SECTICIIIONOISE
Impacts and Mitigation
Standards of Significance
'\im-.c 1mpact~ '' ould be :.1gmi1Cilnl 11 tht'} \qnJ)d result m the followmg·
• r.:,pn-.urc of persons to, or generation of nmo:;c k•veb in execs:- of ... tandard-. cstablisht>d m a local general plan or nClL..C ordmance. or .1n applicable c;tand.ud of another agenc' ~pt'llflcalh
For propcrh located in Si~~ivou Countv, noise lt•vcls e\.ceell!ng the Gen~rall'liln reqlllremcnt Ldn ol60 dBA m rL~idcnh,iiiV zonL'd areas('' hJCh ilfC lnt.tled to the..• northcao..,l and ca...,t of the prOJl'Cl), and 6'1 dBA for mdustnal :toned pMcelo:; (v. hKh ,ue located immc;:tb.it<.· h ~nuth of the project).
for rcs1dcnhal property locntL'd m the Citv lim1tc.; of ~11. Shao..,ta (to lhL' <.;outh c1nd southeast of thL• facility), the C1ty 's l1m1ts speofied m Table 10-·L
• A ..,ub-;tant1al permM\ent increao..,<.' in ambient noist' level:- that can be Jircctly attributable tn the prDJl'CI. SpeCliicalh. a 5-dB·\ increa~ resulting o;,nlelv from the operation of the pro1ecl.
The o..,ccond en tenon, relatmg to a 5-dBA incrca~e, was developed '>l)lel)' tc,r thl':> project ,md was fac:;hioned after similar standards found m the CEQA guidehnl'"· Th1s en tenon wa .... Cc1rricd 0\·er from the l99R document
Existing Environment
Traffic on l-5 lS the most consistent source of noise affectmg the area surrounding the proje<:l site. 1-'i 1!-> appro,imatelv 2,500 feet from the project site, running southeast/northwest along the eastern side of the Strawberry Valley floor. 1-5 is the primary route for traffic travelmg between Oregon and California. In 1992, the C1ty of Mt. Shasta estimated that U1e 19881-S traffic resulted in an Ldn of 60 dBA at 850 feet, and that 2010 traffic , ...·ould re~ult in an Ldn of 60 dBA at 1,420 feet. 1l1is estimate is for 1-5 only and does not incluJe the noise from Mt Shasta Boulevard. The City estimated that the 1988level of traffic on Mt. Shasta Boulevard resulted in an Ldn of 60 dBA at 90 feet (no 2010 estimate was made). The project is approxi mately 1,000 feet from Mt. Shasta Boulevard. Given that tmder conservative assumptions traffic noise drop.., at a rate of appro,imately 4.5 dBA for C Discrete noLc;e events in the vicinity of the Dannon water bottling facility are generated bv train traffic on the UPRR. LJPRR runs 18 to 22 trains daily through the l\.ll. Shasta areJ, haul ing roughly 1,800 rJil cars per week (Shannon pcrs. comm., 1998). RJilroads can generate significant short-term noise. The trains operate 24 hours per day, carrying mostly freight. Amtra~ also hac.; two passenger train:- that pa~ Uuough the area between 2 J.m. and 1:30am. Table 10-'l presents mstantaneous readings of railroad no15c at a di.:;tanCL' of 100 feel and calculated predichons of noise levels at 400 and 1,000 feet. RPOOI 1760005 DOC (CA/f3'[7 OOCl SECTION 10 NOISE TABLE lG-5 Railroad No1se Levels {dB;..:.A.;L) ______Description 100ft__ _ 400ft ----1.000 ft Diesel locomotive (closest po1nt) 79 67 59 Locomotive horn (intermittent) 92 80 72 _fass1ng cars (track no1~ 69 ____ 57 49 Source: City of Mt Shasta, 1992. modifications by CH2MHILL The nearest noise-sensitive receivers (residential areas) arc located approxim,Hely 300 feet to the west. Other rcc;idcntial areas in the project area are shown on Figure IQ-1. The clo~st rcstdenccs are located north and west of the vvater bottling faetlity. T.1ble 10-6 .,ummariLc the closest noiSe sources, and Table 10-7 summariLc~ the close!> I noise-sensitive properties in the proJeCt ,.iCimty. TABLE 10-6 Approximate Distances from the Dannen Fac1llty Noise Source Distance to Dannon Property 1-5 2,500 feet UPRR 1,000 feet Mt Shasta Boulevard 1,000 feet Note Approx1mate diStances as measured from bUIIdmg wall TABLE 1G-7 D1stances to Closest SenS111ve Rece tors ~~------Noise Receiver Distance to Dan non Facility Measuring locations Near Private Residences Ml (South) 800 feet M2 (Southeast) 750 feet M3 (North) 300 feet M4 (West) 300 feet Note: Approximate distances as measured from bUIIdmg wall. Current noise sources at the Dannon facility include bottling operations (which are located in a building with insulated metal walls), exterior mechanical equipment (including an evaporative condenser), and material loading and unloading activities includmg semi-truck trt~ffic. Traffic noise related to the p roject is generated by employees (currently 83, but projected to increase to approximately 100) and truck traffic (currently 15, but projected to increase to approximately 40 trucks per day). As stated in the Transportation section of this document, p roject truck traffic is routed through a designated truck entrance on Mt. Shasta R00011760005 ooc (CAH9n OOC) SE.C ll011 1Q P;u&S[ Boulevard at the soutlnvL• .... t comer of the '>Ill" (a..., ...,lwwn on h~ur1.· 10-1) ,md doe~ not tr.wcl on SJ..i Vill.:tge Dnvc. The project dot.'" not tmpact rat! traffic Methods Constn!tllon notse lc\'el~ were e!-tlmat<:d using l:.PA'._ Nohc' from lcm,ftltCiioll f.qlll/'lllc'tll ''"" Opaation-., Bwldins l:tflllf mt'llf 1llld J-lnn11' Apf,lumcc•, ( 1'171) Thest.> noi<;c It''«.+... uc estimate..., because the amount and tvpe ol con.o.;tructHm t.'qUipmcnt to be u~ed , the lcK.'lhnn and dura tion of LL...,c, .:tnd the e:\.act nobc charJctt.•n<;hC!:t of each ptecc of eqlllpmcnt t.annot bt... prc dKteJ with certainty. The.• cl!:>SumpLHm..., used 10 Lhl'- analysis .:He, howcn:r. tvptcal for construction of indw.trial dc\elopmenb. Constructnm acli\ Jtlt.>..., arc e\.pl·ctcd to onur pnmarily dunng daytime hour.... (7 a .m. to 7 r m .) F.Kility nnbc level-.. were measured at \cJrJous locatlt)ns near the fae~hty prnpt.•rty lirw on June 18 and 19, 2001. O,lf\non reprc!>entativc!> \.\ en.• not advised that the mnmlonng v. mtltl tilke place until the monitonng commenced. :-.lonrtormg sites lvcre selected in respcu\....,c ll' public concern about nOJse emis::.ron'- c1nd to a~-.e<>s the total amount of nOI'>l' generated hv the water bottling facility. Spot noise-level measurements were taken for 20-nunute inten at~ Juring a 24-hour period. These spot measurement" were then compared to similar mea..,urL~ ment.-; taken rn 1998 pnnr to e'L"hn~ facility construction. It !'houJd be noted that the prorect '>llC is a former lumber mdl and th.1t the 1998 dat,, was taken when the mill \\ilS not opcrationill. l listoncal no~e levels were probably much higher. The City of Ml. Shasta ( ,cncral Plan noi!-e <>landard lS more stringent than the County' .., C.cneral Plan noise standard. Typrcallv. Cm.U1t)' ~ tandilrds would appl) ln projects U1 unincorporated areas t'f the County The facility is \'\'holly located m Countv jurisdictwn, but border..; the Cih· and has the potential to impact noise receptors located m the Cit) lim1ts. It~ unclear whether the C1ty ha!:> jurisdictron over noise sources in the County I·or the purposes of simplifvmg this analysis, the more restrictive City standard was applied at all receptor locations, even though Lhe City dDt'..., not have juri:..dJCtion over property located m lhe Cmmty (Virag pcrs. comm., 200 L) ln cases where lhe measurements \Vcre in excess of Ctty st;mdards, the mea!'>urcmenl.., were compared to pre-project measurements. If the pre-project measuremenb were within 5 dBA of the post-project mcasuremenQ., it was concluded that there was not a s tgnificanl change in noise levelc; resulting from the project. In case-; where increases were in excess of 5 dBA, the probable noise source(s) were identifiet.l. Frgurc lU-1 pre~cnts the gcnNallocation..;; where meac:;urcment~ were taken in 1998 and 200 I Impacts and Mitigation During Construction Impacts Noise Impact 1 (N1): Construction Noise Would Be Audible at the Nearest Residences. The construction phases associated with construction of the proposet.l leach field mcludc clearing, e>..cavating, and laying pipe.;; No exterior building construction would be reqUired for mstalliltion of the thtrd boltlmg line, if Dannon chooses to install it. T}VJCal m.1jor R001011 760005 OOC ICAH977 OOC) 1() ~ ~~ ·- ~~41 Approximate Dist anc es from the Oan non Facility ---.....f. -~ .... ~ · "-= oh ..., - ..... ~ - - - == -..... -- ~-c:: --=-=-=-=- :::- :s: - '"!:: ==-=-::: T , Noise Source Oannon Property \• I \ I t-5 2.500 feel ,.. . Mt Shasta Boulevard 1.000 feel ~ • I Noise Receiver Dannon Facility t·. .. I Homes Nonh 300 leet South 750 feet East 600 feet • West 500 leet • '· ! • '\~{ Note 01stances measured lrom closes! poants 10 bulld1ng walls and are approxamat1ons •' . \ ~ I ~ . .:::.. \~ I ~~ ~ ! ~ II ~~ I ·~ ,,\; \rI, '.-~ ·(~· :::-.~.;::.. ' ] ~l \ ------~ ...> :::,;;..~-- ~ ·~ .., - ,, ·= ·- ~ -- -~ -;;; :_:_~'-:. ~ .. n:t - I ~-:;::.-;: ~ ...... _ \. ~~ u- ' .. ' l - ~ ~ -- - -;=-=-= j Tro.t k ,, .:J~~ader II II 1~1 I' )~ PnoL '=-,-;:::, ~· J{ ..," fark \0 ~ ,., ..:;::.. • .'I . ... I I I %/ II '. II I~ ' I ~h -~· \ \ 'Ramo rowe. , (t J~ ·I I· ':, ·-..- . /j .... I I )\. ~ ', ./( I I I • I ·' ' '/' r ... .lr Trrilk 0 ~ '010 1000 FEET ,t' I ._ " ! 'd' I l ' ll ~ \ :- II //~ -----SCALE 15 AF'F'~OXIMATE " FIGURE 10-1 ~ / LOCATIONS OF NOISE-LEVEL MEASUREMENTS . OANNON BOTILED WATER PLANT MT SHASTA. CALIFORNIA I ; '""'P' "''' 1M '" T ... . •M ·'>W "' "$" "'D )- // C H2MH ILL --~ SECTl()N 101~ n01se-producmg pieces of eqwpment for each construction phase are tdentified m Table 10-8. Noise levels from construction equipment generally decrease by 6 dBA each hme the distance between the receiver and the source doubles. Estimated construction noise levels at \'arious distances are provided in Table lQ-8. Topography. vegetation, and atmospheric conditions may also reduce notse levels. These noise reductions were not included in the analystS. Therefore, the noise-level estimates provided in Table lQ-8 should be viewed as conservative. Smce the nearest residential areas are approximately 300 feet from the project site, short-term noise levels from construction operations are expected to increase by up to 30 dBA at the nearby residences. Neither the City nor the County regulates construction noise. The noise impacts would be short lived, approximately 120 days from start to finish, and the loud construction t>quipment would not be utilized during the entire construction period. In addition, the applicant would not utilize heavy construction equipment between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. TABLE 11M'l TypJCallndustnal Facility Construction EqUipment NoiSe Levels {dBA-~) Noise Level for Specified Egulemen1 T~pe Noisiest Construction Phase Eguiement T~ 100 feet 250 feet 500 feet 1,000 feet Ground Cleanng Truck 85 77 71 65 Scra~er 82 74 68 62 Excavation Truck 85 77 71 65 Backhoe 79 71 65 59 Foundation Truck 85 77 71 65 Concrete Mixer 79 71 65 59 Buildmg Erect1on Truck 85 77 71 65 Crane 82 74 68 62 P1pellne Truck 85 77 71 65 Crane 82 74 68 62 Source: EPA. 1971. Mitigation Mitigation N1 : As indicated m the project description, outdoor construction activities would be limited to daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.). If specific noise complaints are received by Siskiyou County during construction, one or more of the following noise mitigation measures would be unplemented: • Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from nearby noise-sensthve properties. • Notify nearby residents whenever extremely noisy work (e.g., pile driving, use of pneurnahc drill} would be occurring. • Lse construction-related soils stockptle~ as effective noise barriers when feasible. • Shut off idling equipment ~0010 l17ti0005 DOC (C.t.li977 DOC I 1~9 SE::TJON !0 NOISE • lnstaU temporary or portable acoustic barriers around stationary construction n01se sources Implementation of these noise mitigation measures after specific construction noise related complaints are received would likely red uce construction-related noise impacts to less than significant levels. Impacts and Mitigation During Operations Impacts Noise Impact 2 (N2): Measured Noise Levels at the Existing Facility. A senes of n01se measurements were taken over a 24-hour period on June 18 and 19,2001, to compare current noise levels (2001 levels) with pre-project noise levels on the vacant site ( 1998 levels). These measurements were taken to determine whether baseline noise levels have increased since completion of the water bottling facility and to establish whether any increase in ba5eline noise le\·els are directly attributable to operation of the existing facility. It should be noted that prior use of the site was a lumber mill and historical noise levels likely were substantially higher than those measured m 1998. The 2001 noise measurements also included a northeast location, which was not recorded in the 1998 study. Accordingly, this series of measurements was not compared to the 1998 series. It should be noted that the northwest series includes the lowest overall noise mea~urements recorded in 2001. Table lG-9 presents a comparison of equivalent measunng locations between the 1998 study and the 2001 study for the daytime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) TABLE 10-9 Companson of EqUivalent Measuonglocations. 7 a.m. to 10 p.m .. 1998 versus 2001 M1 M2 M3 M4 1998 2001 1998 2001 1998 2001 1998 2001 7am to10pm. 52.5 56.3 55.1 48.9 64.0 56.8 50.5 44. 1 54 8 47.9 47.5 48 54.3 53.6 44.4 48.3 45 7 48.6 54 .6 46.1 59.3 55.1 52 9 48.6 41 4 50 50.9 59 59 9 567 492 50.3 dB Average 5L2 522 53.0 539 60.6 55.7 502 48.3 Average Oafterence 1 0 09 -49 -1 9 between 1998 and 2001 Daytime Noise Levels. Table lG-9 indicates that daytime noise levels have not changed sigruficantly with the operation of the project; and, in fact. average daytime noise levels have dropped. Two slight increases in noise-level measurements to the south and southeast \\'ere observed, but these increases are below the 5-d B significance threshold and are in compliance with City of Mt. Shasta noise guidelines ( L~q to 55 dBA). On average, daytime no1se levels to the north of the facility have decreased. ROOI011760005 OOC tCAH9n DOC! SECTlON 10 NOISE Plant records mdtcate that the plant was m full operabon dunng the morutonng penod On June 18, 11 trucks took finished product away from the site during the day, and on June 19, 22 trucks took finished product away from the site. In summary, project daytime noise levels are approximately the same or less than pre project noise levels as shown in Table 10-9. Therefore, the project's current daytime noise impacts are less than significant. Nighttime Noise Levels. Table 10-10 presents a comparison of equivalent measuring locations between the 1998 study and the 2001 study for the nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). Table 10-10 mdJCates that noise levels during the rughttime have changed since construction of the water bottlmg facility. However, the data does not mdJCate a consistent change between the pre-project and post-project condihon. Measurements to the southeast and north indicate a general reduction in noise, while measurements in the south and west mdtcate a mcrease m noise levels. In 2001, aU monitoring locations recorded levels in excess of the 45-dBA threshold established by the Ctty of Mt. Shasta. Three of these locations, M2, M3, and M4, also recorded measurements in excess of the standard before the water bottling facility was constructed. The measurements taken at M2 and M3 recorded a reduction in noise levels behveen the 1998 data set and those recorded in 2001, indicating that the water bottling facility is not a significant source of noise. The increased levels at the Ml and M4 monitoring locations would be significant if the noise could be attnbuted to the operation of the facility However, this is likely not the case. TABLE 1().10 Companson of Equ1valent Measunng Locations. 10 p.m. to 7 am .. 1998 versus 2001 M1 M2 M3 M4 1998 2001 1998 2001 1998 2001 1998 2001 10 p m to 7a.m. 40 4 50.5 56.9 46.3 51.2 50 6 45.6 54.7 41 4 47.6 47.5 534 56 7 50.2 47.9 61 .3 dB Average 40.9 49.3 54.4 51 .2 54.8 50.4 46.9 59.1 Average 8.4 ·3.2 -4.4 12.2 D•Herence berween 1998 and 2001 Ac. Table 10-10 shows, noise levels increased at Ml and M4 since the plant became operational. However, the increased nightbme noise levels cannot be attributed to the facility or nighttime truck traffic associated with the facility as there were no nighttime truck deliveries during the measurement period (see Appendix E). A significant <>ource for increased nighttune noise levels at Ml and M4 can be attributed to a Cal trans I-5 construction project and the resulting detour onto Mt. Shasta Boulevard (see Appendix C). On Monday, June 25, 2001, the Mt. Shasta City Council considered a request from staff to adopt an Urgency Ordmance regarding the impact of commercial truck traffic usmg Mt Shasta Boulevard as an alternate route to a detour at the Highway 89 exit. This unusual truck traffic correc;ponds with the elevated noise measurements at Ml and M-1 POOIOI 1760Qai DOC ICAH9n DOCl SfCTlClll 10 NO!SE gtvcn that these locabons are approxunately 1,000 feet from Mt. Shasta Boulevard. The 1-'; construction project, and truck re-rouhng onto Mt. Shasta Boulevard, appears to be the ~ource of the increased nighttime noise levels at Ml and M4 . The plant 1S essentiaUy a conhnuous noise source and there are no plant noise sources that would increase levels to the south and west without also mcreasing levels to the north and east. The exterior mechanical equipment 15 located on the north side of the northeast comer of the butlding and would therefore not increase levels to the south and west. Truck traffic would be a potential noise source to the south and west; however, no trucks were observed during the measurement period. Therefore, the increased notSe levels cannot be attributed to plant opera tions or plant truck traffic. Given that noise levels increased only to the south and west, and actually decreased to the north and east, the increases cannot be attributed to the planl Increased traffic on Mt. Shasta Boulevard res ulting from the construction on I-5 appears to be the source of increased measurements to the west and south of the plant. Therefore, the plant's current nighttime noise levels res ult in a less than signifi cant impact. Impacts Noise Impact 3 (N3): Predict Future Plant Noise Levels. The proposed modifications from the plant include a leach field and a third bottling line. There are no known noise sources associated with the operation of the proposed leach field; therefore, the leach field is not anbcipated to increase extenor nmse levels. The third buttlmg lme would be located instde the plant (an insulated metal structure), and exterior no1Se levels are anticipated to be sunilar to existing exterior levels. No kno~'Tl noise sources are associated w tth the third bottling line that are anticipated to significantly increase exterior noise levels. The operation of the leach field and third bottling line would not significantly increase noise levels; therefore, their impact is less than significant. Noise Impact 4 (N4): Predict Future Truck Traffic Noise Levels Future truck traffic noise levels for the expanded facility were evaluated lLc;ing the Federal Htghway Adnunistration (FJ lW A) Traffic Noise ModeJ (TNM) Look-up Tables. TNM is the most recent analytical method for traffic noise evaluation and will formally replace the old FHW A Model (STAMINA 2.0) as the p referred method for highway traffic noise prediction. The FJ rw A TNM is based upon reference energy emission levels for automobiles, medium trucks (two axles), heavy trucks {three or more axles), buses, and motorcycles with consid eration gtven to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site. The Look-up Tables are a simplified version that provides a quick screening tool for evaluating simple roadway geometries. Simple roadway geometries entail sound levels p ropagated from an infimtely long, straight roadway over flat ground to receivers at user-selected offset distances. The criteria for evaluating noise impacts that are typically used for transportation sources arc contained in Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part m- Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR m, 1992) and the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol dated October 1998. The Category Bland use activity cnterion in thec;e documents applies to restdences, churche ~, schools, recreation AOOO I l 160005 DOC 1 ~17 OOCl 1~1(' SEC110'1 10 NOISE areas, and surular uses, and IS an hourly sound le\'el that approaches or exceeds 67 dBA Leq or 70 dBA, L10. Other developed lands, properhes. or acti,·ities not described in categones A orB are included in Category C for which an hourly sound-level criterion that approachec; or exceeds 72 dBA Leq or 75 dBA LlO has been established. Cal trans policy does not provide nmse abatement for activtty Category C unless tt IS detemuned that subject land uses withm Uus category include exterior areas that accommodate frequent outdoor human activities. There are no criteria for undeveloped lands. The above-described noise abatement criteria (NAC) are determined at the exterior of structures dunng PH noise conditions. In this analysis, critenon levels in terms of the hourly equivalent sound level (leq), rather than hourly LlO values, have been used to evaluate noLc;e unpacts from the project. Table 10-11 shows the Fl-1WA Design Noise Lc\'el/ Activity Relahonships used for detemunmg the NAC for specific land uses (e.g., residential and commercial). FHW A and C.altrans constder a traffic notse unpact to occur if predicted PH traffic nmse levels approach or exceed the NAC. Caltrans defines "approach" as noise levels within 1 dBA of NAC or 66 dBA for activity Category B. TABLE IG-11 Federal Highway Administration Design N01se LeveVActivrty Relabonsh 1ps Design Noise Ac11vity Levels Category Hourly Leq (dBA) Description of Land Use Activity Category A 57 Tracts of land for whiCh sere011y and qUiet are of extraordinary Significance. (Extenor) and wh1ch serve an important pubhc need. The preservation of seremty and quiet IS essential if th1s land IS to continue to serve 1ts mtended purpose. Such areas could mclude amphitheaters. particular parks or portions of parks. open spaces, or histone diStricts that are ded1cated or recognized by appropriate local officials for activ1t1es reQUinng special qualities of serenity and qUiet. 8 67 Picnic areas. recreallon areas. playgrounds. actrve sports areas, and parks (Extenor) that are not Included in Category A. and res1dences. motels. hotels. public meeting rooms. schools. churches, libranes. and hospitals. c 72 Developed lands. propertses. or activtlles not mcluded m categories A and 8 (Extenor) above. 0 Undeveloped lands E 52 Residences. motels. hotels, pubhc meet1ng rooms. schools, churches, (lntenor) libranes. hosptlals, and aud1tonums. Source. Code ol Federal Regulations. Title 23 CFR Part n2 1992 Federal Hsghway Adm1mstrallon ln addihon to the above-described criterion sound levels, the FHWA and Cal trans consider a traffic noise unpact to occur if predicted sound levels "substantiaUy" exceed existing noise Jevels. Caltrans NoJ.Se Analysis Protocol, Section 2.4 1, states that a substantial increase occurs when future not.Se levels exceed existing noise levels by 12 dBA or more. Ba<;ed on the abo' e discUSSIOn, nmse abatement features would typicaUy be considered for the project if predtcted design-year noise levels increase by 12 dBA or more over existing noise levels or the design-year noise level equals or exceeds 66 dBA, Leq. ROD.'OI 1760005 DOC ICAH9n DOC! tG-13 SECTION 10 lOSE Table 1()-12 sum.manzes pred1cted heavy truck noise levels resulting from different hourly truck volumes (vehiclcs/holU). Noise levels are predicted at 100, 300, and 900 feet from the roadway at an assumed speed of 25 miles per holU. Nmse propagation wac; assumed conseT'\ atively to be "hard" (approxunately 3-dBA drop per doubling of di.stance) as opposed to "soft" {approxrmately 45-dBA drop per doubling of distance). TABLE 10.12 Predicted Heavy Truck NoiSe levels Hourly Heavy Predicted Hourly Sound Pressure Level (Leq. dBA) Truck Volume (vehicle per hour) 100 feet 300 feet 900 feet 40 62 57 51 20 60 54 48 10 56 51 45 5 53 48 42 3 51 46 40 2 49 44 38 46 41 35 The anticipated future truck volume is 40 trucks per day, resulting m 80 trips per day (entering and lea,·ing the plant). It is difficult to estimate the peak hourly or average hourly truck volume, but according to the analysis presented in Table 10-12, an hourly volume of five trucks/hour would result in a sound pressure level of 48 dBA at 300 feet. Titis level is below the past and current daytime average noise levels presented in Table lG-9. At this dlStance, the noise generated by 10 trucks/hour only represents a slight increases in past and current daytime average noise levels. Comparing the -18-dBA estimate (five truck..c;/hour) to the pre-project nighttime levels would only result in a significant increase at Ml where the pre-project nighttime average level was estimated to be 41 dBA. The more probable nighttime truck volume of one to two trucks per hour would likely not result in a stgruficant nighttune mcrease.ln ali cases 1t is not likely that truck nol.Se would exceed the Caltrans 66 dBA or 12 dBA increase criteria. The anticipated daytime truck volume associated with the expanded facility would not s ignificantly increase daytime noise levels, and anticipated nighttime truck volumes would not significantly increase nighttime noise levels; therefore, the predicted future truck traffic noise levels are a less than significant impact. Mitigation Mitigation N2: None Required. No daytime or nighttime noise level impacts are expected as a result of operation of the proposed leach field or third bottling line; therefore, no mitigation is required. Mitigation N3: None Required. The operation of the leach field and third bottling line would not significantly increase noise levels, and their impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required. ROOI01 1760005 DOC ICAH9n OOCI SECTIOI4 10 NOISE Mitigation N4: None Required. The anticipated daytime and nighttime truck volume would not s ig nificantly increase noise levels, and the p redicted future truck traffic noise levels are a less than significant impact; therefore, no mitigation is required . References Beranek, L.L. 1988. Nor <>~ ar1d Vibration Co11tro/. Institute of No1Se Control Engmeenng. McGraw I lill. California Department of Health Services. 1976. Cahfom1a Energy Comrrussion. 2001. Presiding Member~ Proposed Deasion- Metcall Energy Center. C1ty of Mt. Shasta. 1993. C1ty of Mt. Shasta NolSe Element of the General Plan. january 27. Cit) of Mt. Shasta 1992. City of Mt. Shasta Plannmg and Environmental Database. MarciL Federal Highway Administration. 1992. Procedures for Abatement of H ighway Traffic ~oi!,e and Construction Noise. ApriL Kryter, Karl D. 1970. T1w Effects ofNoise ori ,\Itan NY: Academic Press. Peterson, Arnold P. G. and Ervin E. Gross, Jr. 1974. Handbook of Noise Measurement, Seventh edibon. Concord. MA: GenR.ad. Shannon, Mlke/ UPRR. 1998. Personal communication With Derek Willis/ CH2M HILL. November 19. Siskiyou County. 1978. Siskiyou County Noise Element of the General Plan_ December 6. U.S. Department of Transportahon. 1998. FHWA Traffic N01se Model Look-up Tables. Report No. FHWA-PD-98-047. Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C. July. U.S. Department of Transportation 1998. FHWA Trnjfte Noist• Model Teclmical Manual. Report No FHWA-PD-96-010. Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C. Febmary. U.S. Department of Transportation. 1998. FHWA Traffic Noise Model User's Guide. Report No. FHWA-PD-96-009. Federal Highway Administration, Washington D C. January. U.S. Department of Transportation. 1987. Technical Advisory T6640.8A- Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmen tal and Section 4(F) Documents. U.S Department of Transportation. 1977 High way Constmctron NoiSe: Measurement, Pr.·dictrcm, m1d Mitigation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA}. 1971. No1sejrom Cort-; tr-uction Equipment and Operati01rs, Building Eqwpmmt, and Home Appliances. Virag/Siskiyou County. 2001. Personal communication. Heather Rectenwald/ CH2M HILL. 2001. ROO.tll1760006 DOC ! C-4)~ 77 DOC) 10.15 SECTION Jl Public Services and Utilities Existing Setting Thl.' pmJL>cl ~tie '"' located m an umnlorporatcd are.1 of ~hktvnu County, tmmedi.Jtel~ adpccnt to the C. tt) of Mt. Sha::.ta. The project and tt-.cmploVL•es \.o.·ould use a mix of C.mtnt). Ctty, and re~tcmal..,ervicc:-. and utilities. Schools Two sd1ool dt~tnct-; arc m the proJeCt area. Tiu"! Mt. Shac;ta Elementary School Distncl administer.., grades k.-8, ,md the Sbkiyou Tli gh Schl•Ol Oic;trict Jdministers g rades 9-12. l he Mt. Shas ta Elementar) School District maintain<; tv.•o school!:-: the Mt. Shasta Elemcntarv School for grades K-3 and the Sisson Sdlool for grades 4-8. Current enrollment at these schools is 26'1 and 447, respechvely, for a total of 711 m the District. Enrollment in the \Itt Shasti\ Elementary School Di..c;trict is down slightly from past cnrollmcntc; of over 1,000 (Tuttle per-.. comm., 2001) tsktvou Htgh School Dt..,tnct mamtains a capaCitY of .no at Mt. ~hasta lltgh School, v•tth ,, current enrollment of 370. The capac1ty of Si:sktyou lltgh School Di5tnct h~ adequately met the growing needs of e>..isting project cmployeec; and their familie~ (Leah EUiot per~. comm., 2001 }. Police Protection Bccau ... e the s tte is outside the Mt. Shasta City ltmlts, primary police response for the sttc is pro,·idcd by the Siskiyou County Sheriff's Office. The Sheriff's Office has allocated one sergeant and up to fi ve deputies (usually four} lo the City (Murphy pers. corrun., 1997). Incorporated areas of the City of Mt. Shasta are served by the Mt. Sha~ta Police Department. Unincorporated areas arc served by the Siskiyou County Shcnff's Department. The Mt. Shasta Police Department maintains a staff of nine officers, s ix dispatchers, and an animill conlml/ radto technician (http:/ /home.inrcach.com/p-mspd/). Fire Protection Fire protechon scrvin.-::. are proqded by the Mt. Shasta Ftrc Dcpartment/Ftre Protcchon District. Engines are pro\'lded. by California Department of Forestry from the Weed anJ ~v1cCloud stahons, as well a5 the Weed City and I Iammond Ranch Fire Company. The volunteer hre department has one salaried employee, the chjef, and several part-hme employees including an ac;sistant chief, a deputy chief, and a secretary (City of Mt Shasta, 1992). Solid Waste Solid waste collection facilities in the City are provided by John Smith Sanitation Services of Dunsmutr. This service uses the Black Butte LandfilL which has an average daily intake of RD~11760005 ooc (CAmn OOCJ SECTION I I P ~ StiC SFRVJCf S AND l!TILITI[ S approxm1ately 40 ton..... Pa!>l studies indteatc thilt the landfill capacit} can be expanded to Jccept solid waste for another lO years. Estimates ot the hie expect,mcy of the landfill are dependent on the ..,uccc<;~ of v,1rious recychng program.c;; throughout thl! CoLmty. 1n the C'vcnt that C'-pansion is not possible, solid waste would be trucked to lhe Yreka landfill "hich has a ltfc expect<1ncy of at lcilst 20 vc.u<> (Cummins pcrs. comm. 1997). Wastewater Treatment Plant ~wage treatment from the l''-J.Sttng faCihly '"currently prov1ded by a reg10nal sewage trcJt· ment plant locJtcd ncar Bo" Canyon Dam. The existing plant hac; a C<1pac1ty of appro'\i m.ltely 0.7 mgd and currcntlr operate~ at SO-percent capacit). Plan::. arc bcmg tmplcmentcd to tncrcase capaCity ol the treatment plant to 0.8 mgd and ro~Sibly to 1.2 mgd. Typical dry weather inflow~ average 0.6 mgd, with wmter mOows averaging 1.2 mgd. Heavy rainfall may periodically increase intlows to over 2.5 mgd. Currently, Mt. Shasta Publk Works I!> undergoing a 5-vC'ar work program to replace the sewer main line, manholes, and manhole covers throughout the City~ collection system. Thi" plan will reduce the amount of infil tration and in now from stormwater and ~round water (Workman per:::. comm., 2001a). The sewer collection -..y-;tt•m ~ mam interceptor tollnw-.. South Old Stage Road uphill toward the Cit)'. As the collcclton ltnt''> get farther from thl' plant, the diameter of the line::. tend!> to be smaller. Within 1,300 feel of the treatment plant. lines are 18 mches iJ1 dtameter, while neighborhood collectors are typically 6-inch diameter The majority of interceptors arc 12-inch (City of Mt. Sha..c.;ta, 1992). The Dannon facility connectc; to the sc>wer system at U1e W-inch interceptor, appro'\imatel\' 2'i0 feel from the "'ite Domestic Water Delivery The existing water delivery system uses a network of 4- to 10-inch mams to supply water to City customers. Although there is adequate water pressure throughout most of lhe system, problems of low pressure have been reported in the western areas of the City. Homes lo the south of the facility receive water from the City, while homes to lhe cast have pri,·ate wellc;;. A relatively small well provides domestic water supplies to the Dannon facility. This well is located on the sou th side of Ski Village Drive and supports the domestic use and fire protec tion needs; the vvell i.e. also u.c;ed by the Mt. Shasta FirE' Department ac.; a source of w(ltcr when necessary. \Vater is supplied to City cu_c;tomers from Cold Spring and 1:\... •o City-operated wells. Total capacity of the City ~yc;tem is 3.8 mgd. Storilge Ls supplied by three tanks totaling 1.2 million gallon on Quail r fill and a ~ingle 0.5-nulhon gallon tank at Cold Spring. These tanks alc;o provide storage for equah?.ing, fire now, anJ emergency storage requirement::.. Aver<'lgc daily water demand lS approximately 1.3 mgd, with a maximum daily demand of 3.6 mgd. which is comparable to the system capacity of 3.8 mgd. The City's water plan identifies possible expansion through the development of adJitjonal wells throughout the City water system (City of Mt. Shasta, 1992). Further detail<; of water deliveries are outhned in the Groundwater and Surface Water sechon of this document. Storm Drainage System Storm drainage improvements in the unincorporated portions of the project area are typically limited to road crossings. The City currently has a master dramage plan; new RDOIOt1761l006 ooc (CAH9n OOCl 11 2 SfC'TlOOj I I PUIILIC SeFMCES AUO IJTlUTlES de\'elopments withm the City are as.:;cs~cd a dramage fCl' to pay fo r improvements to thl' general drainage ~ystcm Thl' drainage ~y ... tem convey~ wJtt'r to the west sadL' of l-'i n.1 Ca ltran~- ma m taincd cu h erts. Water on thl' west "tlil' nl I-S t<; ei thcr conn•yed to one of h\ o detention facilities, or da!>eharged directly into North Cold C reek Improvements to the sat<.' s storm drainage "''ere made by Dannon dunng the construchon ol the exashng faolit) . ~tom1water is collecteJ through a scncs nf Jr Electricity Elcctncal .,crnce i....; provaded \w Paetfic P<'\'·er and Laght The main ~ourcc I'> a 6Y-ktlovoll (kV) lmc running along the" e:-.t side of the valley. ThL'> line recein~s pow~r from a 11'i kilovolt line that connects to Weed Natural Gas No natural gas pipeline-; are locateu m Lhe project area. Impacts and M!tigation Standards of Significance Public services and utilities impacts would be significant tf they would result m the followmg: • A breach of published national, state, or local s tandards relating to solid waste or litter control • Encouragement of activities that result in the ~e of large amounts of fuel, water, or energy • Substantial impact to local services or infrastructure • Uc;c of fuel, water, or energy in a wa~tcful manner • E\ten~ion of a sewer trunk line with capacil} to ..,ervc new de... · elopmcnt Methods Potential impacts to public services and ut1htaes were analyzed through U1e review of exist ing mformation and contacts with apphcablc municipal and local officials including the City of Ml Shasta Public Works Department and Siskivou County. R00011160005 DOC ICAH9n DOC) 11·J SECllON I I PUBlJC SERVICES AND UTIUTI~S. Impacts and Mitigation During Construction Impacts Public Services and Utilities Impact 1 (PS1 ): Increased Demand for Public Services by Construction Workers. A maximum of Vi constTuclton worl-.ers would be requtred to construl.! the leach fickl. The resultant demand for pubhc scrYiccs such as schools, police prott•ction, and fire protection is expcct<'d to be minimal because of the small number of worker<; involved, as well as the likchhond that manv of thes<.• workN would be local hire-.. Accordingly, no significant impacts to public services are an ticipated from construction of the proposed leach fi eld. Similarly, impacts to existing utilities and City infrastructure are anticipated to be m inimal. Little solid waste would be gcnl..'rated dunng umstruchon, and what is generated would be diSposed ol at the Butte Landfill. Water needs would be met through LI5C of c\bhng wells located onc;1te, hydrants, .1nd / or water trud.$. Mitigation Mitigation PS1 : None Required. Construction impacts to public service~ by construction worke rs are anticipated tu be less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required. Impacts and Mitigation During Operations. Impacts Public Services and Utilities Impact 2 (PS2): City Public Services. The expanded facility would ultimatrly generate a total of approximately 100 jobs, the majority of which would be held by intli' iduals from the project area or adjacent urban areas. Therefore, impacts to public services such as schools, police protecti on, and fire protection are expected to be less than signtficant. Public Services and Utilities Impact 3 (PS3): City Infrastructure and Services-Wastewater Treatment. Operation of the expanded faci lity would result in a total ma:\imum rinsewatcr dLc;charge of 108,000 gpd. Approxim11tely 100 percent of this water would be microfiltered and ozonated rin.•;ewater used to rinse bottles prior to filling them with spring water, and spring water that is spilled during the bottling process. The remaining 5 percent would be mumcipal-gwde wastewater from the filCility bathrooms and kitchen, and CTP water, wh1ch i..::; used to clean the water lines. The UP water contain" a very small concentration of perox1de and peracehc ac1d, which 1$ commonlv used to clean such equipment. When the pipeline from DEX-6 was firc;t brought online, the pipeline from DEX-6 to the faciht)', wa~ filled w1th chlorinated water to disinfect the ripeline. The concentration of rec;idual chlorine is less than 50 mg/ L. The total quanhty of water held in the pipeline L" appro\.iiTh'ltely 25,000 gallons. As part of the operation of the plant, Dannen adds a dechlorination agent such as sodium sulfite to neutraliLe lhe chlorine prior to releasing 1t into th ROOIOI 1760006 DOC (CNi977 DOC) It ~ SECTION 11 I'UBUC SE.RVtC£S AND VntJllES ozonated rinsewater used to rin.c;e bottles prior to fillmg them with spring water, and spring water that is spilled during the bottling process. The remainder of the factlity's discharge::., consisting of municipal-grade wastewater from the facility bathrooms and k.itchen and CIP water, would continue to be discharged to the City's regional sewage WWTP. The City's WWTP is currently under a Cea::.e and Desist Order adopted by the CVRWQB on April25, 1997. The Cea..c;e and Desist Order requires the City to correct system deficiencies with regard to storm..,,·ater inflow and infiltration. The City is anhcipating that the Cease and Desist Order wtll be rescinded by CVRWQB with tht• renewaJ of their NPDES permit in September 2001. In order to hJve the Cease and Desist Order removed, the City must replace 500 fC'ct (lf sewer main and add one manhole to the Ream A\'enue section of the colleclion system. This area of the City's wastewater collection syc;tem is most affected by the d1.scharge of Dannon's rinsewater. Currently. during df) weather, discharges from Dannon do not stgnilicantly impact the City's WWTP. The proposed leach field would have a b e neficial impact to the C itys sewer collection system, particularly during the rainy season, as it would reduce the amount of rinsewater discharged to the City's system, and would reduce the quantity of water the City is requ ired to treat. The City has indicated that it wilJ continue to allow Dannon to discharge rinsewatcr into the sewer .:;ystem until NO\"ember 10, 2001 After that time, the City will only accept municipal wastewater and CIP water. The municipal wastewater and ClP water from the Dannon plant would not significantly impact the WWTP. With the operation of the proposed leach field, the existing facility and expansion would not create any additional significant impacts to the WWTP. Public Services and Utilities Impact 4 (PS4): Other City Infrastructure and Services. Impacts to other City infrastructure and services are determined, such as domestic water.. and electricity are considered to be less than significant because of the limited demand for such services during operation of the existing facility, proposed leach fi eld, and proposed expansion. Domestic water needs are provided by Dannon's onsite domestic well. Electricity is provided by Pacific Power and Light using existing distribution lines adjacent lo the site. The approximately 12 cubic yards (1,620 pounds) of solid waste produced by the existing plant is disposed of weekly at the l31ack Butte Landfill, which has ample capacity for such a relatively small quantity. The additional third line is not anticipated to require significant amounts of additional energy, nor would it generate significant amounts of additional solid waste. Therefore, the existing facility, expansion, and proposed leach field are anticipated to have less than significant impacts to City infrastructure and services. Impacts to Stormwater System The development of the present facility resulted in converting approxunately 10 acres of the site to an impervious surface. Improvements to the existing onsite stormwater collection system are discussed in the Groundwater and Surface Water section of this docwnent. No adverse impacts to the existing storm water collection system would occur as a result of the construction of the proposed leach field or proposed addition of the third bottling line. RDOOI 176()()()!> OOC (CAH9n DOC) ~tCl iON I I PV8UC SfRVICES AHO VTIUTif S Mitigation Mitigation PS2: None Required. Operational impacts to City public services from the existing facility, as well as proposed leach field and e pansion are con idered to be less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required. Mitigation PS3: None Required. Operational impacts to the C ity's WWfP from the existing facility, as well as proposed leach field and expansion are consid ered to be less than significant; therefo re, no mitigation is required. Mitigation PS4: None Required. Operational impacts to other City infrastructure and services from the existing facility, as well as propo ed leach field and expansion are consid ered to be less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required. References Ctty of \tl ShaslcL 1991. General Plan. January 27. ( ity nl (t. Shasta. 1992. Planmng and Environmental DatJbao,;l' for the General Plan. March Cwnmms, Roger /S1skiyou Count}. 1997. Per~onal communication\\ ith ~like Ur!...o\' I Cl 12M I lfLL. November 12. Elhot, Lcah / ?-.H. Shasta I Iigh School 200 l. Personal corrummtcation \''ilh I leather Rectcnwald/ CH2M IIILL fune 7. Hesseldenz, Thomas F. and H umphrey, john E. 1995. Stormwater Runoff Analysis of th~ Proposed Expanswn of Mercy Medical Center Mount Shasta. June. http:/ / hume.inreach.com/ p-mspd / . 2001. Murphj. Mike/ Siskiyou County Sheriff'~ Office. 1997. Pcrc;onal commumcahon with Mike Urkov /Cl 12M HTLL. November 14. Pace Engineering. 1992. C ity of Mt. Shac;ta Master Sewer Plan for the Sewage Collection anti Treatment Facilities. Siskiyou County. General Plan. 1980. Land Use and Circulation Elements. january 16. Tuttle, Cindy/ Mt. Sha">ta Union School District. 2001 Per>onal commumcation with Heather Rcctenwald/ U l2M HILL. July 24.. Worlman. Mike/City of Mmmt Sha.;;ta Public Work.-.. 200la Personc1l communication with lll'4lU1N Lusso/ CI 12M I liLL. May 7. Workman, Mike/ Ctty of Mount Shasta Public Works. 200lb. Personal commumcation with Heather Lusso/ Cll2M HILL. june B . RI)()'OI 176000S DOC (CAH9n DOC! H6 SECfiON 12 Aesthetic Resources Existing Setting TI1L' proJeCt .... ,te ·~ ... tuated at the ba ... L' of Ilk'\\ e-.ll.:m nanl.. <.lf \ 1t. SlM ... tc1 . D.lnnon purcha~cLI .2=ill.Jcre.., of propcrt) from P&M Cl•dur Product..; all ol the property h,1d hl't'n prcvtously d 1-..lurbcd b~ the opcr,1t1on of the former P&t\ 1 Ced.u Products mill. The 250 acre-.. Dannon own~ is bao;iGIIly dtvided in half hy Skt Vtll.lge Dm c. The existing water bottling f.1cility ~~ located on a largt• parcel ..,ihtatcd south of Sk• Village Drive. The portion of the site located l(l the north of SJ...i Village Drive remains pnmarilv undeveloped, as tl is the location of multiple groundwater well.,, includmg thl' nilhual ... pnngs borehole that .;uppli~ the spring water to the bottling facility. The t>lope of the ew.tmg .,., atcr bottlmg fac.:thl\ -..1tc b gentle with ,1 southw~tcrly aspect. Prior to construction of the water bottling facihtv. a !muted amount of' t?getation occurred on the site anJ consisted of scattered grassc-.. forbs, and shrubs, with a few JUVenile comfer... . The site previously contained remnant:- of the P&M Cedar Product::. mill operation, mcluding concrete pads, a building, a tank, and ...,·oodchip debris; however, the-.e buildm~c., and <;tructurc" were removed during the cour!->c of con~truction for the D.-mnon facility. The portion of the s1tc that is o;ituatcd north of Sl..i Village Drive was highly disturbed by the prcnous mill acti\ iltes on the site and remains primarily undeveloped. Dirt roads cross a portion of this northern site. Piles of cedar mulch were formerly located in the northwestern portion of the site, and '"'OOd chip and debri" were scattered onsite (see Figure 2-3). A building that wac; pre\'lously used by P&M (edar Products remains on the north side of Ski Vlllage Drive. All other remaming structures associated vdth P&M Cedar Products were demolished and removed from the proper!) Therefore, the original landscape of the project site provided minimal visual appeal because the disturbed character of the site, combined with scattered, low-lying vegetation and mill by-product debris, was generally considered unattractive. Additionally, Dannon has planted 35,000 native trees on their property, the majority of whjch are located to the north of SJ...i Village drive. Vtews of the northern portion of the site lrom Ski Village Drive arc ltmttcd by the sJoped topography of the stte, and the buildin~s that front the north s ide of Skt Village Drive .ldJacent to the "itc entrance block viewc;. View-.. to the south of Ski Village Drive constst of the existing water bottling facility, as well a-. '-Orne undeveloped land that has been planted .,., ith conifer seedlings. Other views from Skt Vtllage Drive consist of Spring Hill to the we<;l, and forested foothi ll ~ to the north, south, and east. BackgrounLI views include Mt. Shasta to the north, and mountains to the south and C(l'>t. ROM I I160005 DOC (CAmn OOC) S~CIIO 'i tHfSTHfllC REsouqcfs Impacts and Mitigation Standards of Significance Impact~ to acsthl'lll rL'sources would bL' -.igniltcanllf the\ \\'tHtld • Substantiallv degrade the extsting VLsth1l chMacter or qu,lltty nl lht• <;tle and lb surround mg..., • Create n new o..,ource of ubst;mtidlltght or glare. wh1ch would • Create nbjL~ctionahlc noise <~nd / or dn~t lt•vt·L-. durin~ prn)l'Lt tonstructton M operation Methods To l'\ alua tc impact ... to <~esthetic re!:>ourct•::. from the existing proJeCt, the pmpo~cd leach field, and the proposed ouilding expt1nston, the followmg method.:." en.' used· • Site rcLonnaL-.sanct c;urYC\ • Identification of c; urroundmg sen~ith e rcct'ptnr' (i c rcsiJent1al homt."') • Revtew of the ae::.thctic resource~ poltcte-. in the City and County General Plans A "ite rt'connat.Ssance wa'> performed on Ma\ Y. 2001, to visually a"sess the character of the C:\ic;hng site and surrounding area, locate '>Cnsitive receptor.... , and photograph the site and ,uca. The City's General Plan was reviewed for polioes pertaming to aesthetiL resource planning. No specific po liCie5 for aesthetic resource planrung were tdentified in lhc General Plan; ho..-. ever, the plan docs strive to "bring a dh•er::-c employment base to Htc community wtule shll maintaining lhe quality of a small town community" (City of Mt. Shasta, 19Y3). The City's Planning and Em·ironmental D The County ' ~ General Plan was also revwwed for policies pertaimng to ac~thettc resource planning. No specific policies for aes thetic rt>"Ource planning v. ere identiftcd; however, the plan tdentiftcs the "enjoyment of scenic beauty'' as one of its goab, objectives, and principle.., (S•sktyou County. 1980). Additionally, the Si,.kiyou County Zoning Pliln was reviewed for poltcies pertaining to dtmcnsional standards for zoning districts. Specific guidelines were reviewed for the Heav) Indus trial (M-H) t.onmg designation as well ac; specific guidelines that were previously implementeJ by the Mitigation Agreement. The following standards for the M-H zoning designation and Mitigation Agreement were revtcwed and implemented into the County L'iSued permit for Dannon to construct: mint mum site area, minimum building height. mmtmum percent of site coverage, mirumum lot width, signage standards, elevations, ROOIOt 17600C6 DOC (CAH077 DOC) materiab antl color selection, parking, truck maneuvering arei'ls and loading/ staging areas landscape plan, and setbacks. During the cou~e nf conslTuction, hUtlding inspectors were required to enforce these guidelines and ensure that Dannon was complymg fully with the standards sl't by the Siskiyou County Planning Department and the Mitigation Agreement. Impacts and Mitigation During Construction Impacts Aesthetic Resources Impact 1 (AR 1): Visual Character of the Site. Constructing the leach field would result in vis ual impacts from additional construction vehicles and trucks traveling to and from the project site. Large constructed features would be visible during con.stnJction for brief periods of time, such as the expoc;ed dart where the leach field is proposed to be constntcted. However, because the majority of the proposed constnJCtion activity would be taking place on the south side of lhe e\.i!lting Oannon fac ility, it would not bt• v1sible for long penods of time from SJ..i Village Drive. In additiOn, few sensitive rec~ptors are located adjacent to the southern boundary of the Dannon property, Vis ual impacts from construction of the proposed leach field would be temporary (e.g., view ing temporary construction equipment), the number of sens itive receptors would be relatively low, and the duration of views from Ski Village Drive would be short; therefore, the visual impact £rom the proposed constructi on would be less than s ignificant. The expansion to three bottling lines does not invol ve any external alteration to the existing facil ity; therefore, there are no impacts from the expansion. Howe\·er, short-term impacts during the leach field construction lo air quaHty and noise would occur in the areas immediately surrounding Lhe project site from construction dust rnised by earthmoving, grading, grubbing, and construction traffic. ln addition, the noise emitted from construction activities, such as construction equipment, personnet and traific could affect nearby sensitive receptors (residents). These construction-related impacts to air quality and noise are potentially significant. and are outlancd in more detail in the Air Quality and Noise sections of this report. Mitigation Mitigation AR1: Im p acts related to the construction of the proposed leach field are antici pated to be less than significant to the visual ch aracter of the site; therefore, no construc tion-related aesthetic res ources mitigation is requi red. In addition, implementation of dust control measures described in the Air Quality section and noise emission control measures described in the Noise section would reduce construction-related impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts and Mitigation During Operations The proposed leach field would be underground andre-vegetated, and would have no impact to the vis ual character of the site. lmpacts from the existing facility and leach field to lhe aestheti c value of the area s ur round ing the Dann on s ite, and the site itself, are considered less than s ignificant because the facility is in compliance with all applicable design standards. Views of the existing facil ity are limited, the proposed expansion would require modifications only to the interior of the existing facility, and the proposed leach fi eld would be underground; AOO.OI\760005 OOC (CAH977 DOC) 12·3 SECTION 12 AESTHErlC RESOURCES therefore, mitigation for aesthetic impacts of the existing water bottling faci lity, and the leach fi eld is not required Impacts Aesthetic Resources Impact 2 (AR2): Aesthetic Character of the Site. The primary aesthetic impact of the existing water bottling facility included the modification of the existing vacant miU property to a new industrial development. The site was previously an industrial mill development and these changes from one indu<.;trial character to another arc visually consistent. As previOusly mentioned, the s1tc is currently zoned M-Il in the Siskiyou Count~ General Plan. This classification carries specific design requirements that control the design of industrial facillt1es, for example, buildmg height, setbacks, and signage standards. The County is the regulating authority for the design standards applicable to the existing Dannon facility. The existing facility is in compliance with all applicable design standards. Because the facility b in compliance with applicable design standards, the facility is consistent w1th County standards for the aesthetic appeal of industrial facilities. The existing water bottling facility is visible from viewpoints not directly adjacent to the s1te (e.g., from elevated vJe,,·points such as from outlook!:> on the slopes of Mt. Shasta, Everett ~temoriall Iighway, and other local roads and trails). While the facility IS one of the larger man-made features in the viewshed from the western flank of Mt. Shasta, views from such locations are dominated by the surrounding terrain and other residential, commercial, and industrial development. In addition, there has not been a substantial change in the visual character of this vicwshed because the former P&M Cedar Products mill site, as weU as lhc former industrial buildings on the mill site, were once visible from this same viewshed (see Figure 2-3). The existing water bottling facility is located on the southernmost portion of the site, just south of Ski Village Drive. The existing facility is a large, rectangular building (approxi mately 24 feet tall and 450 feet across the front fa~ade) that provides a sharp contrast w1th the abandoned, deteriorating buildings that existed previously on the site. Prior to con s truction of the existing facility, the site was graded to place the facility at a lower profile relative to Ski Village Drive. The facility has been landscaped to include several types of trees and grass in the northern portion (main entrance area) and eastern side of the building (see Figure 12-1 ). The trees are in the early s tage of their establishment, and will not consti tute a substantial visual feature for several years. Once vegetation is established within the northern portion of the site, the limited views of the facility from the few residences that exist adjacent to the northern portion will be partially screened. Conditions such as using Landscaping or earthen berms to screen the site were incorporated into the final design of the faciHty. These conditions were placed in the Mitigation Agreement that Dannon made with Siskiyou County, and were complied with when the facility was designed. For a repre sentative view of the facility and the existing landscaping along Ski Village Drive, see Figure 12-1. Residences a rc located approximately 500 feet to the south, northwest, east, and northeast of the parcel that contains the bottling facility. These residences arc considered sensitive receptors, and are given specific consideration when determining impact significance of facility construction and operation. Because of their proximity to the property, occupants of ROOm 1760005 OOC (CAH9n OOC) 12-4 SE CTIO N· ~ A£SfHETit. ;;fSOURCE- these residence" are the main \'iewers of the D.mnon facility. Although the m.1jont' of newers in the VICinity of the s1tc are comadert·d ~cnsJti\'e receptor...,, -;uch pre'>ence i..., not considered an .lth l'r"-l' impact gi\'t•n tht• tonm~ ,mJ the pre' iou!:- and proptl..,cd tndu~tri.ll uo;e of the site. The use of unobtru~1ve colors and scrct•mng of Lhe cxt..o;ting facility trom tht· publit nghts-ol way has precluded adver!>e effect:. on vwws of lhe site, and the landstapm~ thc~t ha-. been tmplcmentcd a-; miti~ahon tmprovcs the VIsual character of the ~ite from offs1te locatl'-m~ (see Figure 12-2) Impacts to visual resources are considered les than sign ifi cant becau ... e of the industrial nature of the site, the use of unobtrusive colors, and use of screening; therefore, no mitigation i necessary. Aesthetic Resources Impact 3 (AR3): New Sources of Nighttime Light and Glare at the Project Site. Increases in nighttime illumination ,1nd Jccrea~es in night sky visibility im·ariably accompany urb.mi.1.ation. The proJect would result in increased hght rmissions from the project s1tc at n1~ht , which coulJ he sign1f1canl g" en the residential Jevl'lopmenl adJacent to and south of the facilih The existing fJclhl) Jnd parkmg area .... Nighttime light and g lare impacts would be less than significant because there would b t> n<> significant increase in nighttime vehicular traffic as a result of the expansion. Mitigation Mitigation AR2 : None Required. Operational impacts to visual resources in the vicinity of the facility are considered to be less than significant; the refore, no mitigation is required Mitigation AR3 : None Required. Operational impacts from the pro posed expansion are anticipated to be less than s ig nificant to the visual character of the site; therefore, no mitigation is required. There would be no light and g lare impacts from the leach field; therefore, no mitigatio n is required. ROOO 1176000S OOC (CAH9n OOC) 12 6 -- ___ ... -... ------.... _ - -- ... _... . ,..- ;. -- --. 'I ---"1 I I I I I I I 'I I ·$ • ~ '"i ;. ~ ~ ' ~ "~ References City of 1\ lt. Shasta. llJ92. Planning and I:.m ironmcnl,1l Datalw.. c tor the Gl'nL'ral Pldn. M.uLh. Ctty of Mt. Sha~ta. 1991. C1tv of Mt. Shilc;ta General Plan. j.mu,uv 27. C..,tsk.Ivou County General Plan. lYRU. Lmd Use and Ctrculallon Elcmenb \ugtJo;t 12. RD0011760005 DOC tCAH9n OOCI 128 SECTION 13 Archaeological Resources Existing Setting 0:o .;ystcmahc archaeological excavation:::. h,n ~ b~l·n umJucted wJthul the unmedtate prOJCCl \'tcmtl) . The prehistory of thi., arl'cl can nnlv be mfcrred mdm.•ctly from the k.ncm n archJcologtcal r~<.:ord .. of <;urrounding Mea.,, mdudmg the Redding .HcJ, the l..,acramento Ri\.er Canyon, and thC' 1\lodoc Plateau. cll.c~watJon~ conducted m the Reddmt; ,uea dunng Lhc 1':1'10:- .1nd l961b mdK.lted thelllhc area was fir"t mtcru.tvely settled only rc.>lativcly recently. Presumably, evtdence of settlement represented ancc.. tor::- of the Wintu lndtans, who mhabited the Redding area at Euroamcriccm contact. ln excasations beginnmg m llJ71 at Squaw Creek, approximately 24 miles north .md .. hghtly cast of Reddmg, the> f1r~t com mcing evtdcncc was found for a SL'qucnce of human occupation of the region con..,ic..tmg of three apparently distinct penod" of habitatlon, spanmng perhaps 7,500 year-. or more. The thrcc-horiLon occupation sequcnet.• "eems to be c.,tmilar to the sequence observed m the North Coa::,t Ranges. Subsequent exca valtons in the Redding area, the s urrounJmg uplanJ~, and the Sacramento River Canyon have confirmed a long-term human presence characterized by lhrcc occupation periods. The people \\,,.ho inhabited the project vicinity prior to occupatiOn by Euroamericans were the Okwanuchu, cmt: of four groups of people whtl ::-pol-e related languages classified by anthropologtSls a:-; the Shastan Language familv Ok""'anuchu population was estimated at 200 to 300 in the late nmctcenth century By llJ 18, none of these people were thought to SUf\'tve. Very little infonnabon about the1r culture has been recorded, although inferences can be made from information about other Sha~ tan groups that have ~urvived. A settlement appeared in the early 1850s in Strawberry Valley. A post office was established there in 1870 under the name of Berryvale. J. I I. Sisson was the postmaster and hotel keeper there for 12 years. When the railroad came through the area in 1887, the station was con s tructed 1 mile cast of Berryvale. A town called Sisson soon grew around tl1e rail station. In 1924, ito; name was changed to Mt. Shasta. The water bottling site was occupied by the P&M Cedar Products lumber miU from about 1'}58 to 19YO. l\to... t of the facilities associatcJ with the sawmill had hecn rcmO\·cd prior to construction of the cx1stmg bottling facility. Som~ pa' cd areas rcmJin, ROOI011760005 OOC (CAH977 DOC) 13-1 Tiw records search revealed no previously recorded cultural resources, State l listoric Landmarks. or National Register sites in the project area. rlw ard1acological field survey conducted by Impacts and Mitigation Standards of Significance Archaeological resources impacts would be signiftcanl If tl1l'y would result tn Lhe followmg: • Disrupt or adversely aftect a prehistoric or hi!;toric archueological site or a property of his toric or cultural stgnificance to a communit) or cllmic or sonal group; or a paleontological site except as a part of a scient1fic study. • Disrupt or adversely affect important Mchdeolo~i cal resources. An Important archaeological resource is defineJ as one that: ls associated with an event or person of reco~izcd <;Ignificance in Califom1,1 or American history, or recognized sCtcnttfic importance in prehistory Can pro\·ide information that is both of demonstrable public interest and useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable or archaeological research questions Ha;. a special or particular qua !tty such a" oldt•st, be!:>l example, lt~rges t , or last surviving example of its kind Is as least 100 vears old and possesses substanhal strahgraphic integrity Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can be answered only by archaeological methods Contains infom1ation needed to answer important scientific research question!' ilnd ..., here there is a demonstrable public interes t in that information 1._ directly as...c;ociatcd with a scientifically recognized 1mport,1nt prehistoric or historic t'\ cnt or person Methods Archaeological Field Survey and Literature Review An archaeological field survey and literature review relevant to the project vicinity was pcrfonned prior to construction of the existing water bottling facility. Because there are no additional concerns abtlut archaeological finds being located on the Dannon property, no ROD/011760005 OOC (CAH977 OOCJ add1tton<11 rtrchaeologic.ll gurveys will be conducted for the con~tru ctJon ol thl• proposed leach field and the proposed faolity cxp.ms10n. Impacts and Mitigation During Construction Impacts Archaeologica l Resources Impact 1 (ARC1): Exposing Cultural Resources. Although deemed unltJ...elv. a possibility exis ts that culh.tral resources not vt:.ibll- nn the ~round c; urfacc during the MLhJeological sur\'cy he buried m the project area A !.ignificant impact would occur if a cultural resource were to be disturbed by acti vities a sociated with constructio n of the propo~e d leach field or plant expansion. Mitigation Mitigation AACl: Should grading, excavation, or constructiOn associated \\'J ih the proposed h:acn fwld and/ or exp Impacts and Mitigation During Operations No impacts to cultural resources occur during operation of the existing water bottling facility, nor are they anticipated to occur during operation of the propo ed leach field and plant expansion; therefore, no m iti gation is required. ROOI01176000S DOC ICAH9n OOC1 13- j SECTION 14 Cumulative Impacts Cumulah\ L' df~th to the envtronment const'>t nllhe combmcJ dfccb of the custm~ prOJeCt a.., well as th~ propo...,cd leach field and C'\panc;JOn, and other pa~t, pre... enl, .1nJ reasonabh (ure!>t?eable prowcts to be built m the area. It ts tmportant to note thd m this document, tmpacts of the project cUe Cllrrcspondtngly mmor. Contribution.., nf the pmwtt tn cumulrllivc impacts arc ::.imtlarly reduced becaus e of U1e dtsturbed character of lhL· prorcct !lite. TI11s section idcnhfie"> other past. propo::.cJ, or anticipated projcch tn the Ct t~ · and Countv that may contnbutc to cumulative impact~ , and provtdes an analv... , ... of the cumulative tmpacts of those prorcch when combtned with the current project Table 14-l provtdcs a c;ummary of larger prowct... that currentl) are .1pprovcd \' tthin the City. Table 1+-2 provides a similar list of proJeCL<> for the Cmmty. The development wilhtn the County is for a m1x of res idential, commerCial. anti mdustrial dt•\·elopment. TABLE 14-1 Approved Projects and Pending Pro,ects tn the Cny of Mt Shasta Project Use Status Taco BeiVKentucky Fned Chicken Fac1hty. Lake Street Use Permit Approved. pendmg hllgat10n Duplex. Court Street Use Permit Approved Medtcal Office BulldtngJApartments, Pine Street Design Revtew Approved Sllcplex Theatre, Morgan Way Development Permtt Approved Mtnt-Piaza, Mount Shasta Boulevard Design Review Approved Dentrst Office Rezone/General Plan Approved Amendment Source: Carlson 2001 TABLE 14-2 Approved and Pendrng ProJects rn S1sktyou County Project Use Status Tanner Subdtvtston. 23-u~a::..:.r::::.ce:;:.:l~m.:..::a:::~P~·..:...K.!:.t ns:.::::::t::::.o:.:n ...:.. R:.:o:.::a:.:::d ______:....P::::.a ~rc:.:::e.:..:l M=a~p ______..:. Ap~p:.:.:ro::.;:v:;::e:.:::..d Source Vtrag. 2001 R00011760005 OOC ICAH9n DOCI 14 I S£CTJON 14 CUMULAllVE IMPACT~ Cumulative Impacts of the Project When Considered with Other Proposed and/or Anticipated Projects Land Use As outlined in lhe Land Use section of lhis document, the existing facility, expansion, and leach field would essentially have no impacts to surrounding land u ... es because the project site is designated for indu.-;trial u:-.es, was previously used for that purpo::.e, and the project represents the continuation of that use. No impacts to surrounding land uses would result from the construchon and operation of the existing projl'ct nor the proposed leach field and c-..pansion; nor wtll the existing project and proposed expansion result in impacts to land use m the vicinity of U1c project area. The bottling facility Joes not preclude any future use of lands within the project area, except for temporary. less than significant construction impacts and U1e effect on the Spring Hill four-wheel-drive road. Therefore, the facility does not contribute to cumulative 1mpacts to land use tn the region. Groundwater and Surface Water As outlined in the Groundwater and Surface Water section of th1s document, no significant impacts to water resources are anticipated a~ a result of construction and opera tion of the existing project, the proposed leach field or the addition of a third bottling line; nor will the project result in a significant contribution to overall cumulative impacts to groundwater and surface waters in the vicinity of the projecl site. Implementation of erosion control plans (designed to maintain water quality on a regional basis) during construction of the developments lis ted in Tables 14-1 and 14-2 wiU ensure no significant sedimentation effect~ occur. Groundwater withdrawals outlined in this document for the existing water bottling facility, as well as the proposed expansion would, given the conser\'ative assumptions of this analysis, slightly reduce flows in Big Springs Creek, but not to a significant level. More importantly, the project-related withdrawals of groundwater would not contribute to cumulative groundwater reductions in the Big Springs Aquifer because the projects listed in Tables 14-1 and 14-2 would either receive water from the City system (which derives from surface water flowing from Cold Spring) or, in the case of the Tanner Subdivision, driiJ wells in a different aquifer, separate from the Big Springs Aquifer_ Thus, the project would not contribute to cumulative groundwater impacts to Big Springs Aquifer, adjacent groundwater users, or Big Springs Creek. Air Quality As oullined in the Air Quality section of this dncumenl, no signtflcant impacts to a1 r quality are anticipated as a result of construction and operation of the existing project, as well as the proposed leach field and the expansion; nor will the project result in a s ignificant contribu tion to overall cumulative impacts to air quality in the vicinity of the project site. Day-tcrda) operations of the projects listed in Tables 14-1 and H-2 arc likely to add new emissions of criteria pollutants, largely through additional vehicle trJffic. Vehide emissions are a major contributor to local air pollution. However, as shown in Table 6-6 of the Air Quality section, operation of the facility is con tributing emissions far below the trigger thresholds outlined earlier in the section. For example, the projected emissions for the most restrictive cnteria pollutant, PM10, is more than seven times lower than the trigger threshold. Given the scale of the projects outlined above, it is assumed that the cumulative contribution to air quality ROOO 11760005 OOC (CAmn OOC) imp Transportation As outlined m the Trc1nsportation secbon of thiS document, no ~igm.ftcant1mpac~ to roaJ.., and transportation are anliCtpcltcd dS .:t result oi construttu.m and operalton of the e\.l..,hng project, lhe propo~ed leach field. or tht.• addttlOn ul a thtrd hottlmg lmc; nor \\'Ill the prnJCl.l result m c1 stgnificant contribution toO\ crall cumul~1tivc 1mpacts to traff1c or road sen icc tn the \'ICinity of the project site. Traffic generated by thl· project when compMcJ to "buildout' condition:., which include the traffic from the project~ li ... tcd in Tables l-l-1 ,1nd 14-2 along w1th other development c.xpected to occur by 2017, would not cumulatt vel) decrease the LOS of am· of the road!> that would be u~ed b~ truck; or t.•mployee car., dm en to or from lhl -.ite The LOS for all c.;uch roadways L" proJected to remam "C" or better wtth or without the prOJCCL The LOS in the vear 2017 wtlh regard to key intcr~ections (Mt. Shasta Boule\'ard/ North Ntxon/South Ni>.on) 1~ assumed to lw level " F" in th~ absence of the project Accordingly, implemcntiltlon of the prOJCtl will not rPsult m a significant contribution to O\'erall cumulative impact-.:;. Biolog ical Resources Ac; outlined in lhe Biological Resources sechon of thb document, no s1gmf1cant impacts lo biological resources are anticipated as a result of construction and operation of the existing project, as weU as the proposed leach field and the expansiOn; nor will lhe project result m a significant contribution to overaU cumulative impact~ to biological resources in lhe vicinit) of the project site. Con!>tntction of the propo::.cd leach hdd and addition ol the thtrd bottling line would not re-sult in impacb to biological resources because the prOJect stte wa~ previously thsturbed and ~of limited habitat value. Thus, the project would not contnbute to cumulative impacts to biological resources becalL<;C tl mvolved development on a previously disturbed s1te and no impacts occurred dunng construction. Archaeological Resources Implementation of the project. and the as~ociated mihgation measures prescribed m Section 13, would rc-..ult in nn significant impact to cultural re::.ources. The future developments proposed and/ or anticipated within the County have the potential to affect currently undiscovered cultural resources (including prehistoric and histone sites). Each development proposal would require environmental documentation and review of proJeCt impacts to cultural resources. Impacts to cultural resources throughout the County would occur and be mitigated on a site-speofic basis. Therefor<.', the existing proJect as weU as the propo~eJ leach field and expansion, combined with the construction of the proposed and/or anticipated projects throughout the County, would not result in a significant cumulative impact to archaeological resources. ROOO It 76000S OOC ICAH9n OOCI 14·3 SECTYJN t ~ CUMIJVTlVE IMPAC1 S Noise As outlined m the Noi"c ~ction of thL.., Jntument no s1gnificant imp.1Ch to nPL'>e are anticipateJ as ,1 re!>ult uf con~truct10n anJ opt•r,ltion of the existing prOJt'C't, tl1l' proposed leach fidd, or the .1dd1tion ot a third bottling lme; nur will the project r ddined m Section 10, Noise) noL"l' lcveb at the n .'!>Idences ncare.... t the pWJt:'Ct Site arc c\.pt·cted to mcrease over £''\tstmg condth<.ms, primarily as a result of increa~ed trafhc a-. noted m the Ctty of f\.lt . Sha"ta CL'nNal Plan . . \~ dc.•monstrilted in S<.>ction 10, Noise, baseluw no~c condttions both vnth ,md ,.,.·ithout lhl' project cue c~scnttally Lhl.' s.1me. Thus, the prowct's contribution to cumul.1tivc noise cond1tions is de nummus and LS not cumulatJvelv considerable. Public Services and Utilities As outlined in the Public Services and UtLithcc; ... cellon of thiS Jontment, no sigruficant impacts to pubhc -.crvKc:-. and uhllhcc; an.· anhnpilted a~ a rc,.ult of cnn-.truchon and opl•ration of the e>.i!'>hng project a~\'\ ell a.., tl1c prop0~eJ l~ach ficlJ anJ the expansion; nor wtU the project result in a stgnificant cuntnbution to overall cumulative 1mpacts to public senrices in the vicinity of the project c;itc The project will not contribute to cumulative effects to pubhc scnriccs, therefore the faohty does not contribute to cumulative impact5 to public services and utilities in the region. Aesthetic Resources As outlined in the Ac,.thetic Resource~ scchon of this document, no ~•gmficant impacts to aesthetic resources are anticipated as a result of construction and operation of the existing project the propo!:>cd leach field, or addition of a third bottling lme, nor will the project result in a significant contribution to overall cumulative impacts to Aesthetic Resources in the vicimty of the project site. The City of Mt. Shasta and the County of Sisk1you maintain design review and permitting authority over proposed bu ildings in the area. TI1ese review and permitting med1anisms constitute the primary methods by which the aesthetic character of the region is shaped and protected. Given that the facili ty and the projects llsteJ m Tables 14-1 and 14-2 are all governed by either the City or County permitting and rcvw"' processes, all of lhc projects arc within the aesthetic guidelines for lhe reg10n. These proJects, therefore, do not constitute a cumulati\ ely considerable l'lft•ct on the environment References Carlson, M1chelle/City Planner. Mt. Sha~ti'l Planning Department 2001 Fac.,imiJe tr,msmLr;sion of approved and pcndmg proj R00011760005 DOC tCAH9n OOC) SECTION 15 Growth-inducing Impacts Tht.> purpo"e oi lh1s '-ffttOn 1!:- hJ d1scuss h Effects of Facility Operation on Growth The C\.Jsting water bottling proJeCt reqwreJ 25 to 7'i construct JOn job~ for the 7-monlh con <.,truction period. Fewer con!>truction wor~cr<>, approximately 10, would be needed for the potc.>ntial wnstruction of the leach field. The::.e jobs are cons1Jered tcmporan .md wouJd not contribute to long-term grO\\o thin the ~11. Shast.1 region or SL<.~1you Count). Curn:ntl~·. O.mnon employs 83 people, the majont)· of whom were h1red locally. The proposed e>..pcm !> IOn could create a~ many a.c; 15 add1honal jobc;, the majority of.,.. hich would be filled by local labor. Positions requiring special or unique skills rna) need to be filled by candidate5 I rom out of the area, but, currentlv, no 'iuch posJtion..c. ha' e been 1dentified. Therefore, facilit)• operations would cause a smc1 1J degree of local economic growth in Mt. Sha::.ta and Siskiyou County, both through direct expenditures by the plant itself, and indirectly thro ugh personal expenditures by employt-cs. Because the fa cility is not expected to attract a large number of new employees to the area, effects on pnpulahon growth are considered less than significant. The project also would not remove any obstacles to growth. It would not reduce or eliminate common growth-limiting factors, such as water supply or availability of other public services. Accordingly, the project would not have a significa nt growth-inducing impact. Effects on Existing Wastewater Treatment System -\s described in the Public ScrYices and Utilities c;cction, the C\.IStmg regional sewage treat ment is at approx1mately 80 percent of its 0.7-mgd opcration.1l capacity, or 560,000 gpd. Assuming the full projected wastev,·ater now of 72,000 gallons from the cxl5ting facility per day (typical flowc; would be approximately two-tlurds of this--48,799 gpd), the facilit) would increase the sewage flow to the WWTP to 608,799 gpd, ..,·hich would be approxi mately 90 percent of WWTP's capacity. The addihonal flow from the addthon of a tJurd bottlmg line would increase the flow from the Oannon fa ci lity to 108,000 gpd of wastewater and two-thirds of this flow would be 73,199 gpd of wastewater discharged to the WWTP. Accordingly, the proposed expansion wouJd further dccrca~c the abtlity of the City to serve new development, especially in the short-term wlulc bottle nnscwater from the facility is dlc;chargcd to the WWTP. The reduction m the ability to sen c new development wouJd be ROOI01t76000) ooc (CAH9n OOC) SECTlO'IISGAOWTHtNOUONG "'PACIS somewhat growth limiting rather than growth inducing. After the construction of the leach field, existing capacity of the City's WWTP would again be restored. Because the project would not increase the exis ting capacity of the City's wastevvater trea tment system, the project is not growth inducing. RDO.'OI1760005 DOC (CAH9n DOC) SECfiON 16 Contributors Siskiyou County The Dannon Company Bn;m Mc<..ord, Ph.D., Groundwater Hnirolog1'-t CH2M HILL t-..1il-.e Urkov, Environmental Planner. Prowct Manager f\larl... Ba!-l Todd Bradford, Graphic ()ec;ign Cl'll-stc Brandt, Document Producbon .\lJnJf_cr Marjone Castleberry, Wildlife Biologist. Biological Resource-. Mluaffcr Eusuff, Ph.D., Civil Engineering, Leach Field Des1gn AI Farber, Archclcologist, Archaeological Re~ourcc-. Darlene Futrell, Reproduction Mit: C<1rol llullinger, Document Processing Peter Lawson, I lydrologist/Hydrogeologist. Groundwater and Surface Water l mdc1 Lowell, GI~ Technician I leather Lu~~o. Em·1ronmcntal Planner A!-c;1stant Pro1ect t-.. lanagcr Sam Mo:-~. Gr.1phtc Dc::.1gn Kent NorYJilc, Ph.D., Atmospheric Scienhst, Atr Qu.1htv Ra\' Prettyman, Process Chemist, Groundwater and Surfacc Water Chen R.1ndall, Document Processing I lcc1lh cr Rectenwald, Environmental Planner, CEQA Compllanct' • iarokl Robt•rtson, Graphic Design RDG1111760006 DOC (CAH9n DOC) l~l Jim Thayer / 5<.-nior Sod 'Xtcntisl RPSS, CPSS, GrounJwater anJ Surface Water, Leach fl(~ ld Design CRWQCB Reviewers Denms Wilson, Semor Lmd and vvater U~e Anc1lvst I:nJ.- Spte-;..,, Staff Coun~J Jim Rohrbach, WJtcr Rl!snurccs Control Enginct'r Beth Doolittle, Sanitary Engineering Technician Enc Rapport, Associate Engin~ring GeologJ::.t Dale S tult1., Environmmtal Specialist Phil Woodward, Senior Engineering Cc()logtst RD0011760005 OOC ICAH9n DOC) 1~2 Appendix A Summary of June 21,2001 Meeting APPENDIX A Summary of Comments from June 21 , 2001, Public Scoping Meeting and Comment Cards Public Scoping Meeting A PubhcScoping t\let•tmg \\.15 held junl' 21 , -:!00lm ~lount Shasta, l..:lltlnmta. Durin~ the public comment pcnod ol U\c mcehng, approxunately 7l' mdivtdual or.1l .md written comment'; v,·ere rcLctv<.>J. A gencrCtl summary of the attenJees' main toptc:- of concern f01lows: I. A<.>~thc t ics • The facility is un...,tghtly and too lcUgc. • The facility producec; too much glare, and the inuea!:>C in lightin~ em1ttcd ln>m tht.· faolity lS dist11rbing to nearby rec;idents. 2. Groundwater • I low would the facility impact groundwater quanhty dunng drought years? • I tow would the wells that surround the aquifer and Dannon borehole be impacted? • Would rinsewatcr discharge affect groundwater quality? Would pollution from rinsewater affect ground"""''ater quality? • Would rinsewatcr polluhon degrade the wat<.>r quauty of surroundmg domestlC wells? • Would the quantity of rinsewatcr dtscharge cau:-c noodmg to occur m surroundin~ areas of Lhc leachfield? 3. NoLc;e • Would noise levels from the faolity increase, particularly at night? • Would idlm~ trucks and trains m the area of the bottling facilitv cau~e increased noise? 4. Traffic • Would traffiC level<; increase, particularly around Ski Vtllagc Dnve' 5 Air Quality • Would onsite generators be evaluated for levels of NO, and PM 10 emtS$ions? • Air pollution from idling trucks is a concern. R0001 1870002 OOC (a..A817 OOCJ APPENOI:t: I. SINMARV OF COM.,.ttiTS ~ROt.t ,UNE l' 20)1 PU8UC SCOPING MEETlNG ANl) COI.I1,1£r.,'T CAR~ h . Hazardous Matcnab/ Hazardous Waste • The types/composition of materials that would be discharged into the leachfu~ld , and whether they \vould have an • The potenhal for chemical spills from materials used by Dannon m the hottlmg process is a concern. • Were the tO'\IC materi,lb left trom the lumber miU spread all O\ l'r dunng the con.structlon of thl~ ~'L-;ting facilit'? 7 Recreatmn • Access LS now blod.. L•d to the Spnng lltll r 11\...mg Tr;ul. Comment Cards Table A-1 summarize-; the comment c.1rds rccctvcd at the Pubhc Scopm~ 1\. lecting on June 21, 2001, in t\1oLmt Shasta, as well as cards and letters mailed to the Regional Watl·r Quality Control Board (RWQCB) before June 29 20lll Actual comment cards and letters can be reviewed at the RWQCB offtee, located ill -ll 'l Knollcrest Drive, SUite 100, in Redding, C.llif~.)rnia. TABLE A· I Summary ol Comment Cards Comment Card/Letter Number Commentor's Name Comment Summary Janina Monroe, Shun Oevhn Concerned that faCility rs unstghtly Marin AUil Concerned about groundwater Issues, especially dunng drought Concerned about light and norse Oueslions why no envrronmental impact report (EIR) was completed. 2 Diane Krrwrn Concerned about rural town communrty Concerned about a1r pollution, traH1c, water quality, and water quantity 3 John Robertson Concerned about re-dnlhng or residential groundwater wells If groundwater levels should drop 1n VICinity Would like to know who Will pay lor res1dent1al wells to be dnlled deeper, 11 needed. 4 Tammy Goates Robertson Questions how the pro,ect was buill without enwonmental review Concerned about residential wells dunng drought years, as well as increased traffic Concerned about expanston ol the lacthty 5 Bart:Jara Valentini Concerned about property values, traffic, and Spnng H1ll Tra11 be1ng blocked. RD0011870002 DOC (Cl.R817 OOCI A2 APPENOCX A SUMMARY Of COMMENTS FRQt.l JUNE 21 2001 PUBUC SCOPING t.IEEllNG At«>COJ.IIdEUT CARDS TABLE A-1 Summary of Comment Cards Comment Card/Let1er _ ____:N.;.:u:::m..: be :..;:.;_r ______:C:....:o mmentor's Name Comment Summary 6 Kathryn Anderson Concerned about groundwater levels dropptng 1n VICinity and potenttaltmpacts to residential groundwater wells. Would like to know 1f there will be compensation for loss of property values Would hke to know what process IS established to deal wtth aqUifer-related problems, espec1ally 1f groundwater levels drop. 7 Robtn Taylor and Concerned about Dannon expandtng to the other s•de of Sk1 Virg1n1a Harnson Village Onve (toward the truck company). Would like to know how much actual acreage Dannon owns. and what the expanston plans are 8 Bonme J Eddy Concerned about mght no•se from plant. mght ltghtmg of plant. lowenng of groundwater table, and glare from building. 9 Anonymous Would like to know how many people from the 1mmed1ate area are employed by Dannon. and what the average salary is. 10 Karen Sullivan Requests full, m-depth, enforceable EtA. 11 George Ainsworth Questions why Dannon needs to bUild plant in Mt. Shasta. 12 Leah Elliott Atnsworth Would like to know how groundwater levels will be regulated, especially during a drought. Would like to know if Dannon w1ll decrease the1r groundwater withdrawals during a drought. 13 Lynnette Schm1dt Concerned about the plant doubling 1n size. 14 Pat Solo Comment: 'Why do you need to he to achieve your goals?" 15 Marita Mascon Concerned about loss of property values in vicinity of Oannon plant. Believes Dannon should compensate City of Mt. Shasta for water that IS being bottled at plant Believes trees need to be planted Believes toXJns released from soil need to be handled w1th care. 16 Mark Ne1ll Concerned about dtscharge of nnsewater and pollution levels m nnsewater. Concerned about resident•al groundwater wells and Dannon's groundwater extraction rates. Would like to know if there IS any guarantee that the water table "will not be drastically and permanently damaged?" Concerned about air pollution from the plant. Believes more trees need to be planted. ROOI011870002 OOC (Ct.R817 DOC) APPENOIX A SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM JUNE 21. 2001 PUBLIC $COPING MEETING AND COMMENT CAAOS TABLEA-1 Summary of Comment Cards Comment Card/Letter Number Commentor's Name Comment Summary Believes lights from plant should be shielded. 17 Martha Gramger Concerned about Dannon trucks on Ski Village Drive, Oannon's expansion. pumping more groundwater. trucks 1dl1ng while loadmg, and noise. Would like to know who will be responsible for measunng water levels at the Headwaters Spring. 18 Robert Hanson Would like Oannon to "be responsible for our wells." If groundwater levels drop m residential wells, would like compensation from Oannon. Dannon should cover cost to reconstruct wells if needed. 19 Claire Hanson Concerned about her groundwater well going dry from Oannon groundwater pumping. Would like Oannon to be financially responsible for deepening wells 1f required. 20 Todd Cory Requests independent review (from consultants other than CH2M HILL). Concerned about continued violations of agreements/mitigations currently in place. Would like to know who will enforce mitigations. 21 Keith Hess Concerned about the eventual size of the plant. Concerned about groundwater levels dropping in Big Springs, McBride Springs. and other springs. "If wastewater is discharged to the ground, will it get into Big Springs or McBride Springs?" 22 Vince DeGabriele Concerned about the time of day when noise-level measure ments are conducted, and whether or not they are being conducted w1th Oannon's knowledge. 23 Doreen Healy Would like to see a sampling of residential groundwater wells surrounding the Dannon plant and future studies to be conducted to monitor potential drops in groundwater levels in the wells. Would like to see future studies conducted by an Independent company, not Oannon. Concerned that leach field will contaminate her groundwater well. 24 Pamm Hanson Concerned about light pollution and noise from plant. Would like the culture of the community to be considered in the environmental document. Would like to see public access to Spring Hill Trail restored. AOOIOI1870002.00C (CtR817 .DOC} APPENDIX A SUMMARY Of COMMENTS FROM JUNE 21 2001. PUBLIC SCOPlNG MEE'TlNG ANO COMMENT CARDS TABLEA-1 Summary of Comment Cards Comment Card/Letter Number Commentor's Name Comment Summary 25 Juhan Colescott Would like to see growth-inducing tmpacts addressed in document. Would like to see a cittzen's commtttee established to momtor flows in Big Springs Creek or at the Headwaters Would like to see a gagmg station mstalled on B1g Spnngs Creek. Requests that 1f flows in Big Springs fall below a certain level, Dannon would have to stop groundwater pumpmg. 26 Dawn Fryling Concerned that commumty does not w1sh to see the plant expand. 27 Pam Weeks Requests that wind d~rec t ton be factored tn when measuring noise (i.e .. south wmds at night bring noise from one stage of the process). - Concerned about light pollutton from the plant. 28 Marilyn Taylor Would like to see a City Ordinance prohibiting trucks from exiting the plant onto Lake Street and going through town and would like to see tickets issued by the police lor violations of the ordinance. Believes that trucks should not be able to idle overnight on the Dannon property, and should be required to tum off engines. Concerned about the potential of the leach field flooding neighboring properties during the rainy season. Concerned about noise from trains, includmg train cars being coupled/un-coupled. Wishes to read draft document and send written comments to the RWCOB. 29 MI. Shasta Chamber of Notes that the Dannon water bottling plant fits into the Commerce · General Plan for the Mt. Shasta community, as well as the Community Action Plan that is reviewed by the public each year. No specific comments on environmental document. 30 Julian Colescott Concerned about lighting, Dannon·s claim that they are (second comment card) bottling "spring water" instead of "well water," mitigation for impacts from existing building, hazardous materials analysis has not been conducted, public access to Spring Hill Trail, and cultural resources. 31 Peggy Risch Would like information to be included in the document regarding the cease and desist order for the City of Mt. Shasta. Would like to see an independent consultant involved in the project, one not paid by Dannon. Would like No Action Alternative to be included in the document. ROCW11870002 DOC (CLR8 17.00C) APPEPOX A SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FAOM JUNE 21 2001 PUBliC SCOPING MEETING AJIO COMMENT CARDS TABLE A·l Summary of Comment Cards Comment Card/Letter Number Commentor's Name _____C~ o'-'-'mment Summary Concerned about the plant expans1on. Concerned about level of groundwater extraction Requests that ra1lroad connections be d1scussed 10 the no1se analys1s Requests that emiss1ons from back-up generators be evaluated Would like to know what type of monitors w111 ex1st to mon1tor groundwater extraction levels. Would hke mitigation measures to "carry substance ~ and be enforceable. Environmental rev1ew must continue. even if Dannon contmues to discharge to C1ty of Mt Shasta sewer system Requests that transportation of chemiCals used 1n the water treatment process be assessed. 32 Joanna W1ley Concerned about impacts to Headwaters Spring. Concerned about drought cond1 t1ons. Concerned about the leach f1eld and 1mpacts to water table 33 Andrea Miller Concerned about water at Headwaters Spring being depleted. Concerned about further plant expans1on. Concerned about overall water use Believes full environmental1mpact1s needed. Would like to know how many jobs at the Dannon plant are being filled by local residents. 34 Yvonne Malee Would like to know about jobs and wages at the Dannon plant, and Dannon's re-Investment of profrts in the community. 35 Tern May1ngo Expressed support for project, but no comments specifically related to an enwonmental document 36 F. Mangels Concerned about compaction of soils over the aquifer. Headwaters Spring, noise, hghl, fumes from diesel trucks and "plastic smells," loss of property values, dust, and enforceability of mitigation measures. 37 Vince D1Gabriele Concerned about groundwater 1mpacts and leach field. (Comment Card #2) Requests full EtA be conducted. 38 Bevy Sp1cer Requests full EtA be conducted. (Letter) Would like to know who has authonty to monitor quantity of water Dannon removes from aqUifer. Concerned about Headwaters Spring. ROOOII870002 OOC (CLR817 OOC) APPENDIX A SUM!AARY OF C().lt,~Eiffli FRQt.l .M~ 21 200 1 PUBLC SCOPING ~ EEllNG At~ COMMENT CAADS TABLE A· I Summary of Comment Cards Comment Card/Letter Numbe:..:r__ ___: Commentor's Name Comment Summ..:..:.:: a~ry~____ _ Requests Citizens monrtonng comm1ttee to monttor Dannon's operations. Concerned about expansion of the plant Concerned about traff1c and children's safety. 39 (Letter) Aurora Ray Dawn Concerned about chem1cal constituents and d1sposal of bottle rinsewater. plant expans1on. 1mpacts to Mt. Shasta watershed. lighting, and the closmg of Spnng H1ll Tra1l 40 Randy Bofmger Concerned about no1se and requests n01se impact (Letter) m1tigat1on measures. 41 G L. Sm1da Concerned about hghttng and no1se Requests no1se (letter) mitigation measures, tncludtng a no1se barrier. 42 Chris Smida Concerned about lighting and no1se Requests no1se _ __:(_Letter) m1tigat1on measures, tncludtng a no1se barner R00011870002 ooc (CU'I817 DOC) A-7 Appendix B 1998 Mitigation Agreement Ma r 27 01 0 4: 39p j pe t. e rson p. I DANONE . ·. - • • f' I - [)anon~ Waters o f North America Number ol pages including this one , Do:e RE Ma~ -r7 OJ 04 : 3 9 p JPPterson ..,_ , ol uv tu 1n~ .!1 r \...\ :i!b;')b' Jt 5 3 092 6 6 445 J ltr t-oil ILl I l '·~Ul t' SISKIYOU COUNTY MITIGATION AGREEMENT Lead Agency· Planning Department P.O. Box 1085 Yreka, CA 96097 Contact Person: \Nayne Virag, Assistant Planning Director Phone: (530) 842-8202 Projed Title: Dannen - Natural Spring Water BoUJing Facility Project No. SP-97-08 Projed Applicant Christopher G. Keams, Project Manager Oanone International Brands. Inc. 208 Harbor Drive Stamford, CT 06902 Project Description/Location: Dannon Spring Water Bottling Facility, ML Shasta California; T40N, R4W, Section 9, MDB&M; APN: 37-140-010 MmGATION AGREEMENT: ....._ As the applicanUowner or their Jegaf representative, I hereby agree to amend the .. above-named project by Incorporating all mifigaUon measures, as identified In the related lnlliaJ Study, wflidl are necessary tn order to avoid or reduce any adverse environmental effects to a point where clearty no significant adverse effects would occur upon project implementation (if and when executed by applicant). Each party hereto understands that by agreeing to amend the proposed project through Incorporation of the mitigation measures identified and attached her-eto, or substantially similar measures to those listed herein, all potentially significant adverse environmental effects wilt be reduced to a level considered less than significant. This agreement shall be binding on lhe appJicanVowner and the County of Sisldyou and on any successors In lnteresl Mar 27 01 0 4: 39p Jpeterson ~,iU::.S~bb ., ;:> u J ..~ .. u • ~ iUU JO -.> r"\\ ~j O .JO :_, .. l tjt ~ ''- ' 11 1 1 , tLI p.3 ~uu ~ IN WlTNESS WHEREOF, \he Planning Director or his assign, representing the County of Siskiyou. and the applicanVowner or his legal representative have executed this agreement on this 4 0=- day of tVo •. ~ , , b,.,,- 1998 . COUNTY OF SISKIYOU APPUCANT(S) NAME & ADDRESS: Planning Department (Type or Prtnl). Richard D. Barnum, Planning Director ( 'A f'i5Jbf'l\rr 0-. h;:~ ,. rl'l$ Oanone International Brands, Inc. - 20B Harbor Drive Stamford. CT 06902 Approved as to form: ~~Jebt~FrankOe(C(}. County CounseJ Ma r 27 01 0 4 = 4 0 p U.1 04 IJU J Pe t e rson l H l lfJ C: ;J I -\ \ J .0 5o I It!} ~ p. 4 li;OJD DANNON Natural Spnng Water Bollling Facility IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS GROUNOWATER AND SURFACE WATER Impact Site Grading. Impacts to surtace waters could occur dUfing construction if site grading resulted in erosion the:. caused the deposition of sediments into the onsite drainage system. Construction of the facal ity is proposed to occur from May through November The potential for sedimentation during the majority of this period is e)(J)ected to be low, except from late October through November. Areas which are disturbed and left bare or reseeded would be subJect to erosion during the wet season. Such erosion would have potentially significant impacts to North Fork Cold Creek water quality. Mitigation. The following mitigation measure{s) would reduce the potential for sedimentation impacts to surface water in North Fork Cold Creek to a less than significant level Develop and implement an erosion control plan (ECP) in coordination with the Central Valley Regional Water Quallty Control Board (CVRWQCB) through the Section 401 process in obtaining the stormwater management approval for the project. At a minimum, the plan will contain the following best management practices: -·. All ground-disturbing activities will be limited to lhe dry season (mid-May through mid-October) to the extent possible Disturbance adjacent to all drainages that ultimately drain to North Fork Cold Creek will be limited, and vegetation let\ in place to the degree possible to reduce potential sedimentation All stockpiled material will be placed such that potential erosion is minimized .•' - Filter fabric, straw bales, and/or sediment basins will be used to reduce erosion and the potential for in-stream sedimentation Seeding and revegetation will be initiated as soon as possible (timed properly to coincide with fall/winter precipitation) after constructJon completion ~JU::::JC:OO .,"t ~ p.:l nH r 11 'l llf\ ,,!lr11 P ,:J 0! I AIR QUALITY Impact: Construction Related Fugtltve Dust Emtss1ons. During ground surface preparation of the plant s1te, most of the PM10 emissions would be composed or fug1tive dust. Emission sources would include vehicles and construction equ1pment traveling over du1 surfaces, site clearing, grading, cut and fill operations, and wind ~ blown dust. The impact of dust em1ssions on PM10 levels would be temporary, bul could be potentially sigmficant - Mitigation· To reduce the constructron-related impacts on air quality, t.he following mitigation measures will be followed: Mitigation of fugitive dust (PM,O) emissions will occur via education of the construction crews regarding measures that can reduce or minimize emissions. These include operating motor vehicles to minimtze emissions and suppress dust. Control measures for construction emissions of PM10 will indude: Water all active cons1ructlon areas at least twice daily, if, and as reasonably needed. Suspend dust-producing activities when high winds create construction induced excessive dust plumes moving beyond the site In spite of dust control measures Cover all truCks hauling soil and other loose material, or require at leas I 2 feet of freeboard ·. Pave (with temporary rock aggregate), apply water three times daily, or appfy soil slabiliz.ers on all unpaved access roads and staging areas at construction sites Sweep streets as reasonably necessary, with water sweepers if excessive amounts of soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets as a result of applicant construction activities. Apply soil stabilizers, as needed, to inactive construction areas Endose, cover, or water twice daily (if, and as reasonably needed), and/or add soil bind~s to exposed stockpiles of soil and other backfill materials Use best efforts to ensure that applicant's (and its contractors) traffic speeds on unpaved roads do not -exceed 15 mph -2- J nar c. t Ul ...., __ '"' __ __ ;l51'04 '0U mr-- r' 1u n t:?i'i :o TRANSPORTATION: Impact Influx of commerc1al traffic in Central Bu s1ness Otstnct The traffic generated dunng operat1on of the proposed project may tncluda unwanted commerctal truck traffic tn the cental business drstnct Mitigation Dannen will use our best reasonable effor1s to contractually obligate all carriers to limit access to the plant to roads north of and including the proposed acces;, road off of North Mt. Shasta Boulevard to avoid truck traffic through the central business disinct 8 10LOGICAL RESOURCES Impact. Construction may Disturb Nesting Raptors and Protected Migratory Birds. Although no nests were identified during the survey conducted in November 1997, several trees occurring in the project site could potentially support breeding raptors (I.e., birds of prey) or other birds protected by the MBTA by the time project construction is initialed. Certain construdion adivilies which could result in excessive noise from equipment and increased traffic, may cause nest abandonment in nesting raptors. This impact could be signiftcanl Mitigation· ·Prior to construction, a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFG) shaU conduct a survey of. the project area to Identify any active raptor or proteded migratory bird nests :within 500 feet of the construction zone. If active nests are located within 500 feet of the construction zone, a monitoring program would be initiated in consultation with CDFG. ~ t ~ r;- .,...C+-<- Impact: Operations may negatively affect the fish hatchery and Big Springs Creek. Dannen has shown, through extensive analysis of the underlying aquifer(s) and groundwater systems in the area. that the impact or extracting water from their property will have a negligible effect on water flow rates from Big Springs, Big Springs Creek, and the Department of Fish and Game diversion to the hatchery and all other downstream users. While supported by evidence, this conclusion is difficult to prove The Department of Fish & Game suggested the following mitigation: Mitigation: Dannen has stated and agreed that if there are sig.niftcanUy reduced flows on Big Springs Creek, they will discuss and participate with all other water users in developing a proportionate, equitable and mutually agreed action plan to address such an issue. . J. Ma r ?.7 01 0 4 : 4 0 p JPet Prson 5 3 092()6 44 ~ 04 1111 1,; '!n 1-L\ p.7 o" uo o~p;ss~ou'>· ntE 1'\CJ J i H r.RUll' ~01 ~ NOISE Impact: Construction Noise would be Aud1ble at the Nearest Restdences. The phases associated with industrial racilily construction Include clearing, excavating, placing foundations. erecting buildings, and laying the pipeline. Noise levels from construction equipment generally decrease by 6 dBA each time lhe distance from the receiver doubles. The decrease is caused by sound waves spreading out as they travel away rrom the noise source Topography, vegetation, and atmospheric conditions also tend to reduce noise levels at - locations remote from the source. Offset1ing any noise level increases is the fact that the r "nstruchon would be short-term. Also, heavy construction equipment would not be used during evening and n1ghttime periods (7 p.m. to 7 a.m.). These noise-reducing effects were not included in the analysis for estimating construction related noise tevels Therefore, lha noise level estimates provided should be somewhat Inflated and. in any event. not to exceed levels Mitigation: As Indicated in the project description. outdoor construction activities would be limited to daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.). 1r specific noise complaints are received during construction, one or more of lhe following noise mitigation measures will be Implemented: Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from nearby noise·sensitive properties. Notify nearby residents whenever extremely noisy work (e.g., pile driving, usa of pneumatic drill) would be ocrurring and ongoing. Use construction-related soils stockpiles as effective noise baniers when feasible. .. Shut off Idling equipment Install temporary or portable acoustJc baniers around stationary construction noise sources if excessive noise is reasonably anticipated to be ongoing. PUBLIC SERVICES Impact Sewage Treatment Plant Capacity is limited. Damon admowledges the need to utilize the limited sewage treatment resources responsibly. Dannen's largest potential discharge would be its rinse water generated during the bottling process. To minimize consumption of -.. - Mar 27 01 04:4lp JP~t~rson !:l .J U ~ ~ b O .. ., ::J OS 00 1111 lb lt:i f \.\ 0 ~ 'llbSo-Uti~t rm 1 ,c 1 ur. c:~m r remaining treatment plant capacity, Dannen has withdrawn their request to discharge their rinse water to the municipal treatment plant The disposal of domeslic wastewater and Post Cleamng Water would still be delivered to the sewage treatment facility, per Mt Shasta C1ty Council Resolution No CCR 97- f 0 1 Mitigation: The rinse water will be treated by Dannen and delivered to a proposed on-s1te stormwater retention pond No rinse water will be discharged to the municipal _ treatment plant AESTHETIC RESOURCES Impact. Aesthetic Values of the Site Short-term impacts would oca.Jr fn the areas immediately surrounding the project site and pipeline alignment from construction dust raised by earthmoving, grading, and grubbing, and construction traffic, particularly if constructton occurs dunng drier months of the year In addition. the noise emitted from construction activities, equipment, personnel, and traffic could affect nearby sensitive receptors (residents}. These impacts on aesthetic resources could be significanl Mitigatton: Implementation of dust control measures described in the Air Quality section and noise emission control measures described in lhe Noise section would reduce these impacts to a less than sigrnficant level. Impact Aesthetic Character of the Site Aesthetic qualities considered include changes to the landscape character, noise levels, and dust levels because these are the environmental components that sensitive receptors (people) perceive and use to judge the acceptability of their surroundings. The primary aesthetic impact of the project would be the modification of the existing rural character of the project site to an industrial developmenl The site was previously an industrial development, and these changes in character would be consistent with industrial developmenl Also, because the site is zoned M-H for heavy industrial development. the eventual landscape of the area would be consistenl Dannen has acquired approximately 250 acres of land. Ninety percent of these lands are currently anticipated to remain undeveloped, and have been disced and planted with native grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees. This is a beneficial impact, as it returned a large portion or the site to a more natural state. Most visible project development would occur on the southern portion of the project site. land uses to the west, south, and east consist of primarily resldenUal, with -s - Mar 2? Ul 0 4 : 4lp Jpet~r~on 1111 t :Pu:.li,.:Ju !ll !):JU~ C::: bb't'+ :l nLn4 Ul 16 z- ~·. IIIC. I \I..I .. &J •,ICUl I" a mtnor amount of commercial/industrial uses. Once vegetation is established within the northern portton of the site the lim1ted views or the proposed site from the few residences which exist adjacent to the northem portion would be screened. The facility would also be visible from v1ewpo.nts not directly adjacent to the slle (e.g., from elevated viewpotnls such as from ouUooks on the slopes of Mt. Shasta, or other local roads and trails). While the facllity would be one of the larger man-made features in the viewshed, v1ews from such locat1ons would be dominated by the surrounding terrain and development, and would occur on a fairly limited basis. Accordingly, such impacts are considered less than - . significant. The proposed revegetation of the northern portion of the site would result in a beneficial aesthetic impact with regard to distant views. Mitigation. Operational impacts are antic1pated to be less than significant at the site. However, the following measures will be followed: Building and free-standing signage will be constructed of non-renective materials and will not be internally ifluminated. Elevations and specifications will describe materials and color selection. The applicant will work with the City and County to determine a mutually acceptable theme. Truck manelNering areas and loading/staging areas, and all outdoor mechanical equipment. will be screened from view from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way using landscaping, screening, earthen berms, or sudl means to accomplish screening to the degree commercially-feasible. A landscape plan for the proposed project site with line-<>f.-sight cross sections should be prepared and provided to the City for review. ...-:. The public/employee parking area will be screened from view from Ski VIllage Drive using landscaping, a landscaped berm, low wall, or such means to accomplish screening to the degree commercially feasible. The screen should be placed outs1de the building setback area to maximize its effectiveness. Impact: New Sources of light and Glare at the ProJect Site. Increases In nighttime illumination and deaeases in night sky visibility invariably accompany urbanization. The proposed project would result in an increase In light emitted from the project site at night. which could be significant given the residential development adjacent to and south of the proposed planL Additional light sources include security and parl • 6 - lld l c;.' u .. u -., . ....,. , t""' J,....~\...t-t -,v,. p . J u ()5/ 0 ; / 00 nr1 Ib ~~ F\\ 9Jti~fii't.•r ~015 Shield all exterior lighting to prevent d~rect light and glare from be1ng emitted onto adjacent properties. Low-pressure sodium lights and/or directional lighting (or equivalent) shalt be used (as opposed to flood lighting). Impact. Construction rnay affect heritage trees. Mitigation Dannon will preserve all heritage trees currently growing on the property to the extent comm~rcially practical ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact: Exposing Cultural Resources. Alt11ough deemed unlikely, a possibility exists that cultural resources not visible on ttle ground surface during the archaeological survey lie buried in the project area The greatest potential for project construction to expose previously undiscovered cultural resources is judged to be in the area surrounding Cold Spring, where a prehistoric artifact was found in the graded service road. A significant impact would occur if a cultural resource were to be disturbed by activities associated with project development Mitigation: Should grading, excavation, or construction reveal the presence of cultural resources {i.e., artifact concentraUons, including stone end bone tools and projectile points (arrowheads], ceramics. foundations or other strudural remnants; or human skeletal remains). wor1<. within 50 feet of the f10d wiJI cease immediately. A qualified professional archaeologist will be consuiled to evaluate the remains and implement appropriate mitigation. In the event human skeletal remains are encountered, State law requires immediate notification or the County Coroner. - 7- AppendixC Mt. Shasta City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 07 17 lll l (l: .,... l MT. SHASTA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Mt. Shasta Community Center, 629 Alder Street Monday, June 25, 2001; 7:00 p.m. 'The mU.ioo of thl M1 Sh:srJ Com-nwliry .a.ctloo Phn u to m""''"' tbe durx\CT Uld raowc:es of our ·~1 town' c:ommw::tty wlulc nnluo$. an ~propni>k !nhn~ bctwcw ~ononuc dcvdopmc:nt wd pnK~QOO of our qlalav o1 t.fe' 1. Call to Order and Fla~ Saluk l. Roll Call l 3. Approval o! Minutes; Minutes of June J 1, 2001 (Reg~utar City Council Meeting} 4. Public Comment on Open/Closed Session ltt!ms: This is an opportunit) for members of tbe public to address the <.:ouncU on items not on the agenda. Tbe public-wiJJ have an opportunity to comment on any agenda item during Council discussion of tbat item. Council resen-es the rigbt to l.imit tbe length of individual comment!. Council may ask qu~tioo9 bur may take oo formal action on items addressed during the Public Comment period. Please use the microphone a nd state your n.ame for our records. If you desire a written response, plcMe provide tbe City Clerk witb your mailing addr;es5. S. Consent Agenda- Tbe City Administrator recommends approval of the following ConJent Agenda items: All Resolulinns and Ordinances on this agenda, or added hereto, shaLl be lnlroduced or adopted, as applicable, by title only, and the full rt!11di11g thereof is llerehy waived 10 a. Disburse ments: Accounts Payable: 06/05/0l, 06/07/01. 06/ ll/01 , 06/14/01 and 06/ 19/01 IS Total Gross Payro ll and Taxes: For Period Ending 06115/0 1 b. Adopt Resolution R£: Approvine Extension of Contract Between the City of Mt. Sbastll and Kellogg Engincerine to Provide General MuoicipaJ En!ineering Services A resolution adopting the extension of a public service contract with Kellogg Engineering to Provide "As Needed Services" until December 31 , 2001 16 a. Staff Report - Public Works Director 17 b. Proposed Resolution c.. Adopt Re8olution RE: Establishing the Appropriarioru Limit for tbe 2001 - 2002 Fiscal Year Each year the cities of California are required to establish a limit on the amount of monies that may be appropriated for spending from the proceeds of taXes. This limit is based on the 1978 base ye;u amount as adjusted for growth and inflation The calculated amount for 2001 - 2002 is $4,736,878 million. 18 a. Staff Report - Finance Director 2Z b. Proposed Resolution 11f <="1-HST.:. tIT I HHll • 'H.:.1·1 HILI ri0.0Cib DQ 3 Mt. Shasta City Council Agenda "--"' ...... / Monday, June 25, 200 I ~e 2 d. Adopt ResoJution RE: Approving Contract with the Mt. SbMta Resort for Effiuent Rout i n~ and Autborizine, the City Administrator to Sien as Represent1Ui\'e on behalf of the City of Mt. Sbnst@ The fi nal draft of the contract between the Mt. Shasta Resort and the City of Mt. Shasta for effluent routing has been examined and approved by the City Anomey and the attorney representing the Mt. Shasta Resort. Staff is requesting approval by Council for the execution of the contract 23 a. Staff Report - Public Works Director 14 b. Proposed Resolution e. Mayor Appointment R£: Appointment of Shaunna Jones to Fill a Vacancy on the CEDAC Committ« As A Member F rom the Lode,ine, Co mmunity Ms. Jones is tbe Matketing and Development Director for the Mt. Shasta Resort. She rce¢ntly moved here from Redding where she held a sim1lar position with Turtle Bay. She is appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the Council. 6. Discussion und Possible Action RE: Report aod Recommendation Fr·om the &at~tificattoo Committee on Tree Guidelines for Streets (AnPro:dmately 15 Minutes) The ~e.amiflcatioo Committee will present to Council their pr~posed guidelines for the planting of trees ~ ithin the public right of way in the City of Mt. Shasta. 29 a. Rewrt- Beautification Committee 7. Discussion and Possible Action RE: Rettuest by Rick lknnetb, a Member of fbe Plua Committee, for the City to Remove Equipment Between Buildings for Construction of Public R.estrooms (Approximately lS''Uinutes) .• Rick Bennetts, a member of tbe P"taza Commia ee is ask tug that the City prepare to rernov\! the genera\QT, air conditioner, and diesel oil tank in preparation far-~1e construction of the Public Restrooms. Estimated cost to the Ciry is $10,000.00 IJ 34 a. Staff Report - City Administrator 8. Adopt Urgency Ordinance RE: Reruion to Chapter 10.41 Vehicl' W eiehc Lhnit3 (Appruximatdy 20 Minutes) Because of the l-5 detour, there has been a significant increase io the amount of commercial trucks utihz.ing Mt. Shasta Boulevard as an alternate route as opposed to the suggested 1-5 detour. Due to the existing deteriorating street surfaces, steps must be taken to stop the increased commercial truck traffic on Mt. Shasta Boulevard. 39 a. Staff Report- Public Works Director 40 b. Proposed Ordinance 111 SHHSTH C l T, HHLL - 'rldl >-iiLL t lO.OOt Mt. Shasta City CoUllcil Agenda --J Monday, June 25, 2001 Page 3 9. Adopt Resolution RE: For mal Adoption of the 2001-2002 FY Operatine Bud[et an«! Aucborizing Positions (Approiimately 15 Minutes) The City Counctl has conducted two workshops on dte Operating Budget for the 200 I -2002 Fiscal Year. lbe budget presented for adoption calls for $2.2 million in General Fund revenues and $2.36 million in General fund expenditures. The budget estimates an operating carryover of $109,000 from 2000 - 2001 and a resulting contingency reserve of 6%. The budge1 projects Enterprise Fund receipts of S 1.230 million and expendinu-es of$1 .227 million for City operated utilities. 4J a. Staff Report - fmance Director 45 b. Proposed Resolution 10. Di.scussioo and Possible Action RE: Council's Proposed Cbanees aod Questioos Regarding tbe Current Version oftbe Proposed Parkine Ordinance (Approximately 45 Minutes) At the June 11 , 2001 Regular City Council Meeting, Council requested changes to the proposed parking ordinance and requested that additional information be provided regarding ..Tabl e A" Council continued discussion of· 1Tabl~ A'' and other parking issues to tbe next reg11larly scheduled City Council Meeting. 62 a. Staff Report- City Administrator 64 b. Proposed Parking Ordinance ~ 11 . Discussion and Possible Action RE: Mavor Appomtment ofMembc, of J....s:islative Ad Roc. -: C~mm itt ee and lkscriptioo of Their Duties (Approximately 15 Minutes} _ At the last City Coumil Meeting., Council direction was to place th is item ont\lte agenda for the next meetingforCouocil to d iscuss formation of a Grass Roots Committee anJ the respoosibilitie$ ;. t the members of such a committee would assume. •.· ..• 12. Discussion and Possible Action RE: V2canr PJannine Position (Approximately 15 Minut~l With the withdrawal by the latest candidate for the position of Assistant Planner, Cout1cil is being requested to provide direction as to how to proceed in fiHiog this vacant position. 75 a. St.affReport-City Administrator 79 13. City Administrator Updates {Approximately 15 Minutes) U . Minutes 80 a.. Mt. Shasta Beautification Committee Minutes- May 9, 200 I Sl b. Mt Shasta Beautification Committee Draft Minutes - June 13 , 2001 82 c. Mt. Sbasta Parking District Committee Draft Minutes - June 13, 200 I 07 17 01 r·n SHHST11 ~IT, MH...L - CH?l I HILL I :U , l..'llt_, Mt Shasta City Council Agenda '--" Monday, June 25, 200 I Page 4 lS. Monthl~ ReeQru 85 a. Public Works Director 89 b. Finance Director 98 c_ Police Chief 103 d. Fire Chief 106 e. City Adm inisrraror 16. Comments by Council and Staff: At this time. memben o( tbe Council may ask questions of s bff, request that reports be made at a later date, or ask to place an item on tbe agenda, on any subjec1 within tbe Cou.ocil's jurisdiction. Jo addition, the members may take this opportunity to make commcniS on any topic wbicb is not on this agenda, provided bowevtr. that oo deliberation may be conducted, eod no decision may be made oo sucb topi C3. 11. Adjourn .. ~ .. ,.. Ttte City of ML Shasta does not discriminate on the basl5 of race, color, Mtional ongln, UlC, 1'91~ . age or ctiSability in emptoyment tM provlalon of serv1ees. Persons ~ need accommcxiat1ons tOt a disability a a public meeti~ m~ all the City Ciotti at (530) 92&-.7510 for assistarq. Notttlc:at1011 o48 hours prior to tnG mogdng Will eMble the City ro m~e n~asONSbte errangements to .-u,. aceesslblllty to this moatlng. I r;' I '7 IJl r:o . wt) - AGENDA ITEM #8 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Mike Wori(man ~ Director of Public Wori(s SUBJECT: Veh1cle We1ght Limits DATE: June 18, 2001 Cal Trans has posted detours on 1-5 instructing south bound traffic wantJng to access Hwy 89 to go south to the Mott offramp then tum around & head north to Hwy 89 Because of the extra distance and the wait at the scales, many logging and long haul truck.s are using Ml Shasta Blvd as the detour We have noticed a sharp increase in truck traffic. The increase in heavy truck traffic is threatening the structural integrity of our streets and Increases the risk to our pedestnans. With slower tra1ns and the increase in summer domestic traffic, the increased truck traffic IS also causing delays at our stop lights. Or\ce the trucks get into town. the tum onto Mt. Shasta Blvd or Lake Street is very difficult. I am recommending that the City Council make Immediate amendments to Chapter 10 41 of the Municipal Code to include a 12,500 pound weight limit on all City streets. The wetght restriction will start south of the McCloud River tracks on Ml Shasta Blvd and east of Commercial at Lake Street If approved, we will install s1gns at au entrances to the City. The existing 8,000 pound weight limit on designated streets will rematn. Current language within the Municipal Code provides exemptions for local deliveries and pickups .19 r·1T SHHSTH ( 1 T, Hi-LL _, l.ll• .ll H!LL •;o. 8Gb ,../ ORDINANCE NO. CC0-01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE OTY OF MT. SHASTA AMENDING CHAPTER 10.41 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE DEALING WITH VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMlT The CJty Corn1cil of the City of Mt. Shasta does hereby ordain as fol1ows: Section l : Chapter J0 .41-Sections 10.41 .0 I 0 and I 0.41.020 of the Mt. Shasta Municipal Code are amended to read as follows: 10.41.0 110 - 8.000-Pound Limitation. It shall be unlawful to operate any vehicle with a maximum gross weight in excess of eight-thousand (8,000) pounds upon the foUo'ving streets within the City of Mt. Shasta: Spring Stree~ West Jessie Street ~west of Cedar Street), West [vy Street (west of Cedar Street), West Castle Street, Maple Street. East Ivy Street. East Jessje Streel, Chestnut Street (north of Alma Street)>Alder Street, (between Alma Street and Lake Street). CastJe Street (east of Chestnut Street)> Water .Street (west of Mill S1reet), Berry Street (north of High Street), and Alpine Street. 10.41 .020- 12.500-Pound Weisilit Limitation. It shall be tm.lawfu1 to operate any vebi¢le "With a maximum gross weight in excess of twelve-thousand-five hundred ({2500) pounds on any streets within the City of Mt. Shasta south of the McCloud River railroad tracks and east of the intersection of Lake Street and Conunercia1 Way. Section 2· Effective Date The City Council flllds and declares that this Ordinance wiU be effective immediately on passing as an urgency ordinance. The City Council ftnds that immediate effectiveness is necessary to preserve the public peace, heal~ and safety in that repair work on Interstate 5 has resulted in large Interstate Highway vehicles in excess of 12,500-pounds indiscriminately detouring through and along the city streets of the City of Mt. Shasta. The presence of these large vehicles on the city streets constitutes an imme&ate threat to the structural safety of the streets. The presence of these vehicles also constitutes an immediate threat to the safety of pedestrians and motorists on the city streets, parking patterns and pedestrian patterns are not designed to accommodate large number of vehicles of this size. The presence of these vehicles on the city srreets constitutes an immediate threat to the health and safety of the public due to noise, congestion and pollutants. For the above stated reasQns the City Council of the City ofMt. Shasta finds and declares that this ordinance will be effective immediate upon passage. 10 : 29 I'1T SHASTA C l TY H!=LL .., CH2M H l LL N0. 006 Q08 Ordinance No. CC().<) 1- Page 2 of2 The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 25m day of June, 2001 by the following vote: ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DATED: CITY OF MT. SHASTA Marge Apperson, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Prudence Kennedy, City Clerk John S. Kenny, City Attorney 41 U1 l7 01 II" ~·ST l \..1 T I Hrll.L .. I 1-GI HILL I Q . QOS '-"CITY OF MT. SHASb\ 305 North Mt. Shasta Boulevard Mt Shasta, Califomia 96067 (530) 926-7510 • Telephone (530) 926·0339 • Fax NOTICE OF PUB LIC HEARING ML Shasta City Council PUBL tC NOTl CE IS HI.REBY GIVEN that the City ofMt. Shasta will conduct a public h~:aring by the City Couo~il on Monday. June 25, 2001, at 7.00 p m. at the Mt. Shasta Community Ceoter. 629 Alder Street. to discuss the proposed revisions to Chapter 10.41 Vehicle Weight Limjts. The proposed revisions will set weight Limits for vehicles tn~ve l ing on streets within the Crty of Mt. Shasta South of the McCloud River Railroad Crossing and East of the intersection of Lake Street and Commercial Way The purpose of the public hearing will be to g1ve ctttzens an opporrunity to make thetr cotrum:nts known. Both wriuen and verbal comments will be accepted at the public hearing. If you are unable to auend the public hearing, you may direct written comments to the attention of Jo:~eph T Riker W , City Administnuor, at 305 North Mt. Shasta Boulevard, Mt Shasta., C A 96067 or you may telephone (530) 926-7510 In addition, information may be oblllined at the above address betwe.;n the hours of9:00 a.m and 4.00 p m . on weekdays. Legal Nooce - Mt. Sbasta Herald 20 2001 Publish Once June • YEAR-ROUND RECREATIONAL CENTER 42 07 '!7 oil D1 Mt Shasta C1ty Council Mt.nu~ Monday. June 25, 200 I Approved ~ Amended July 9, 2001 Page 6 8 . Adopt Urgency Ordiolloce JU.: Revision to Chapter 10.41 Vehicle Weigbt Limits (Approx.imately 20 Minutes) Because of the 1-5 detour, there has been a stgnificant increase Ul the amount of commercial trucks utilizing Mt. Shasta Boulevard as an alternate route :lS opposed to the ~uggested 1- 5 detour. Due to the eX!Sting deterioratjng street surfaces, steps must be tAken to stop the incn:ased commen:ial truck traffic on Mt. Shasta Boulevard. At the hour of 8:48p.m., Public Works Director Workman presented his staff report stating that emergency veh.icles and utility work was also exempted from the ordinance. He stated that he had met with CaJTrans representatives and the Cahfomia Hjghway Patrol and there had been discuss ton regarding posting l-5 and that CaiTrans would put out oo the radio the infomlation to rruckers regarding tlte weight limits within the City He stated that CaiTrans could not force the trucks to take the recommended detour aod that the onJy restnctions that could be enforud would be those as set up by the City within this type of ordmane Pohce ChiefMonU! mted be had no further comments regardtng the issue.J Mayor Apperson stated that this was an urgency ord inance that would be acted on torught Couac.il Action: At the bour of 8·56 p.m., Council Member Meyer movcd·Council Member Steams seconded to open me public tnput portion of the public.:bearing Motion carried on a voice vote of 4--0 with Council Member Gibson ooied as absent. <11: 1·• • Dennis Cross- 1230 Pille Grove Drive. ML Shasta Is the owner operator~ Cross Petroleum. He stated that b.is facility would be limited to local utiliuttion should this ordinance pass. H~ opined that thts was an effort to eliminate commercial traffic within Mt. Shasta. He stated that his business was h11ving to pay for the City's lack of performing its responsibjJity of maintaining its infrastructure. Council Member Steams stated that trus was a public health and safety issue. Mr. Cross d isagreed with Council Member Steams that this was a health and safety issue. Gene Erickson- P.O. Box 1179. Mt. Shast,a- Stared that the derour was a circuitous route for the trUckers that resuJlS in the use of an additional two to three gallons of gasoline. Police ChtefMontz stated that truck traffic within Mt. Shasta has actually declined in l.be last seven years. He pointed out that the routing of traffic for the detouring of l-5 has resulted in much of the traffic returning. He stated that Hwy. 89 bad been closed with no worl< being done on it. He st.ated that approximately two weeks ago he bad counted 28 trucks passing through the City in a one-hour period. He stated that the amount of traffic now being seen could be a problem to the infrastructure. Tl/SA C7 17 lJl Mt Shasta C1ty CoUllcil Minutes Mcmday. Jvne 25 , 2001 Approved As Amended July 9, 2001 P~c 7 Council Member Stearns as.ked whether the Publac Works Dirc::ctor could give sp~cial permlls to local businesses to order for them to continue operating without in te~n~ption City Administrator Riker responded that this would be possible. Tom Heilmann - ll 01 N JXOO Road, Mt. Shasta - State.d that he was a local log trucl.. owner/operator and asked b.ow the enforcement officer would know whether a part1cular truck. was making a delivery Hnus jUS\ passing through the Ctry due to the I-5 detour. Public Works Director Workman stated that it would be determined at the tJme that a vel11cle was stopped. He pointed out that the cruck dnver should be able to provide evidence of their business within the Ciry. He stated that this LDfon:natioo would be dtsseminated via the radio as proposed by CaiTrans. Police Chief Montz pointed out that every single truck would not be stopped. He potnted out that this would be a temporary solution to a tempor81)' problem. He stated that if the ordmance passes, CaJTrans would get the infonnation out so it dtscourages the use ofMt Shasta Blvd. vs. using the designated detour. Mr. Heilmann asxed whether the intent was that the ordinance would go tb.rougb October, when Hwy 89 would be reopened He opined that Council would decide to leave theDtdinance in effect rather t.bao removing the ; new vehicle weight Limits as proposed when Hwy. 89 reopened. He stated it costs approximate!) 70 10 80 cents per mile-to run lus truck and that means a lot of dollars to him in terms of tires, fuel etc ' Mayor :Apperson stated that the pro posal to Council was a temporary weight limit restricnoo oo the streets. Gary Gaede - 1315 Old McCloud Roacl ML Shasta- Stated he has an in dump and a belly·dump and that n'1 sometimes he hauls a reifer He Stated that be had come to this meeting in order to detennine whether or not he '''"· would ~b l e to continue his truci(iog without interruption or not•as a local businessman. ·! f red Erickson - P.O. Box 11 79. Mt. Shasta - Stated that the local people were concerned and that it sounds as if the ordinance would be OK iftbe local businessman would bo excepted as City Administrator Riker and Chief Montz bas indicated. Carrol Thomas - 802 McCloud Avenue - Verified that it is OK for him to park h.is empty truck on Adams Street as be has always dooe. Police Chief Montz responded that be is aware of wbere Mr Thomas parks hts truck and that it does not propose any problems in being parked at that locatloo DLSB David Manning- 20 Regioaro Road, Mt. Shasta - Is an owner operator and expressed bis coocem regarding the eJttra tune and extra cost involved if he bas to go halfway to Weed to go South or he has to go halfway to Dunsmuir to go lo Hwy 89. He pointed out that b~ bas been using Mt. Shasta Blvd. for years. He stated that be Wlderstaods the City's need to do away with the other truck traffic but that they need to consider the local businessmen. U7 l'i' 0! Ill .HHSTI-1 CIT t 1-f~L ~ LH?II HILL NJ.l'•lt Mt Shasta City Council Minutes Monday, Jun.e 25, 2001 Approved As Amended July 9, 2001 Page 8 Couocil Actioo: At the how of9 43 p m., Council Member Meyer moved Council Member Valenzuela seconded to close the public input portion of the public hearing. Motion carried on a voice vore of 4-0 with Council Member Gibson noted as absent. Lengthy discuss ion ensued between Council. staff and the public with the following points bemg covered. Council Member Stearns proposed the following amendments to the proposed Ordinance: • In Chapter I 0.41.020 insert the word "Commercial" in front oftbe word vehicle. • Add a new sentence at the end of Chapter 10.41 .020 - "At the discretion of the Director of Public Works, local residents wbo are making local runs may receive a Special Pmnit pursuanl to 10.41.030 sub C if the Director deems the vehicle will not cause a hea!lh and safety hazard". • Under Section 2· Effective Date. Add to the end of the last sentence of the first paragraph wording such that it reads ''polltrtants 1 and other increased public health and safety risks". Mayor Apperson requested that staff state any concerns or comments regarding the recommendation as presented by Council Member Steam~ . City Administrator Riker responded that there were no concerns or comments. Council Member Valenzuela requeSted language to e.mi this ordinance at a fitture date wbeo the overpass would be reopened. He opined that this should be a tcmpor:ary ordinance. He opined that this was a temporary problem and lhe inteot was not to shut down the local busmessmen. City Administrator Riker proposed language that would provide for a sunset'diue for the Ordinance . ., ·-" Mayor Apperson suggested a date of October 31st be used as the teTTn inatioo date for this temporary Ordinance City Administrator Riker proposed an additional ameodmeot to tlte Ordinance so that it would be sunsetted effective the second meeting of the Council in October and Council could take that action at that time. Council Member Steams stated that if there is a sunset date WJthin the Ordinance, that it would automatically terminate on that date. He opined that ifthe overpass is finished and is open prior to that time then Council could put this on the agenda for action to terminate the ordinanco at an earlier date. Council Member Stearns proposed an additional amendment to the Urgency Ordinance as follows: • Add an additional sentence following the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph Under Section 2: Effective Date stating "This Urgency Ordinance shall cease to be effective on October 3 I. 2001 oral such time as the Hwy 89 overpass is reopened, wbichever comes fu-st. CounclJ Member Meyer stated that as this was a temporary issue, he would be voting no on this ordinance. He stated that due to unfortunate circumstance there: has been the diversion of taxes from city municipalities to state government that has resulted in decreased funds for City's to use for their roadways and other public infrastructure needs. He opined that it was not going to be enforced and his biggest concern was that it would not be local police who would be stopping the trucks but it would be persons who may or may not know the: 10¢-aJs. He proposed that a strongly worded letter be scot to CalTrans to state that they should consider dditional fvnding be provided to citie6 that they have impa~t<'d . ~20 !)7 11 0! f IT -HHS TH '-' T ' HALl • I H..;! I HILL Mt Shasta Ctty Council Minutes Monday, June 25. 200 I Approved As Amended Jul) 9. 2001 Page 9 Mayor Apperson requested that a correction to the Ordinance be made to the last sentence before the recordmg of the ROLL CALL VOTE that reads "The foregoing resolution" and should read ''The foregoing Ordinanu"'_ Counctl Member Valenzuela stated that the City should wnte a letter to Granite requesting that they speed up the constructJoo for the repcurs to lhe Hwy 89 overpass. Council Action: Counctl Member Steams moved to approve the Ordmance No. CCR-0 1-03, An Ordinance of tbe City Council of the City of Mt Shasta Amending Chapter 1OA I of the Munic1pal Code ~a l i.n g With Vehicle Weight Limits as amended. C tty Admllltstrator Riker remmded Council thst an Urgency Ordinance rcqu1res a ~ / 5 vote in order for it to be adopted. Motion died for lack of a s~.ond . Co11oci.J Action: Council Member Steams withdrew hJs moll on 81ld moved to table discussion of this item to the next meeting to be held on Monday, July 9, 2001 Counctl Member Valenzuela seconded the motion Motion earned on a voice vote of 4-0 with Counct.l Member Gibson noted as absent. Council Action: Council Member Steams moved, Counctl Member Valenzuela seconded to continue the public hear111g to the oext City Council Meeting to be held on Monday, July 9, 2001 w ith the Ordinauu presented with the amendments as proposed during the present discussion . 'Motion carried on a vmcf" vote of 4 0 with Council Member Gibson noted as absent. Council concurred that a letter should be sent 10 CaiTrans to expedite the reopening of Hwy 89_ Ju. At the bourof9:S7 p.m. d1scussion of agenda item No. 8 ended. l tti 9. Adopt ResoluCioo RE: Formal Adoption of tbe 2001-2002 FY Operating Budget aQd Authorizing P~itioiU (Appronmatety lS Minutes) The City Council has conducted two wotbhops oo the Operating Budget for the 2001 - 2002 Fiscal Year. The budget presented for adoption calls for $2.2 mill ion in General Fund revenues and S2.36 million in GenentJ Fund expenditures. The budget estimates an operating carryover of $309,000 from 2000-2001 and a resulting conlingency reserve of 6%. The budget projects Enterprise Fund receipts of$ 1_230 million and expenditures of$1 .227 million for City Opel'llted utilities At the hour of 9:58 p.m. Fmance Director Marconi presented hts smff report stat ing that $10,000 would need to be put in the budget for the Restrooms as approved by Council per the request made by Rick Bennetts. He stated that an additional $2,900 was included in the budget for the mcrease associated wath the Grass Roots injtiative as it appears that the initiative would be adopted. He also pointed out that funding for 81llnterim Public Works Director in the amount of $13,000 bad been carried over into the budget in error and therefore bad been removed. He stated that the net effect oftllese cbanges reS\IIted in a contingency in the amount of approximately 6% as requested by Council in an amount of$142,139.00. Council Member Stearns requested that the SlO,OOO for the Restrooms should be added before adoption of the t>,udget. ~2 1 Appendix D Ecological Survey I ~5~0-225-238 1 DFG REDDIN~ J LlL l 9 ' 00 1..::! ; 1 C::, I ~:.. ~ Land~cape Architeclur~ ·Environmental Planning ·Ecological Services ~04 Wdtlali.e Strttt, S uiteD Post Off1te Dox 202 Mount ShaJtt.. Cahfom r• 96067 ( ~30) 91~2181l Phone rSJO) 926-3430 FAX C.J li form~ l 1censc 112018 I [colugical Suntc)' of Rllpror ':lnd Protected Migral4)ry Bird ActiVIty 1a I be Vicio1 cy of tbe PlannetJ o~noou Sprio~ Water Douliag Factlity Near Mount Sh•sta Crt)·. C:.llfornia Tom HcssddC'llZ. Owneri'P rinctpal Bob Noyes. W1ldlifc Biolo&JS I Prepared For Danonc lntcmallon.lli Orands ..1\ lt.enhon- Brian McCord Date ol Sw-vcy June 22. 2000 Date of Report: June 23, 2000 J.o~ro ducnon Jn the Siskiyou Cour.ty ~itigauon AJ1re-.:mcnt prep~ for the Dannoo Natural Spring Water Bouhng Faciliry Project (S P-97~8 ). the fol low1ng IS stated under Biolog•cllJ Resources (pa~e 3 of the Agreement): lmp1ct: ConsUllcuon may dirnub ncstmg raplors Md prote-cted m1gratory b1rds A lt.bough no nests we~ tdentsfic:d during the survey condueled in ~ovemtxr 1997 several trees occurring in the proJect site could po~llally s-upport b~ed i ng raptors (t.e.. birds of prey) or other birds prol~ted by lhe MBT/\ [:;Migratory 81rd Treary Act] by the hmc projecl corulruct1on is uutiaterl. Cen.atn consuuctioo aaivihes which could n:.~uh tn exce~s 1 vc nouc !Jom eq\lJpment and increased traffic may cause nesLaba.odonmcnt in natJng raptors. This 1mpt1cl could be sign.ifica.ot. Mitlption: Pnor to cortruUCIJOn, a qualified b1ologrS1 (In consultation >~~ 1 th COFG) shall condw:r a survey of the projoct area to 1den1ify any acnvc raptor or protccled mtgratory buo nes1s wnhtn 500 feet of the const~tion zone. If acuve nests are located with 500 feet of the construction zone. c mon11onng program would~ 1nitialed tn con5uhauon with CDFG [= CaJifom1a DeparonCflt ofFish and OameJ. Tom Hcncldcn. and Ai~ .. ler Daoaoa Jlacilify Eto1o&iut Sarvty Porr I £Et.681SOES .. 530-225-2381 DFG PEDu I 1 ~ G 571 Pes JUL 1 9 '130 l4;19 Based or. lhts rcquircm~nr and a convc."sation With Steve Button ofCDFG !he follo ~mg scope: of work was agreed upon between Oa.nonc and THA · r • Survey for ne.stmg.. perchmg, :~nd for.~gtog ra;:Jtors m the VICmil'• or the construct10il pro;ect wun pamcu.lar arrenuon gtvcn to fo~ st stands and large t'ldr\•idual uees aroWJd the edge of the project sue . I • Survey for nc-sun~. pcrth m~ . SDd foragmg mtgralory btrch an the vtctmry of the construcuon pro;ect. '-'i th pam cular anenuon g1vcn to ftc$hwater m.arm ( c11t5ttng slTUIII ponds on site), ra~an woodland (next to ponds). ctuparral, and oM. woooland areas I • DocU!n&!nt all bird sp~ t es observed or he:ud. tr. orarr to pre~ an rnvemorj or all specaes encoumered at tile ume of the surve) I • PrepMe a b rief write-up of the resuiL of the field survey. concllLc;tons reached. and any recommendattOM made Planned constructJon acnvtucs Wtll c li'\SlSt ot tnstalhng a large buddiog..·parklng are11. .rnc.J :>lonnwotc:r retcolJ on basu1 on the south ·Ide of Ski Vtllage Dn v~ . nt1d ins1AJiing a pipchne and pumphouu o n the north side ofSkt Vii !ge Drive The project me was th orou~h ly tTav ·sed oo foot between 6 a.m. a.1d 12 p.m on June 22. 2000 ( Fi~ 1). Binocttlars, listening. and se of a field gwde ~xt were used to adeoufy bird .!pec!es encountered. O bscrvattons were ~ r ·rded in a notebook during the ~urvey . Pamcular attention was gwen to looking for ne!t3, ne!. .. ng behavior (warning calls. d ive-bombing, caayin& food, feigning tnjury, etc.), and whitewnshU ! on or near crees 1.11d cliffs. Key rypes ofhabiLat were also looKed fo r (surface water. wetlanc :>r riparian vegetarjon. cliffi. large tr«s. cavities, thickets, etc..) Toot H..udd~nr. a>Od Au.oci8tn O.aDOI factlitJ Ec:olocc-J Son-, P•ct z s·d E:£ t> 68160E:S r I -530-225- 2381 OFG REDDlNG 571 P06 JuL ::9· ee 14:20 Figure l. A.""Ca sun·c)cd lboi.!Jldc.d b~ dashed hoe: s~e · i " = l.OOO'l I I I I.BMJ.flf j. I· Toea Hnw4d•es 11ed ~iatcl D•saoa V•cillcy EcokJcical SIITT~ her J L.·d EE to> S8l60ES uos..Ja~ad sawer ,. •.,. ... _ ~s-~0:-?2.~- 2 381 DFG PEDD J NG , 5 71 P07 JUL 1 9 '00 ]...1: 2 0 ThC' ccntml pon•on \>f the pru}~X: Si te 1$ largely dc: v01d of vcgct~tion due to past lwnber I m1 ll acti\ 111es The &mst areas consJS( pnm;u;)\· of de n~e moniMc chaparral (most!) man:zanl\3) wuh !teeltercd large and smaJI comfe~ growmg mdiVldually and m small groves 'fh( steep nonh Si de ofSpr.ng H1ll facing the proJect site \s vegtlated by a m•X of regenerating comfers and successional montane: chaparral. '41th several cock outcrops al tl\e swnmn. S cv~ral sc:dimcnl ponlh and Jrainage d.cch~ were sl..lr'< cycd. but no surface; water or \'-ctlan.:h were iou.nd 81ld npanan vegetauon was hmu ed 10 small willow and box e ld~r trees ~o wmg iodJv1dually and 10 small clumps No nests. tree C.1V1t1cs. or wlufc::washmg on chiTs or brneath large com fer trees wen: found. nor was nesting bduv1or ob3erved eJtLr!pl as Indicated The followm!! bird species were cncountc:n:d. I American/Common c,ow (heard) Brewc:r's Blackbird (20+) Busht1t (3+) Cahfom1a Quail ()) Comroon R.avtn (3) Killdeer (2 togethc 1n a barren an::a. but no feigmng of IOJW)' lhat ~uld mdica~ res11ng) Nonhem/Cornmon Flicker (I) Red-tailed Haw1. ( 1-,oanng) Rufous-sided Towhee ( 1) S<:tub Jny (7+) Solitary V ireo (I) Starling 3+) Turkey Vulrure (6- perching on rock outcrop in early mom10g sunJight) Yellow-rum~ Warbler ( I seen and l he-an! rtelil'b)'··nco.r too o f Spring H ill. came very clo!C, qwte vocal. could be ne!ltint) Miscella.ne<>us mammal observaoons were aJso made whtie survey1ng the proJecl si re. and consisted of the foUowing. RAccoon tracks ( I set) Deet 'cracks (l set) Jack. rabbit (I) Paclc rat nestS (2) Golden-mantled ground squm~l (I) 1'001 Hcucldcm: and AUocUl/:1 O•.aon facility £c.oloti(~ l s.,ny r.co ~ EEv 6 8160ES , +530-225-2381 DFG REDDING 571 Pes JUL 1 9'00 14: 2 1 I Of the b;rd s:>ecae.s encou!llered during the survq. tht" t'OIIo win l!t ~ ptotected b> the Migratory 81ro Trt:acy Act tMB1Ai, With nesung habttat 1ndJc!UeJ in parentheses Amcricu.u Cww t~e) Bre.,..er s Blad.btrd (6found shrub. small ~c J BushUl (snrub. tc~ ) Commol\ j~aven (chff. trecl Killdect (ground) Non.hcm F!icker ( cavtry J Rcd-t.alled Haw).. (tree chff)··also. the onlv raptor observed Rufous-stded Towhee (shrub) Scn~b Jay (shrub. 1~ } Solitary Vi reo (oec, shrub) Tutlcey Vuhure (c:Jve. cliff. hollow log. abandoned bam) Yellow-rumped Warbler (contfer lr~) }';esci.og babiLat C'lmts around the fnnsc of the prOJect ~tc for aJI of the above species. Bnd some of these s ~ctes are Wldoubtcdly nesting io that area even though nesung behavior was, for the most pan, not observed. Much of lhc fringe area is funher th!LD 500 feet from proposed consuucuon acrivu'ies, bw even wllere constrUctron will be c!osa-. 11 is unlikely that corutruciJon a.cnvJilt:3 would h.:lve any impact on nestiog. Th.c boundary between the suitable nesting r.abttlt of the fringe ara end the mo~tly unsuitable: habitat of the largely barren central portion of the project site is so abrupt th.aJ nesting birds would tend to sr.ty within the suitable habitat and not spend much of any lime in the unsuitable central area. Abo. since construction activittes will be limited to Lhe cenltal portiOn of the project site. no suitable nesting habiuu wt ll be' dc:stroycd. The one specie.'\ that did exhibit nest10g behavior was a pair ofYcllow-rumped Warblers. These birds were observed near the summit ofSpnng Hill. however. which is aboul 1.500 feet from the ne4l'C3t prop03ed eonswct1on activities. Regarding suitable nesting babilal within the c~naal portion of the project site, the only species observed that would be ltlce.ly to nest in that~ w·ere Brewer's Blackbird and Killdeer, neitheT of wbicb indicated 4TI)' nesring behav•or. Tbc blackbirds were foraging as .J smaU flock within sparse pa.t(hes of weeds, and the k1lldeer were foraging in a recenily graded area wh~ the bare ground was mo1S1 and n:mmisceot of a :streambci.J or lakcbo:d wberc tbey wowd norma.l ly be foWld. t:gnclusions and Recommendation' Based on tb~ ! urv"ey re!Uits a.nd the highly altered conditiOn of the poroon o f the project Site where constructton activities are planned, i1 is extmnely unhlcely thai the'c: nctivirie:s wtll have 11oy impacts on nesting btrds. To• H~~ ... •ocl Anod.Wa Oanoa Faeiliry Ecoiot~l S.rny hlf ' EEv68160ES +530-225-2381 DFG REDDING 571 P09 JUL 1 9 ' 00 14:21 Rcfcrcncc:s Audubon So~ 1ety 1977. Fteld Gutde to Nonn American Birds Western Rcgton. Chanuclcer Press. lnc., tx ew York. 852 pp. B11t10n. Steve Wildlife Btolog.Ist. (dlifom•a D-epartmc:nt ofFish and Game Personal cornmumcation June 20. 2000 Mt. ShlUta Area Audubon Soc1cty. 1990 Btrds ofStskiyou County '!\!oi Q!I Lnho, Yreb Folding hrochun:. National Geographic Socu:ty. 1983. Field Guide to the Birds of l'\orth Arocr•ca. Nadonal Geographic SoC1ety, Washington, D.C 464 pp. Siskiyou CoWJty Planning Department. 1998. Siskiyou Counry Mitigation Agreement (Projecc No. SP-97-08). 9 pp. U.S. fish aru1 Wildlife Semce. 2000. Bird5 Protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act: Ltst of Migratory Birth; Alpbabe.ucaJ L.i9t. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Website (http:J/migrarorybirds.fws.govfmtmltr/mbtalmbt.andx.b!ml). I6 pp. Ta• Hcsukfce1 aad Asooa.ra o.Dooa F•aUty Erofociul S11oq r.tt 6 0 I ·d EE t.SB ISOE:S +530-2....:5-238 1 DFG R EDO II lG r 5_,1 JLJL 1 9 ' 00 1--l ; 1 8 Sure ot C .il 11 01 n~ • Tne R e~c)ufc ;en.--y __ _ GRAY D AVIS (.v..rr~~a DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME I http://www dfg ca gov 601 LocuGI Stre~l ' Redding. C ohfomul 96001 (5 30) 225-2300 l' I t July 11. 2000 Mr. Wayne V1 rag. Ass1stant Planning 0 1rector Siskiyou County Planmng Department Post Office Box 1085 Yreka, California 96097 Dear Mr V1rag Dannen Spring Water Bottling Facility- Project Number SP-97-08 The proposed proJect is the mstallation of a sprmg water bottling facility Construction activities include the installation of a large building, parking area, stormwaler detention basm. pipeline and pumphouse adjacent to Ski Village Dnve rn Mount Shasta. The project proponent entered Into a mitigation agreement with Stsk1you Co unty on November 4 , 1998. One of the potential impacts identified In that agreement was disturbance from construction activities to nesting raptors or other bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Mitigation for this potentialtmpacl was for a qualified biologist to survey the project area and identify any bird nesting acti\lity within 500 feet of the construction zone. If active nests were found the Department of Fish and Game would be consulted to design an appropriate mihgation and monitoring program. In response to this mitigation agreement requirement the attached ecological survey was conducted by Mr. Tom Hesseldenz and Associates. The Department has rev.ewed this survey and concurs with the findings Since no nests were found wnhm 500 feet of the construction zone. the Department feels th2t construction activ1 tr es will not significantly impact nesting raptors or other btrds protected under the MBTA. EE to> SB l SOES - 530-225- 2381 DF G P E DDI NG S?t P03 JUL 1 9 ' 00 1 4 : 1 2 Mr Wayne Virag July 11 . 2000 Page Two I If you have any further quest1ons or concerns regardmg the subject project, you may W1sh to contact Environmental Specialist Ill Steve Burton at (530) 225~3845 t Stncerely. Donald 8. Koch Reg1onal Manager cc. Messrs. Steve Burton and Cra1g Martz Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, California 96001 Mr. Richard Callas and Ms. Melissa Crew Department of Fish and Game 1724 Ball Mountain Road Montague. California 96064 Messrs. Tom Hesseldenz. Bob Noyes and Associates Post Office Box 202 Mount Shasta. California 96067 Mr. AI Richardson Facility Construction Management Inc. via fax at: (530) 926-8747 E£~68160ES eos:Lo 10 so he~ DFG REDDi r lG ~ 5~0 - 225-238 1 JUL 19'00 14 : 1 '=' Lands~pe Architecture· Environmental Planning · Eco l ~ical ~rviccs 104 Wc:$1 Lake St.rtet, Sune 0 Post Office Box 202 Mount Shasta.. Cahfom~ 96067 ( HO) 926.2184 Phorn: (SlO) 926·J4JO FAX C.. llforns~ Ltcense #20 18 -= Ecological Survey o( lbptor :tnd Prvt«ted Migrator)' Bird Acttvtty ia the Vicmuy of tbe Planned Daoooo Spriu~ Water Douling facuity Near Mo\Ulf S hasta C ity, California Tom Hcsscldrnz. Owner!Princtp!il Bob Noyes. WJld1ifc B•ologiSI PTep~d For Danonc )ntemaJ.tOt1Al Orands Attentwo Brian McCord Date of Survey June 22.2000 Date of Report: June 2J, 2000 .IQ!roducnon ln the Siskiyou CoW1l)' Mitigation A~ncnt prepared {or the Oannon NatUral Spring Water Bottling Facility Project (SP-97~8), the followmg ts sUied uodcT Bio l og ic~ Resources {paite 3 of the Agreement): lmpae1: ConstrUction may di51Urb nc31mg raptol'l and protected m•gratory btrds AJlbougb no nests W\:"rc identJfied during the survey conducted in ~ovcmbcr 1997 several tren occuning in the projjXt ~i tc could potennaJiy support breeding raptors (i.e . birds of prey) or other birds prol~ted by the MBT 1\ {:;;Migratory Bird Treaty Acr) by the time project comtrucllon is i.wtiated. Cenain consuuction activities which could result tn excessave nouc bom t:.qUJpment met increased tTaffic rru~y cause ni!S\ abandonmenc io n<:3ting raptors This 1mpac1 could be significant Mielgalion: Pnor to COrl$tNCIIOn , a qualified biolog r To.. Hnstldcn aad A.SIOC41let D•aue 51.o!ify Erolotiul SIII'Yt) Pq s,·d E£t.6BI60£S eos:~o 10 so ~ew , I +53~-225-2381 DI="G REDD I tiG JUL. 1 9 • QQ J. 4 - 1 9 Based on lhis reqwrcmem and a conversa tion wuh Stc\c Burton ofCDFG. lhe followm~ ~ scope of work WIIS agreed upon between Danone Md THA · I • Swvey for ne.stmg. perchmg, and fo ragtng rajltors 10 the V1csniry of the con5tr\1CIIon project. Wlfh pamcular aneo11on !iven to fon:st stands and large individual tree! aroUild the edge of che project s ite. • Survey for nestl11!!:. pc.zrlUag, aod foraging m1gratol') b1rds l1l tbe vtCUll[) of lhe I coostrucuon proJect. "'itn particular anenuon g:vc:n lo f•e~hwater tlanh (cxistms smAll ponds on site). ripanan woodland (ncltl to ponds), ch.lplliT8l. and oM. woodland ~as I • Document aJl bird species ob~I"ed or hnrd 1n order to prepare an IJlvemory of all spectes encownered atlhe lime of the survey • Prepare a brief write-up of the result! of the field survey. eonclu.~ions reached. and an~ recommendations made Planned consnucuon acnVlli~ will c >rum of mscalltng a large butldin~. -parlung area. itnt.l slormwatc:r ret.eotion ba.stn on tbe south .1de o( Ski Village Onve. nnd instnlling n pipell.ne and pumpho~ on the north side of Sid Vii J.ge Drive Metbod! The project ~ne was Lhoroughly rrav -sed oo fooc between 6 a..m_ and 12 p.m. on June 22. 2000 (Figure I). BltiOCUJars, listcni.ng, and s c: of a field guide te'Xl we~ ustd to idcoufy bird specses cncoWllered. Observations were rec ·rded in a notebook during the survey. Pantcular artenhon was gwen to looking for n.e!t.s, oe~ . ng behavior (w-arning ca.lk, dive-bombing, carrying food. feigning tnJUl")', etc.), and whitewnshir ; on or near ~TeeS and cliffs. Key rypc.s of habitat w~ aJso loolr.:ed for (surface water. wellaru: :>t ripanan vegewion. ctiffii. large trccs. cavities, r.hiclcets, etc.. ~ To'" H..uftdtnJ. a~ AM«i:aea o.. ao• futli.cy [n~IOflO.) S lli'U)' Pqc l 9 ·d E:Et.SBtSOE:S -530-225-2381 OFG REDDING 5?1 PC3E: JUL l9'13ta ~~:20 Figure I. Area sw-vcyc:d (bounded by da.shl"d lsne: scale' i .. = 1,000'). "•I \\,, ~,, \ 1\ \I Tom Ht•M4d~JU •ood ~i.ata DaaaoD '•c:illcy Ecllloaial s.,.,«y ~ ) t_•d f:E t.6BI60f:S .,- -·· _ + 5~0 -?~~- 238 1 DFG REDD I UG 571 P07 J UL 19·ea J4: 20 The ccmral poruon o( the projC\..1 Site~~ large!) devoid of vegetation due to pastlwnbc:r m1 ll activities The fringe area' C'onsist primarilv of dense monr:mc chaparral (moS1Iy manzanita) w1th !<:&tiered IMgt and small conr fe.'"S grow1ng indivtdually and in sm..! I groves The steep nooh Side of Spnng Hr\l facio@ lbe proJect site is vegetated by a max of regenerating conafers and successional montane chaparral, wuh several cock oulcrops at the swnm1t. Several sc~.itmcn t pon American/Common Crow (heard) Brewcr'.s Blackbird (20._) 81.13htit (3+) Cahfomra Quail (3) Cot11111on Raven (3) Kitlda:r (2 logether ro a barren area. but oo fergnrng of inJury that would indicate nestmg) Northern/Common Flicker (I) Rtd-tailc:d Hawk (1-,oaring) Rufous--sided Towhee ( 1) ~bJ11y (7+} Solitacy Vireo ( l) StarHng 3+) Turuy VuJtU!e (6--perching on rock outcrop ill early momtng sunlight) Ycllow·f'Wll~ Warbler (I seen and 1 heut.l nc~ by -near top of Spring Hill. came very close, qwt~ vocal, could be ne!tins) Miscellaneous mammal observauons WeiC also made whlle survey111g the project sire, and consiS1cd of the foUowing . Rlk:cooa craclc.s ( I set) Deer 'cracks ( 1 set) Jack rabbit ( 1) P!.dc rat nests l2) Golden-r11Antled ground squarrel (1) Tom Hcnddtru: and -'•IOC&atn OUJtOn F~el\tty teotoci~l ,.,.S.nc, . a·r:J EE~SBlSOES r •530-225-2381 D~G REDDING 571 P08 JUL 19' 00 14: 21 'I Ut}CUSS!OO Of the bud s;:>ecaes encounterd during t.hc survey, the fcllow a ~ arc pu>t~ lcd by lhc Migrotory B1rd Treacy Ac, tMBTA). wich nesung habaut 1ndacaJcd in parentheses· Amcncan Crow (!Itt) Brewer's Black bard (gtOWld. shrob. smalllt'tc) Bushut (sbrob. tret>J Common Raven {cliff tree) Killdeer (ground) Northern Flicker (cav.ry) Rc:d·talled Hawk (lrcc, cliff)·-also. !he only rapaor observed Rufous-sided Towhee (shrub) SCJ\.Ib Jay (shn.lb. l~) Solitary Vireo (llee, shrub) Turlc:ey Vulture (cave . cJJt[ hollow log, abandoned bam) Yellow-rumped Warl>Jer (conafcr tree) Nesting babiLat C'ltlsts around the fringe of the prOJect 1atc for a.ll of the above species. and some oftbese specaes are undoubtedly nesting io lbat area even though oe.suog behavior was, for I he most part. not obsel'led Much of lhc fringe area is further than 500 feet from proposed construcuon activities, bw even whert construction will be closer, HIS unlikely that corurructJon a.crivilio would hne any impact on nesting. The boundary between tho suitable nestiog habJtat of the &mge area and the mosuy unsuitable habitat of !he largely barren cenlnll portion of the projc:ct site is so abrupt tJw ndting birds would leod to !~Y within the suitable habitat and 001 spend much of any ume in the un!Uat.able central area. Abo, since construction activities will be limited to t.h.e central ponaon of the proJect site, no suitable nesting habitat Will be dntroycd. The one specie'i that did exhibit nesting behavior was a pair ofYcllow-rumped Warblers. These birds wefC observed near the summit of Spring 1-lill. however. which tS aboUl I JOO feet from the ~a.resl proposed corutiUC~on activiues. Regarding su i t~ble nesting h~bitat within the c.cmnJ pomon of the project site, the only species observed that would be likely to nest in that acea were Brtwer's Black bi..rtl and Killdeer, neither of wbicb indicated any nesting behavior. lbc blackbirds were foraging .u a small nock within sp113C pa.tches of weeds, and the killdeer were foraging in a recently graded area where the bare ground was moast and rcmtniscent of a. !Ueambc\1 or lakc:b«1 wbere tb~y would nonna.lly be found. r:Qnclusioas and ~omms:ru:iatio n:s Based o n the s~ results and the h1ghly altered conditton o f the portion of the project "~ whe re construction activitie s are planned, iris eJtiJemely unlikely that lhe.se ncti vities will hsvc 11ny impacts on nesting bards. T'e • H-'oi~ ... •tt4 Anoda&as Dn~~e• f• ~ility £cofotk:aJ S.rvty hft ' s·d EE?681SOES r - 5 30-2 25-2381 DFG REDD ING 5 7 1 P09 J UL 1 9 ' (30 1 4 : 2 1 Audubon Society 1977 r'ield Gutde to North A mencan Bu·ds· Wc:sccm Region Chanuclcet P~ . lnc .• f'\cw York. 851 pp 811tt0n. Steve. WildJife Biologist. Cc~lifomia [}eparnncnt of Fish and Game Personal commumcation June 20. 2000 ~k S l~a.:~ta AJca Audubon Soc1el)' I 990 B11ds of Sisk1you C'ouncy NoiiiJl Lnho. Yreb Folding hrochure. 'NBlional Gcogrophtc. Soetcty. 1983. Field Guide to the Birds of North Amcnca :-.lacional Geographic SoCiety. Washington. D.C 464 pp. Siskiyou County Planning Deparunent 1998 Siskiyou County Miogation Agreement (ProJect No. SP-97-08). 9 pp U S. fish and Wildlife Semce 2000 Bi.rtb Protected by the Migratory Bird Tn:aty Act· List of Mignnory Birds; Alphabetical U9t. U.S. fish and Wildlife Scrviu Web.~1tc (http://rrugrarorybirds.fws.govruumltr/mbta/mbtAndx.html) 16 pp. Toa Hauld~t a.ct Auociatcs DtooOA Ft dUty £colotiul SwrYq ... ~ 6 0 [ ·d Appendix E Truck Delivery Bills of Lading, June 18 and 19,2001 ENT BY : OANONE INT BRANDS; 530 235 2Bd7; JUL-24 01 3:55PM; PAGE I DOCK DOOR Page 1 of2 250 - Da11one W.;rte/5 Start j6 /~9/2.001 _ Stop J6l:9/2001 Ylew Unassigned r: VlewShipped P" ;~.:.~ ;.... -;..:·.:~~~~-~-- i~;~ ~: .... ( . -;~:;/:·::.:~:t;~ Lo• I Schneider 025032$W a430009 53 6/19/2001 Delivered 9245330 025032SW Cerritos CA National 1:06:00 PM 1f Mtller Truck.lng 9231795 024842SW 024642SWI Hayward; CA ] 6/19/2001 Delivered ,corp. ~530~ Is-' 1:45:00 PM '--- =' J&S 6/19/2001 9182910 024418SW 024.416SW Tracy CA 1026 53 oenvereCI rrrens~rtatt on 1:..,49:00 PM f - Miller Trucking 6/19/2001 '9239501 44090650 Milpitas CA vl9 48 Delivered f44o906SO Corp. 1:57:00 PM -.·-· ._ - Gene Eri,kson R6/19/2001 9231800 024a43SW 02~3SW Hayward CA E Delivered ltl" 2:28:00 PM n tr.rucking - - Schneider 6/19/2001 19~·39701 02489ssw!!o24895~~- Cerntos CA National a49J024 53 3:18:00 PM Delivered - -i== '(''- Knight 6/19/2001 024892SW 024892SW Cerritos CA ifran.sporatton, 6674 53 Delivered 9239693 3 :19 :00 PM tnc. J&S 6/19/2001 - 9182920 024422SW 02+4l2SW Tracy CA [Transportation 5302 53 3:20:00 PM Delivered A. ~ Miller TI"Uddno 6/19/2001 19231785 02..a http .1/www.backhaulers .com/dockdoor/W ddLoads .asp 7/3/01 SENT BY: OANONE INT BRANDS; 530 235 284 7; JUL-24-01 3:56PU; PAGE 3/3 DOCK DOOR Page 2 of2 IKtught ~-- 9239686 10248S9SW 02~89SW Hayward CA /Transporatlon, 60782 53 .6/19/2001 Delivered 5:"15:00 PM - Inc. - - Miller Trucking -- 9231803 ~24844SW 02"1844SW Hayward CA 277701 6/19/2001 J Delivered Corp. !4B 5:52:00 ~M. > -- Knk)ht ·' 6/19/2001 9239696 io24893SW 024893SW Cerritos CA lrransporatlon, 7391 53 Delivered 5:5<4 :00 PM Inc. - "..c 9182914 02«19SW 024419SW ifracy ~&S 31747 53 16/19/2001 ~ [@_ns_P-~rtatton 6:41 :00 PM Dehvered ~ ~= Knight 9239691 024891SW 024891SW Cerritos <:A TransporatJon, 60418 7 Delivered tJ[8:1~/20/20014 :00 AM ,;Inc. ~ http .I/ www. backhaulers.com/dockdoor/WddLoads . asp 7/3/01 ~NT BV : DANONE INT BRANDS; 530 235 2847; JUL-24 01 3:56PM ; PAGE 2 /3 DOCK DOOR Page J of2 250 • tunone W•ters- Start 16 /18/2001 Stop 16/16/2001 View Unassigned r VlewShlpped f7 .. ·::..:. _.., ....: ;~ ·-; . ·: ... ~ v' v"' ~ ...... -...... , -:" lf~d Count 1011 ~ ~~~~~ITI -~PU # .. [ordertt J N:t:)oest Ctty lt~tte prrier [Trailer# fs l~eiiA/Ti ved ~_tatus looor 9099012 4 29422 L 294225;-l Salt Lake UT ~ Sch ne i der A96492 5;- •6' 18' 2001 Delivered r· 'I Oty ' N a tl:;:o:.:..;n,:,:al~===l:=====:;?=~'9 : 26:00 AM r--ul Knfght ·6/18/200"""1=·={F= =9l==9l 9266472 025030SW I025030Sw!J ICerntos CA rrransporatJon, 8289 48 10:52:00 DeiiYerea , Inc. _ ~*=~'~.AM~==--=;==~· ~ Mflfer Trucking G/18/2001 · 024877SW 024877SW LJ c923303J Hayw ard CA lcorp. 5315 53 12 :4S:OO PM Delivered lr====9?==-~i~--~~9?====~==l~~---- - werner I[ 16/18/2001 9180597 438609~~- 43860950 Loveland CO !rr ans~ortatlo n l0095153I t::J :l :00 PM DeliveredD 1 1 8 9231766 lo24839~~~0=2=4=8=39=S=W=e==~i'H=a=y=w=a=rd=ll=CA==={l= ~k ln g 4880 53 ~~;~~~gc'~ lo;ltveredJ ] !~:~-=~~=====:~-===~~-=<~==~~ ' ..., . ... . Salt Lake l1T Schneider Em1 8/2001 92041:26 ~"3 95 1 750 1r 39517SO Jty National a418851 :00 PM Oefivered a - .. .. - 38======~~====-l?==, J Gene Eri ckson fGiiB/2001 !9233031 024875SW 024a75SW Hayward CA ITruckrng ,t14 48 3:49:00 PM Del rvere!l t r-~ - 9214377 024679SW 02-4679SW H d CA Miller Trucking 5309 isJ 6/ lB/ 2001 Dellve r~d l?=====?=====il== ===- 1 _ aywar lcorp. , ~3;,;:5;;;0;;,;,:,;;;.00;..,;.P;,;M~=====l~=ll ~19=2=3=1=77=8=~0=2=4=8-40~5~ ~24840SWOHaywa rd FJ~~;~Truck~n~ _. Ell o .(s3- ~~~~~~~00iM ~3 __ _J 1 2001 9231762 02483SSW 024838SW Hayward CA Miller TnJCkJng 5305 53 G/lB/ Delivered __ Corp. 4:14:00 P~l hnp·I l www. back.haulers.com/dockdoor/W dd.Loads .asp 7/3/01 M l. Dcn•ismn & A.,·.\ociutes, Inc.. TO: Daniel Axelrod, The Water Group March 19, 2014 FROM: M. Lee Davisson, PG d:-- ~ /pp- You had requested that I supply some commentary and recommendations on potential influences of new groundwater water production planned with the opening of the Crystal-Geyser bottling plant in Mt. Shasta. As we had discussed on the telephone, the planned production rate of up to one million gallons per day for the bottling plant will only equate to a small fraction of the daily discharge understood to originate from Big Spring located in the same area. This simple comparison seems to alleviate concern for negative groundwater impact caused by the groundwater production. However, I think it is important to point out that groundwater in and around the city of Mt. Shasta is anything but simple. This stems from the fact that groundwater and its emergence as spring discharge is controlled by potentially complex and largely unmapped subsurface conduits created by the volcanic deposits in wh ich they flow. Contrary to most groundwater basins that are formed by accumulation of sediments derived from stream deposits and exhibit inter-granular porosity, recent volcanic material in the Mt. Shasta area comprises successive layers of eruptive material that is non-porous. Groundwater can only reside in this material where it has formed interconnected fractures or buried lava tubes. A porous sedimentary basin lends itself readily to groundwater flow prediction using mathematical modeling based on continuum mechanics. However, this approach fails to achieve the same results for groundwater aquifers comprising fractured material because the occurrence and spatial scale of subsurface conduits transporting groundwater is largely unknown. Unfortunately, the complexity of the local groundwater in Mt. Shasta only adds to the uncertainty and level of concern for negative impacts. As you articulated to me, the bottling plant would extract water from wells located north of the Big Spring discharge. One question that is fair to ask is whether the water that they pump is the same water as Big Spring? My past research experience using isotope measurements on spring water in this area, Hat Creek Valley, and the Fall River Springs (Davisson and Rose, 1997; Davisson and Rose, 2014; Rose and Davisson, 1996; Rose et al. , 1996) has shown me on more than one occasion that waters collected just a few hundred yards apart can have distinctly different recharge sources. This is undoubtedly due to independent subsurface conduits that are not connected. It is reasonable to expect the possibility of the same in the Mt. Shasta area. I realize that the opening of the bottling plant has positive outcomes for the local economy of Mt. Shasta, and I believe that much of the concern for its possible negative impact to groundwater supply can easily be addressed with simple monitoring approaches. Firstly, determining whether the groundwater produced by the bottling plant in their wells is from the same source as Big Spring can be addressed with some inexpensive oxygen and hydrogen isotope measurements combined with general mineral analysis. Previous measurements we made of Big Spring in 1997 indicated ,.,J,/1, ?n , ..., , .,