Final DRAFT Sphere of Influence Plan Update Truckee Sanitary District, Nevada County, California

Transcription

1 Final DRAFT Sphere of Influence Plan Update Truckee Sanitary District, Nevada County, California Prepared for: Nevada LAFCo 950 Maidu Avenue Nevada City, CA Contact: S.R. Jones, Executive Officer Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates 2000 O Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA Contact/Author(s): Elliot Mulberg E Mulberg & Associates P.O. Box Elk Grove, CA Report Date: July 21, 2011

2

3 Nevada LAFCo Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ExecutIve Summary...1 Introduction...1 District Profile...2 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews...3 Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Present and Planned Land Use Present and Probable Need for Services Present Capacity of Facilities Social and Economic Communities of Interest...4 Recommendations...5 Conclusions...5 CEQA...6 Section 2: Introduction LAFCo LAFCo Policies and Criteria for Sphere of Influence Plans Municipal Service Reviews Sphere of Influence Update Process California Environmental Quality Act...10 Section 3: District Profile Description and Setting Sphere of Influence Population Methodology Growth Rates and Projections...17 Section 4: Updates to Municipal Service Reviews East County Wastewater MSR (2003) Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area Financing Constraints and Opportunities Cost Avoidance Opportunities Opportunities for Rate Restructuring Opportunities for Shared Facilities Government Structure Options Management Efficiencies Local Accountability/Governance...34 Section 5: Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Proposed Sphere of Influence Map and Annexation Plan Present and Planned Land Uses Present and Probable Need for Public Services and Facilities Present Capacity of Facilities Social and Economic Communities of Interest Summary of Determinations Present and Planned Land Use Present and Probable Need for Services Present Capacity of Facilities Social and Economic Communities of Interest...45 Michael Brandman Associates iii H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

4 Table of Contents Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Section 6: Recommendations Sphere of Influence Boundary Sphere of Influence Plan...47 Section 7: Conclusions...51 Section 8: CEQA...52 Section 9: Acronyms and Abbreviations...53 Section 10: Bibliography...55 Appendix A: Agreement Between Placer and Nevada LAFCos for Coordination on Cross-County Proposals Appendix B: CEQA Analysis Appendix C: Comments Received LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Truckee Population Housing Characteristics...23 Table 2: Current Land Use the Town of Truckee...37 Table 3: Land Use in Martis Valley Service Area...38 Table 4: Planned Land Use in the Town s Sphere Area...41 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map...15 Exhibit 2: Truckee Sanitary District...19 Exhibit 3: Current Sphere Boundaries...21 Exhibit 4: Land Use in the Sphere of Influence...39 Exhibit 5: Recommended Sphere Boundary and Sphere Plan...49 iv Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

5 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) is responsible for determining boundaries of municipal service providers. LAFCo operates under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (CKH) with the mandate of: Discouraging urban sprawl Preservation of prime agricultural land and open space Assuring efficient local government services Encouraging orderly growth and development of local agencies The tools that enable LAFCos to accomplish those goals are the Municipal Service Review (MSR), the sphere of influence, and the ability to change the organization of a municipal agency. The MSR provides data on services and the ability to provide services. This information is used to determine the sphere of influence that is defined as the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency. A change in organization, such as annexation must be consistent with the sphere of influence. In order to establish the sphere, LAFCo is required to make determinations with respect to the following: Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands Present and probable need for public facilities and services Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services provided by the agency Social or economic communities of interest LAFCo also must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). For the purposes of CEQA and updates of the Sphere Plan, LAFCo is the lead agency. According to CEQA, the lead agency must begin the environmental review with an Initial Study to determine if the Sphere Plan would have environmental impacts in any of the 18 areas of concern, which include climate change. The results of the Initial Study will determine whether a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report is required. If the action on the sphere plan would remove an area from the sphere of influence where there is no possibility of having an environmental impact the sphere plan could qualify for the General Rule exemption. The sphere of influence also must be consistent with Nevada LAFCo policies. Those policies state that LAFCo will not include areas in the sphere of influence that are unlikely to require municipal services. They also require a Sphere Plan that describes the phasing of the annexation of territory in Michael Brandman Associates 1 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

6 Executive Summary Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update the sphere of influence. This document provides a plan for the sphere of influence or probable physical boundary of the Truckee Sanitary District. District Profile The Truckee Sanitary District (TSD), formed in 1906 with initial facilities installed in 1908, is one of the oldest sanitary districts in California. This District was subsequently reorganized under the Sanitary District Act of 1923, and operates under California Health and Safety Code Section 6400, et seq. A five-member Board, which meets once a month, governs the District. Since its inception, the TSD service area has grown in size and has experienced increased development. In 1962, TSD undertook a large annexation that included the lands between Gateway (currently in the Town of Truckee) and the foot of Donner Summit. This annexation and subsequent provision of wastewater collection and treatment was intended to relieve water quality problems in Donner Lake. The annexation increased the territory of the District to approximately 2.5 times its original size. Today, the TSD covers an area of 39 square miles in Nevada and Placer counties (see Exhibit 2). During the 1960s, the TSD participated in Congressional hearings on existing wastewater disposal practices in the Lake Tahoe and Truckee River basins. These hearings resulted in the formation in 1969 of a committee called the Five District Committee, consisting of the Truckee Sanitary District, the North Tahoe Public Utility District, Squaw Valley County Water District (Public Service District), Tahoe City Public Utility District, and the Alpine Springs County Water District. This led to legislation enabling the formation and operation of the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency. The Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency (TTSA) was formed by a special act of the California Legislature known as the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency Act, which became effective in November This Act created the TTSA for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage, industrial waste, and stormwater within the agency; it prescribed its organization, powers, and duties; and it repealed the North Lake Tahoe-Truckee River Sanitation Agency Act (Chapter 1503 of the Statutes of 1967). As provided in the legislation, member agencies include: Truckee Sanitary District (TSD) North Tahoe Public Utility District (NTPUD) Squaw Valley Public Service District (SVPSD) (formed under County Water District Law) Alpine Springs County Water District (ASCWD) Tahoe City Public Utility District (TCPUD) TTSA member agencies, such as TSD, collect and convey wastewater to TTSA s Water Reclamation Plant east of the Town of Truckee for processing. 2 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

7 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Executive Summary Because a greater portion of the assessed value of TSD s taxable property is located within the boundaries of Nevada County, Nevada LAFCo is its principal LAFCo. Accordingly, Nevada LAFCo will review TSD s services and set the District s sphere of influence, considering the demand of the entire District upon capacity. The existing TSD boundaries are shown on Exhibit 2. Updates to Municipal Service Reviews The Eastern Nevada County Wastewater MSR was completed in November of 2003 and describes the services provided by Nevada County and the Truckee Sanitary District. The MSR concludes that the district is functioning well and is viable. The District has the capability and infrastructure to provide wastewater collection services to the Truckee area and the Martis Valley. The MSR was completed during a time of economic expansion, so population and service needs were overestimated. The MSR made determinations regarding an expanded wastewater treatment facility, enhanced communication through developing a website, and sharing facilities with other agencies. The TTSA completed its wastewater treatment facility expansion in 2008, which increased capacity sufficiently to serve the region beyond The District now maintains its own website for enhanced communication with the public. The District has not updated its Wastewater Master Plan, which was completed in 1995; however, the District regularly updates its capital improvement plans. The sphere of influence was established in 1983 and included territory in both Nevada and Placer Counties. In 1998 Nevada LAFCo updated the Nevada County portion to include a broad area east of Donner Pass, and an area north of the Town extending to the border with Sierra County. The MSR suggested the addition of a couple of areas in Placer County: one in the Martis Valley east of Northstar and another south of Donner Lake. However, to date, the sphere of influence for the Placer portion has remained consistent with the 1983 sphere (Exhibit 3). Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis CKH requires the Commission make four determinations to establish the sphere of influence. The four determinations are summarized as follows Present and Planned Land Use The boundaries of Truckee Sanitary District encompass two identifiable population centers, the Town of Truckee and the Martis Valley, as well as sparsely populated surrounding territories. Present land use in the Town is 23 percent residential, 19 percent open space, 1.5 percent commercial office, 12 percent roadways and railway rights-of-way, and 17.5 percent multiple other uses. There is also a large portion of vacant and undeveloped land, 28 percent, but half of that is designated as resource conservation open space to allow for mining and limit development. (See Table 2, p. 33, for a detailed list of the Town s land use designations.) Surrounding the Town in Nevada County, the land use is primarily forest, with two exceptions: the community of Hirschdale and the Juniper Hills Michael Brandman Associates 3 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

8 Executive Summary Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update subdivision. Juniper Hills is comprised of large rural residential lots that are primarily on septic systems and too spread out to make connection to a sewer system economically feasible. Hirschdale is a small residential community on private septic systems which receives treated water from Truckee Donner Public Utility District. The District also extends south of the Town into Placer County in the Martis Valley, in which land use is primarily split between residential uses and open space The Martis Valley community extends well east of the TSD boundaries. It includes the Northstar community and the territory served by the Northstar Community Services District (NCSD). The primary land use designation in the vicinity of Northstar is forestland, with areas of anticipated low-density residential just north of the Martis Creek and State Route 267 (SR-267) Present and Probable Need for Services The need for services will depend on the rate of construction within the boundaries of the District and within the current sphere. As documented in its recently updated Sphere Plan, the Town of Truckee has sufficient housing capacity for the next 30 to 100 years. The large range is due to the impacts of the economy on growth projections. The previously anticipated growth rate of 238 new dwellings per year in the Town, and subsequently in the District, has been significantly reduced because of the economy. Another result of the economy is that growth within the Town s proposed sphere will also be reduced. The need for facilities and services in the Martis Valley will also be reduced because of economic conditions Present Capacity of Facilities Wastewater services are provided by the Truckee Sanitary District (TSD), which serves as the collection district, and the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency (TTSA), which operates the regional wastewater treatment facility. The TTSA recently expanded its Water Reclamation Plant to a capacity of a peak seven-day average flow, in the summer months, of 9.6 million gallons per day (mgd). TTSA estimates there is sufficient capacity at the facility to accommodate growth through The additional needs of the collection system arising from new growth will be addressed by TSD and the land use authority through conditions of approval. TSD will stipulate any offsite collection system requirements Social and Economic Communities of Interest The District boundaries include much of the Town of Truckee, and there are subdivisions within the Town that are in the current sphere of influence and not served. The some of the subdivisions north of Interstate 80 (I-80) along SR-89 have been developed but are on septic systems., The community of Hirschdale just east of the town receives potable water from TDPUD but relies on septic systems. The Northstar community lies adjacent to the District s southern boundary and should be considered a community of interest. The Northstar CSD provides wastewater collection services to Northstar, but contracts with the TSD for sewage treatment and disposal at the TTSA treatment facility. 4 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

9 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Executive Summary Recommendations Given these considerations, portions of the District s sphere which are now in public ownership or are otherwise not expected to be developed should be omitted from the District s sphere and designated as Areas of Concern. These are shown in Exhibit 5. The following recommendations apply to the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere Plan: Near-Term Sphere: The near-term sphere includes areas within the boundaries of the Town of Truckee and areas of planned development in the Town s near-term sphere of influence. Long-Term: The long-term sphere should include areas identified in the Town s long-term sphere, such as the areas to the west of the Tahoe Donner subdivision, the area north and west of Donner Lake, and the area northeast of Truckee including the Hirschdale subdivision. In addition, the long-term sphere should include the area along SR-89 just to the northwest of Prosser Lake, as it has been identified for potential development in the Nevada County General Plan. Areas of Concern: Areas of concern should be identified for the area in the current sphere that is designated as forestland in Nevada County. In Placer County, an Area of Concern should be identified for the area that overlaps the sphere of influence of the NCSD identified in the MSR. Since the District conveys wastewater from Northstar to the treatment facility, it does have an interest in potential additional demands on its system. Since the principal county for NCSD is Placer County and the principal county for TSD is Nevada County, some consultation between the two LAFCos would be desirable. At present, there exists the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Placer LAFCo and Nevada LAFCo that essentially recognizes the concerns of multi-county special districts and provides a mechanism for consultation. The MOU is included in Appendix A. Similarly, the area south of Donner Lake in Placer County that was identified in the MSR to be included in the TSD sphere would be an ideal candidate for designation as an Area of Concern. The District would like to be notified of any potential development in that area, as it may affect future service delivery. An Area of Concern designation would allow for that, since there is presently no planned development. Conclusions The analyses presented in this study lead to the following conclusions: The MSRs prepared for the services provided by the TSD within the current and proposed sphere have concluded that the District is viable, has the capability to provide services, and has the wastewater treatment facility has capacity for anticipated growth through Michael Brandman Associates 5 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

10 Executive Summary Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update The current sphere of influence should be reduced to comply with LAFCO policies and convert the forestland to the north of the Town of Truckee to an Area of Concern. With regard to the four determinations required of CKH: - Present and planned land use: Land use designations in the Nevada County portion of the District are primarily forestland north of the Town. In the Martis Valley area of Placer County, land use is a mix of residential and open space. Changes to accommodate increased development are not anticipated, due to the downturn in the economy. - Present and probable need for public services and facilities: Because of the current economic conditions, the area has experienced very slow growth in the last year. However, additional housing opportunities in the Truckee area to accommodate present needs and allow for anticipated growth will require additional wastewater services, particularly within the Town s sphere of influence. - Present capacity of facilities: With the added wastewater treatment capacity that became available in 2008, the facility has sufficient capacity to accommodate growth through Social and economic communities of interest: The District serves the Town of Truckee and the Martis Valley communities south of the Town. The sphere would include the Hirschdale community as well as area subdivisions within the Town where conversion from septic systems may become necessary, such as the developments along SR-89 at the north edge of the Town. The Northstar community lies adjacent to the District s southern boundary and should be considered a community of interest. The Northstar CSD provides wastewater collection services to Northstar but contracts with the Truckee Sanitary District for sewage treatment and disposal at the TTSA treatment facility. Nevada LAFCo policies limit the proposed sphere of influence to areas of potential development. The recommended sphere of influence complies with LAFCo policies to the extent there is no conflict with CKH. CEQA Actions taken by LAFCO are subject to CEQA. A reduced sphere is proposed that eliminates the area north of Town that is currently forest and designated in the Nevada County General Plan as forest. The reduction in the sphere requires an Initial Study that would include a discussion of any potential impacts on climate change. The CEQA analysis determined that a negative declaration is appropriate for the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere Plan. The Initial Study and Negative Declaration determination is included in Appendix B. 6 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

11 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Introduction SECTION 2: INTRODUCTION LAFCo The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) was formed in 1963 to address the problems caused by explosive growth in the post-world War II era. To accommodate growth the legislature had created many new local government agencies with irregular boundaries and overlapping jurisdictions. Also of concern was the rapid conversion of prime agricultural lands to urban uses. In 1959, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Sr., appointed the Commission on Metropolitan Area Problems to study and make recommendations on misuse of land resources and the complexity of local government jurisdictions. Recommendations from the Commission resulted in the formation of a Local Agency Formation Commission for each county in In 1965, the LAFCo legislation became the Knox-Nesbit Act; that year also saw passage of the District Reorganization Act (DRA), which gave LAFCo jurisdiction over special districts. The Municipal Organization Act (MORGA) adopted in 1977, consolidated procedures for changes in organization such as annexation, detachment, incorporation, and consolidation into one act. In 1985, Cortese-Knox combined Knox-Nesbit, DRA, and MORGA into one unified code. The last major revision occurred in 2000 and is known as the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (CKH). It clarified LAFCo s purposes as: Discouraging urban sprawl Preservation of prime agricultural lands and open space Assuring efficient local government services Encouraging orderly growth and development of local agencies CKH added the Municipal Service Review to the sphere of influence and the ability to change the organization of cities and special districts as tools to achieve those goals. In addition, CKH requires that LAFCo adopt written policies and procedures LAFCo Policies and Criteria for Sphere of Influence Plans CKH requires LAFCo to adopt a Sphere of Influence Plan and Map for each city and each special district in the County. The Sphere Plan is defined by CKH in Government Code Section as a plan for the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency or municipality as determined by the Commission. CKH requires that the Sphere Plan be reviewed and updated every 5 years. The Sphere Plan serves much the same function for LAFCo as general plans do for cities and counties: it guides the Commission in its consideration of annexations and other forms of reorganization. CKH also requires LAFCo to make determinations with respect to the following four factors when establishing or reviewing a sphere of influence: Michael Brandman Associates 7 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

12 Introduction Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands Present and probable need for public facilities and services Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services provided by the agency Social or economic communities of interest Cities or towns and special districts are required by Government Code Section 56430(c) to have conducted a service review before, or in conjunction with, but no later than the time it is considering an action to establish a sphere of influence... or to update a sphere of influence. Nevada LAFCo policies have the following additional requirements. 1. Consistency: Each Sphere Plan must be consistent with LAFCo s policies and procedures, the State Legislature s policy direction to LAFCo, the Sphere Plans of all other agencies in the area, the Commission s statement of written determinations with respect to its review of municipal services in the area, and the long-range planning goals of the area. 2. Sphere Boundary: With respect to the present and probable need for services, LAFCo will not include lands that are unlikely to require municipal services. With respect to the capacity of facilities, LAFCo will not include areas in an agency s sphere of influence that cannot feasibly be served by the agency within a time frame consistent with the Sphere Plan. 3. Areas of Concern: LAFCo, at its discretion, may designate territory beyond the sphere of influence as an Area of Concern. An Area of Concern is defined as a geographic area beyond the sphere of influence in which land use decisions or other governmental actions of one local agency (Acting Agency) impact directly or indirectly upon another local agency (Concerned Agency). When LAFCo receives notice of a proposal from another agency relating to the Area of Concern, LAFCo will notify the Concerned Agency and give great weight to its comments. LAFCo will also encourage Acting and Concerned agencies to establish Joint Powers Agreements or other commitments as appropriate. 4. Zero and Minus Spheres: LAFCo may establish a zero sphere (no territory) for an agency that is either not providing services or whose services are no longer needed. A zero sphere designation implies an agency should be dissolved. A minus sphere designation excludes territory within an agency s boundary from the services provided by the agency. A minus sphere is designated for territory that is not in need of the agency s services or when the agency has no feasible plans to serve the territory. LAFCo policies also include specific requirements for a Sphere Plan. The Sphere Plan must include a sphere map and phased plan for annexation: territory expected to be developed and annexed within 5 years will be assigned to a near-term sphere, while territory expected to be eligible for annexation at some time between 5 and 20 years in the future is designated for the long-term sphere. 8 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

13 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Introduction Additional policies relate to the MSR. An MSR must contain information on which the Commission can base its determination of appropriate sphere boundaries and Sphere Plan provisions. The MSR will also be used in consideration of proposals affecting the agency Municipal Service Reviews According to LAFCo policy, the MSR must support the sphere of influence by providing the information the Commission needs to make the required determinations for the sphere of influence. The MSR discusses and evaluates six areas: 1. Growth and population projections: This section relates to LAFCo s mandate of discouraging urban sprawl by providing information on the population projections for the affected area. 2. Present and planned capacity of public facilities: This section relates to LAFCo s charge to assure efficient provision of government services. The discussion covers the status of current and projected facilities and the adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs and deficiencies. 3. Financial ability of agencies to provide services: A key to providing effective and efficient services is adequate financing. This section reviews budgets, sources of revenue, and financial reports. 4. Status of and opportunities for shared facilities: The opportunity for shared facilities with other agencies relates to LAFCo s charge of assuring efficient services. Avoiding duplicate facilities of another agency will reduce costs and promote more efficient operation. 5. Governmental structure, accountability for community service needs, and operational efficiencies: An analysis of government structure and accountability examines the makeup of the agency s legislative body, administrative structure, accountability for community service needs, and public participation. 6. Matters related to effective or efficient service delivery required by policy: Local LAFCo policies may have an effect on service delivery. This section includes a discussion of any local policies that influence the ability of the agency to provide efficient services. Upon approval, the MSR is used by LAFCo in consideration of any future proposals affecting the agency as well as to establish or update the Sphere Plan Sphere of Influence Update Process A Sphere Plan may be amended or updated. An amendment is a relatively limited change to the Sphere Plan or Map to accommodate a specific project. Amendments can add or remove territory, Michael Brandman Associates 9 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

14 Introduction Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update move territory to a different development horizon, address a change in provision of services by an agency, or revise a plan for services when it becomes impractical. An update is a comprehensive review of the Sphere Plan that includes the map and relevant portions of one or more MSRs. CKH requires updates at least every 5 years. In conducting the sphere review, LAFCo requests the agency to provide updated information for the Sphere Plan and the MSR(s). If the information is inadequate, LAFCo will complete the update by identifying the territories that currently receive services and excluding territories that are not or will not be served from the sphere of influence California Environmental Quality Act Actions taken by LAFCo require review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In many cases, LAFCo is the responsible agency, but when LAFCo initiates the project, it is the lead agency. For adoption of a Sphere of Influence or a Sphere Plan, LAFCo is often the lead agency. The Plan may be exempt or require an Initial Study (IS) for a Negative Declaration (ND), a mitigated negative declaration (MND), or a full environmental impact report (EIR). The Sphere Plan will be exempt if the sphere of influence is not changed. An expanded sphere of influence requires CEQA review because the extension of services could represent the initial step toward development of the territory. Under CEQA, an expanded sphere of influence would require an IS and, depending on the outcome, an ND, an MND, or an EIR. Should an expanded sphere be recommended, additional environmental concerns relate to LAFCo s role in addressing impacts of climate change that are due to emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Those impacts could affect the services required of local agencies. It has been well documented that some of the effects of climate change are more wildfires caused by lack of rainfall, shortfalls in water supply from lack of snowpack, and a rise in sea level that is due to melting of the ice caps. A recent study by the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force predicted a rise in sea level ranging from 28 to 55 inches by A change of that magnitude would severely stress and possibly overwhelm many of the levees maintained by reclamation districts. Such effects are gradual and long-term but require some planning. Of more immediate impact are the requirements of AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Nunez 2006). AB 32 recognizes California as the source of substantial amounts of GHG emissions. AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by Many of the sources of GHG relate directly to LAFCo s mandate to discourage urban sprawl and encourage orderly growth in governmental services. In developing the 1990 inventory, the Air Resources Board, in its California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit (2007), found the major GHG sources are transportation (38 percent) and electricity generation (25 percent). As urban areas grow larger and the distance between housing and jobs increases, the GHG 10 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

15 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Introduction emissions due to transportation systems increase as well. An expanded urban area will also increase demand for electricity. Expansion of urban boundaries also places a burden on municipal service providers for more services and added services may require additional facilities. Water districts that add new water systems increase electricity consumption to pump water. Sewer service providers that add wastewater treatment facilities have the potential to emit GHGs such as methane and nitrous oxide. Sanitation districts that expand landfills have potential to increase methane emissions and the GHGs from service equipment at the landfill. Other services providers that expand services have the potential to increase demand for electricity and/or vehicular traffic. In addition to AB 32, SB 97 (Dutton 2007) amends CEQA to establish GHG emissions and their effects as appropriate subjects for a CEQA analysis. SB 97 directed the Governor s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop draft CEQA guidelines for mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions by July 2009 and directed the Resources Agency to certify and adopt the CEQA guidelines by January OPR recently published proposed guidelines that were approved by the Resources Agency. The guidelines have been submitted to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for review and became effective in March of As a responsible agency and sometimes a lead agency, LAFCo will have to address GHG effects for changes of organization and sphere of influence expansions under CEQA. Michael Brandman Associates 11 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

16

17 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update District Profile SECTION 3: DISTRICT PROFILE Description and Setting The Truckee Sanitary District (TSD) encompasses approximately 39 square miles in Nevada and Placer counties, of which 11 square miles are in Placer County (Exhibit 1). TSD operates and maintains an extensive wastewater collection system serving 9,764 equivalent dwelling units and 840 commercial accounts. TSD s collection system consists of 350 miles of gravity pipelines; 4,435 manholes; 41 lift stations; and other assets valued at $49 million. TSD also transports wastewater flow from Northstar to the TTSA treatment facility in Truckee. The TSD, formed in 1906 with initial facilities installed in 1908, is one of the oldest sanitary districts in California. This district was subsequently reorganized under the Sanitary District Act of 1923, and operates under California Health and Safety Code Section 6400, et seq. The TSD is governed by a five-member board of directors. In 1923, realizing the need for improved wastewater treatment and protection of the Truckee River, the District constructed and placed into service an Imhoff Tank and a series of stabilization ponds located approximately 1 mile east of the current Town of Truckee on the bank of the Truckee River. Effluent from this tank was discharged into the ponds, with disposal by means of percolation into the ground and evaporation to the atmosphere. Since then with the formation of TTSA all wastewater collected by the TSD is processed by the TTSA treatment facility. The specific powers that the TSD Board of Directors may exercise under the Sanitary District Act of 1923 are the acquisition, planning, construction, reconstruction, alteration, enlargement, laying, renewing, replacing, maintenance, and operation of: Garbage dump sites, garbage collection, and disposal systems Sewers, drains, septic tanks and sewerage collection and disposal systems, outfall treatment works, and other sanitary disposal systems Stormwater drains and stormwater collection, outfall and disposal systems, and water reclamation and distribution systems Water recycling and distribution systems Currently, TSD provides sewerage collection services. Other services are considered latent powers which could be provided by the District if approved by LAFCo. Generally, LAFCo s review of a request to activate a latent power would consider whether any other agency provides those services,. In this case, the Town of Truckee is responsible for storm water and solid waste services. The Town contracts with a private entity for garbage collection and disposal. Water is provided by Michael Brandman Associates 13 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

18 District Profile Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. To LAFCo s knowledge, there have been no indications from the District or any of the other affected agencies that a transfer of service responsibilities would be advantageous from a fiscal or governance perspective. Should the District decide it would like to exercise its latent powers LAFCo must be able to determine that the District would be the best service provider. Since its inception, the TSD service area has grown in size and has experienced increased development. In 1962, TSD undertook a large annexation that included the lands between Gateway (currently in the Town of Truckee) to the foot of Donner Summit. This annexation and subsequent provision of wastewater collection and treatment was intended to relieve water quality problems in Donner Lake. The annexation increased the District s territory to approximately 2.5 times its original size. Today, the TSD covers an area of 39 square miles in Nevada and Placer counties. The District operates and maintains 350 miles of sewer pipelines. During the 1960s, the TSD participated in Congressional hearings on existing wastewater disposal practices in the Lake Tahoe and the Truckee River Basins. These hearings resulted in 1969 in the formation of a committee called the Five District Committee, consisting of the Truckee Sanitary District, the North Tahoe Public Utility District, Squaw Valley County Water District (Public Service District), Tahoe City Public Utility District, and the Alpine Springs County Water District. This led to legislation enabling the formation and operation of the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency. The Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency (TTSA) was formed by a special act of the California Legislature known as the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency Act, which became effective in November This Act created the TTSA for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage, industrial waste, and stormwater within the agency; prescribed its organization, powers, and duties; and repealed the North Lake Tahoe-Truckee River Sanitation Agency Act (Chapter 1503 of the Statutes of 1967). TTSA member agencies collect and convey wastewater to TTSA s Water Reclamation Plant east of the Town of Truckee. As provided in the legislation, member agencies include: Truckee Sanitary District (TSD) North Tahoe Public Utility District (NTPUD) Squaw Valley Public Service District (SVPSD) (formed under County Water District Law) Alpine Springs County Water District (ASCWD) Tahoe City Public Utility District (TCPUD) The NCSD is also served by TTSA using TSD facilities through an agreement between NCSD and TSD to share the sewer capacity of the Trimont line. 14 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

19

20

21 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update District Profile The TTSA Board includes a representative from each of the five member agencies listed above. The legislation provides for a membership of five entities with a total of four votes, with the TCPUD, TSD, and NTPUD each having one vote, and the ASCWD and SVPSD each having one-half vote. Of the four votes, two are from within the Tahoe Basin (TCPUD and NTPUD), and the other two votes are outside the Tahoe Basin (TSD, ASCWD and SVPSD). In 2001 TTSA applied to Placer LAFCo for annexation of the territory within NCSD; however, the TTSA statute does not provide for NCSD to become a voting member of TTSA even if the annexation is approved. Membership may only be granted by an act of the State Legislature. To date no action has been taken on the application. Because a greater portion of the assessed value of the District s taxable property is located within the boundaries of Nevada County, Nevada LAFCo is the principal LAFCo for TSD. Nevada LAFCo policy is to review services, considering the demand of the entire District upon capacity. The existing TSD boundaries are shown on Exhibit Sphere of Influence The present sphere of influence, established in 1983, and updated in 1998, is shown in Exhibit 3. It includes the Town of Truckee and extends north to the county line. On the east and west it includes all of the area within the Town s proposed sphere as shown in the 2025 Truckee General Plan. In general it covers any area in the vicinity of Truckee with a potential to request services. The 2003 MSR identified a proposed sphere in Placer County that includes two sections. The western section is south of Donner Lake. The eastern section extends eastward from the present TSD boundaries and southward to approximately 5 miles northwest of Kings Beach. The proposed eastern section sphere overlaps the sphere of the NCSD, which also provides wastewater services. To date, the Placer County portion of the proposed sphere has yet to be updated, and remains as it was when adopted in Population Methodology The major centers of population in the TSD are the Town of Truckee and the Martis Valley in Placer County. Population estimates for the Town of Truckee are derived from the 2000 U.S. Census, as well as California Department of Finance (DOF) and Sierra Planning Organization projections. Population estimates for the Martis Valley are derived from the Martis Valley Community Plan, which was adopted by the Placer County Board of Supervisors in December Growth Rates and Projections Population and housing characteristics of the Town between 1990 and 2009 are shown in Table 1. The table shows that from 2000 to 2009 the population grew by 2,274 or just under 2 percent per year. Michael Brandman Associates 17 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

22

23

24

25

26

27 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update District Profile Table 1: Truckee Population Housing Characteristics Jurisdiction Population Truckee 8,928 13,967 16,241 Nevada County 78,510 92,033 98,718 Housing Units Truckee 9,767 12,136 Nevada County 44,282 50,788 Households Truckee 3,289 5,164 6,045 Nevada County 30,758 36,894 41,968 Persons per Household Truckee Nevada County Source: Town of Truckee 2009 Population projections from 1990 to 2025 derived from the Town of Truckee 2025 General Plan show an increase in population of 56 percent between 2008 and 2025 or about 3.3 percent annually. In the Martis Valley, the population growth rate is slower. In 1975, the Martis Valley included 1,190 permanent homes. By 2000 that number grew to 1,935, an increase of 62 percent or an average annual increase of 2.5 percent. Although many of the homes are used on a seasonal basis, the District, in estimating demand for services, assumes they are occupied year round. The Martis Valley population in 2000 was estimated at 1,185 year round residents. Based on a factor of 2.5 persons per household and 2.5 percent annual growth in the number of households, the estimated population in 2009 is approximately 1,800 year-round residents. The current estimated population of the TSD is then approximately 18,000 residents. The Martis Valley Community Plan estimates a holding capacity of 8,600 dwelling units. Assuming 2.5 persons per household, that would calculate to a maximum population of 21,500. Growth projections out to 2025 using the Town of Truckee s 2025 General Plan estimate a population of 25,280 for the Town, assuming the Martis Valley population is about 10 percent of the population of the Town, yields an estimated population for the district of 27,700. The average growth rate of the District would be estimated at 3.5 percent per year. The population may be overestimated since the projections for the Town were made before the current economic downturn. Michael Brandman Associates 23 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

28 District Profile Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update While most areas are concerned only with permanent residents, the area served by TSD receives an influx of seasonal residents. It is estimated that in 2015 there will be approximately 54,500 served in the summer and 54,000 served in the winter. 24 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

29 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews SECTION 4: UPDATES TO MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS East County Wastewater MSR (2003) The East County Wastewater MSR was completed in November of The MSR described the services provided by TSD and the TTSA agencies. The following sections list the determinations from the 2003 MSR as they relate to the TSD. The MSR determinations have been approved by the Commission and should be considered valid unless there are updates. The updates for 2011 are shown in italics Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies Determination 1: There is no regional approach to managing growth and resolving land use planning issues between jurisdictions in the study area. TTSA was established principally to process sewage and serve member jurisdictions. Wastewater treatment is one of the essential services required for new development, and treatment capacity is provided on a first-come, first-serve basis. Monitoring of available capacity is an annual requirement of the Waste Discharge Requirements for TTSA. Factors that could impact future treatment plant capacity needs include the following: Existing land use plans are in the process of being updated (e.g., Truckee General Plan and Martis Valley Community Plan), and it is possible that more or less population holding capacity may be embraced than is reflected by current plans. These changes may ultimately not be consistent with the projections TTSA used when planning its recent expansion. As development occurs within a given (TTSA) member agency s boundaries, capacity that could otherwise be used by other member agencies is reduced. Available capacity may be influenced by patterns of second home ownership. It is impossible to predict future ownership patterns; however, it is possible that the area may see a trend toward more permanent residency as a greater percentage of the population moves into retirement. In keeping with the above recommendation concerning the Nevada County LAFCo population and development projections, both TSD and TTSA should reevaluate their respective facilities plans, capital improvement budgets, and expansion plans upon adoption of the Truckee General Plan Update and Martis Valley Community Plan, to assure that the sewage collection and treatment systems will be adequate to accommodate planned growth. During the plan development and adoption process, all agencies should coordinate and communicate (Town of Truckee, Placer County, TSD, TTSA, other TTSA member agencies) to assure that the planning process takes into consideration any infrastructure constraints. Infrastructure needs have been addressed in the capital improvement budgets for TSD. Infrastructure needs over the next 5 years for the TSD are set forth in their Master Plan. Michael Brandman Associates 25 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

30 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update TSD should update its Master Plan every 5 years (last updated in May 2002) and continue to maintain and update its capital improvements budget annually. TSD funds major as well as minor system repairs by utilizing its reserve funds, which are generally targeted to be 10 percent of the replacement value of District assets. TSD s approach is consistent with practices of other agencies. Both TSD and TTSA are adequately funded and through systematic maintenance programs have progressively addressed infrastructure problems as needed, and have planned for (and in TSD s case have already sized) infrastructure to meet growth demands in many portions of their service areas. 2011: TSD designs systems assuming full time occupancy. TSD uses a hydraulic model wherein the capacity of the existing sewer collection system can be compared to existing and projected future flows to ensure that sufficient capacity exists. If necessary, new developments are informed early in their entitlement process that they will be required to upsize the collection system to accommodate their projected flows. TSD s Master Plan was prepared in 1995 in anticipation of significant growth in the service area. Most of the major new developments discussed in the plan have been completed, and most of the associated infrastructure needed to serve these developments has been installed and dedicated to the District. As discussed elsewhere in this report, in spite of many new residential and commercial development projects completed in the last 5 years, growth rates have significantly slowed down in the Truckee area. As a result of the completion of the new developments and slower growth rates, the District has not identified a need to update the Master Plan. Even though the document itself has not been updated, the District does update the key sections of the report regularly. Growth and flow projections are available through the District s new hydraulic model which is now fully functional. The District s maintenance and Infiltration and Inflow (I & I) programs are comprehensive and very effective. Capital needs are expressed in a current 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Infrastructure needs are evaluated every year and the CIP is updated as part of each annual budget cycle. This planning effort ensures the District performs the repair and maintenance necessary to preserve the community sewer system, and constructs all capacity-related projects in a timely manner. Finally, revenue needs are evaluated as part of every budget cycle. Determination 2: Comparing the growth and development projections prepared by Nevada County LAFCo with TTSA projection for it service area, it appears that the TTSA projections could be low. 26 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

31 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Determination 3: As development occurs within a given member agency s boundaries, capacity that could otherwise be used by other member agencies is reduced. 2011: The Martis Valley Community Plan was completed in The Truckee 2025 General Plan was completed in At the time the plans were adopted the area was in a phase of rapid growth, the recent economic downturn was unforeseen, and as a result both plans overestimated growth. The TTSA agencies have no capacity agreements between member agencies. Capacity is available on a first come first served basis. In 2008, TTSA completed expansion of its wastewater treatment facility. It now can handle 9.6 mgd. TTSA has indicated the facility is capable of handling increased demand at least through That assumption was based on population projections of the time, which would mean a demand for 400 to 800 additional connections a year. TTSA has not seen that level of demand, due to current economic conditions. In 2010 there were only 303 new connections. TTSA now estimates sufficient capacity through Growth and Population Projections for the Affected Area Determination 1: The TSD service area will experience the highest growth rate of the member agencies in the TTSA, since it serves the Martis Valley and the Town of Truckee. Growth rates in the Lake Tahoe Basin, Alpine Springs, and Squaw Valley will continue to be low, due to a variety of growth-related constraints. Determination 2: TTSA planned capacity will be fully maximized at a summer population of 143,000 during the summer months and 148,400 during the winter months around the year These figures are based on probable development in the Martis Valley, the Town of Truckee, and North Lake Tahoe based on the General Plans currently in place and include part-time residents, campgrounds, hotels, and other temporary occupancies. 2011: These estimates were made during a vigorous growth cycle. Growth in the last couple years has been reduced. The system will likely have capacity through Determination 3: It is possible to expand the treatment plant beyond current expansion subject to the regulations and other constraints established by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2011: The most recent upgrade to the treatment facility was completed on June 30, There are presently no plans to expand capacity beyond 9.6 mgd. Determination 4: Treatment service is based on a first-come, first-serve basis. Most of the existing capacity will be consumed by 2015 planned growth. Michael Brandman Associates 27 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

32 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update 2011: There is likely to be capacity beyond 2015, since growth has slowed considerably, due to the current economic downturn. TTSA now estimates they have sufficient capacity through Determination 5: Additional wastewater collection and treatment planning is required for the period beyond Upon completion of current Town of Truckee General Plan Update and the Martis Valley Community Plan Update, master plans for TSD and TTSA need to be updated/developed to reflect the revised plans and growth trends beyond This needs to be a cooperative effort between the TTSA member agencies. 2011: As stated previously, TSD has not identified any need to update its Master Plan based primarily on the very low growth rates being experienced at this time. Any significant growth that does occur will likely be in the major subdivisions already constructed, but underutilized. Infrastructure needed to serve that growth is already present. TTSA estimates there is sufficient treatment capacity through Determination 6: It will be a time consuming and costly process to expand the TTSA Water Reclamation Plant beyond the newly permitted expansion capacity, as evidenced by the most recent expansion approval process. TTSA currently has an estimated 3.6 mgd unused capacity, based on recent flow projections and construction of increased capacity contained in the Waste Discharge Requirements. Expansion of the Water Reclamation Plant was based on projected population through the year Financing Constraints and Opportunities Determination 1: Based on the latest available information, TSD and TTSA capacity expansion will be sufficiently funded through a combination of reserves, grants, the State Revolving Fund loan program, and connection fees. TTSA has a plan to facilitate repayment of the State Revolving Fund loan. There appear to be no institutional or financial obstacles to funding necessary expansion of the respective systems. Costs associated with new development for both the TSD and TTSA are paid by private developers. Costs for infrastructure benefiting each district as a whole are paid though service, connection and annexation fees, as appropriate. TSD s service fees are discussed below under the section titled Opportunities for Rate Restructuring. Costs for emergency repairs are covered by the districts reserve funds. 2011: The most recent expansion of the TTSA facility was completed in Determination 2: There appear to be no institutional or financial obstacles to funding necessary maintenance and operation of the respective systems. Operational costs for both TSD and TTSA are covered by ratepayers based on the type of use. 28 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

33 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Cost Avoidance Opportunities Determination 1: Since new development pays the entire cost of new infrastructure that is required to accommodate the new development through payment of connection fees to TSD and TTSA, there is little additional opportunity to eliminate costs attributable to accommodating additional growth. Determination 2: TTSA and TSD both provide a public forum for budget adoption, which could be enhanced by completing construction of the agencies respective websites and posting budget information that is easily accessible to the public. 2011: TSD s website ( has been functional since Board meeting agendas and minutes, including those related to budget adoption, are posted on the website. Determination 3: The TSD/TTSA District Codes and TSD District Master Plan, including the adopted Capital Improvement Program, establish procedures for staff, developers, and the public. Well documented procedures can minimize costs and can result in cost efficiencies. Determination 4: TSD s preventive and corrective maintenance programs are cost effective for the ratepayers in the long term by reducing the likelihood of encountering major system defects and catastrophic system failures. Determination 5: TTSA and its member agencies, and other agencies such as the Town of Truckee, should explore potential efficiencies that could be achieved through shared facilities and other costsharing arrangements. Ideas that could be explored include shared corporation yards and equipment, shared office space, and cost savings that could be achieved through such methods as employee benefit pools (e.g., health insurance). 2011: The Town of Truckee is in the process of completing a new corporation yard. The new corporation yard is located on a parcel that has been split to accommodate the Forest Service which will eventually be home to Truckee Fire District facilities. The TSD s existing corporation yard has sufficient space for TSD s needs. There have been no discussions between the Town and TSD about sharing the space. Determination 6: TTSA operates with 57 employees and a General Manager, while TSD has a General Manager and 38 employees. In the control case agency, South Tahoe Public Utilities District, approximately 28 employees are dedicated to the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater, and approximately 57 other employees are shared between wastewater and nonwastewater functions. Although no direct comparisons can be made, it appears that there may be efficiencies in use of personnel in multi-function agencies. The reader, however, is cautioned to consider that the treatment requirements are substantially more restrictive for TTSA and require additional wastewater processes that require additional employees. Michael Brandman Associates 29 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

34 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update 2011: TSD and TTSA each provide separate and unique services. TTSA s primary responsibility is wastewater treatment. The TSD s primary responsibility is wastewater collection. Since the functions are separate, increased efficiencies as suggested in the determination are unlikely to occur Opportunities for Rate Restructuring Determination 1: TSD s residential rates have not been increased since This is an indicator that TSD has acted prudently in controlling costs, but it is likely that the justification used for establishment of fees in 1986 does not reflect more recent changes. It is somewhat implausible that there have been sufficient efficiencies created during the succeeding 17 years to keep 2003 service costs in line with 1986 costs. It is recommended that the District revisit the residential component of its rate structure and review it annually thereafter. 2011: In 2008, TSD did adopt an Ordinance that made some changes to its deposit, charge, and fee schedule. Residential Inspection Charges increased from $75 to $200), Sewer Main Tapping Deposits increased from $250 to $500. The Ordinance added a Utility Permit Deposit, $1,500, added an Unclassified Service factor type to serve as a multiplier to hold correct values on an account for administrative purposes, clarified the Other factor type user fee of $0.23 and $0.30, and established Plumbing Fixture Unit Equivalents for Swimming Pools, Jacuzzis, and Hot Tubs. TSD s basic sewer service charge program remains unchanged. TSD has been able to hold the service charges level because of new growth and more importantly, growth in assessed value of properties within the service area. TSD receives a significant portion of its operating revenue from property taxes. The growth in assessed value has resulted in a substantial increase in revenue from property taxes, thereby eliminating the need to raise service charges. Determination 2: Rates and fees for services have been established at hearings that include public participation. Completing construction of the agencies respective websites and posting rate information that is easily accessible to the public would enhance the process. 2011: The agencies now have operating websites. TSD s website includes information on all rates and charges currently in effect. Determination 3: LAFCo should ensure that future annexation decisions do not affect existing ratepayers for wastewater and collection services. Information regarding the impacts of annexations on rate structure should be provided by the affected district and considered by LAFCo as part of the decision-making process. Where annexation proposals could affect the cost of service to existing ratepayers, appropriate conditions should be attached to the annexation to ensure protection of existing ratepayers. Based on past history, annexations to TSD would not raise rates to existing ratepayers. 30 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

35 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Opportunities for Shared Facilities Determination 1: Opportunities for TSD and TTSA to share wastewater infrastructure are limited, since wastewater collection and wastewater treatment are distinct functions. Both entities collaborate on an as-needed basis. Determination 2: Efficient service delivery and ability to expand the member districts is dependent upon the ability to process wastewater in a cost efficient and environmentally sensitive manner. TTSA and its member agencies collaborated in the recent Water Reclamation Plant expansion efforts. Determination 3: TTSA and its member agencies should explore potential efficiencies that could be achieved through shared personnel, facilities and other cost-sharing arrangements. Ideas that could be explored include shared corporation yards and specialized equipment, and shared office space. Other agencies need not be sewer collection/treatment agencies, and could include the Town of Truckee and/or the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District. 2011: TTSA and TSD provide distinct and separate services to the community. There is little overlap in these functions, so there is limited to no opportunity to routinely share either facilities, equipment, or staff. However, the agencies have a long history of cooperation and support, particularly during emergency situations. Both agencies participate in regional mutual aid arrangements, and assist each other on an as-needed basis. Each agency relies on the presence of certain key equipment such as tractors, bypass hose/trailers, portable generators and pumps that can be, and have been, made available during emergency or other non-routine situations. Being able to have access to this equipment reduces costs, since the need for each agency to independently own that equipment is reduced Government Structure Options Determination 1: Although TSD is functioning well and is viable, it is possible to merge or consolidate it with other service providers or public agencies in the area. TSD is the major wastewater collection agency for the Town of Truckee and one of many single purpose districts in the area. Determination 2: TSD could merge with the Town of Truckee, or become a subsidiary district of the Town of Truckee. If this were to occur, the Placer County portion of TSD would need to become a separate entity, or the Town of Truckee would need LAFCo approval to serve areas outside its town limits. TSD would have to turn over its infrastructure in Placer County to a new entity such as a CSA 28 zone of benefit or an existing entity such as NCSD. In addition, the Town of Truckee would have to acquire the TSD collection system. A decision would have to be made regarding ownership and operation of the portion of the collection system located in the unincorporated area of Nevada County outside the Truckee town limits. Michael Brandman Associates 31 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

36 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update 2011: At this time,no fiscal analysis of any of the listed options have occurred. Further, the Commission has not determined such an analysis would be likely to reveal significant cost savings or efficiencies that could be achieved through consolidation. Determination 3: TSD, along with the other member entities, could merge or consolidate with TTSA, resulting in one wastewater agency to perform both service functions collection and treatment. TTSA would be able to impose uniform performance requirements for collection of wastewater into its system. In addition, TTSA would be able to provide a uniform approach to reducing Infiltration and Inflow. Rates would be based on zones of benefit throughout the Agency. The TTSA enabling legislation allows it to provide wastewater collection services. Overall administrative costs would be reduced, although it is unlikely that personnel needs would be reduced. There would be uniform employee benefit standards and maintenance programs. 2011: An expansion of TTSA s responsibilities to include collection would need to be initiated by TTSA and would be reviewed by the Placer County Local Agency Formation Commission. At this time, no fiscal analysis or review of organizational options has been undertaken; the scope of such a review would need to consider impacts on the other TTSA member agencies. Determination 4: TSD, as the Truckee area s largest service provider, could provide wastewater collection service throughout the Truckee area and the Martis Valley. TSD has the capability and infrastructure to provide wastewater collection services. Overall service costs would be reduced, and uniformity in the provision of collection services throughout the service area would be established. Administration would be centralized. NCSD could relinquish its wastewater collection function. Administrative overhead within the NCSD would have to be covered by remaining service functions. Disputes and litigation between the two districts would be eliminated, although the same issues would remain to be resolved internally. 2011: To date none of the agencies have expressed interest in reorganization and all legal disputes between NCSD and TSD were resolved in Determination 5: While TTSA is taking steps to reduce Inflow and Infiltration on its Truckee River Interceptor, there appears to be no consistent program throughout the member agencies to reduce Inflow and Infiltration, and little incentive collectively to member agencies to address the problem comprehensively. While some agencies have active Inflow and Infiltration reduction programs, others do not. Reduction of Inflow and Infiltration will extend the life of the Water Reclamation Plant and reduce the potential for water quality violations. 2011: While there may not be consistency among TTSA member agencies regarding Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) reduction, TSD has by any measure a very aggressive I & I identification and elimination program. TSD s program has won numerous state and local awards for its program, including three Collection System of the Year awards from the California Water Environment 32 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

37 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Federation. I & I identification and elimination is the cornerstone of TSD s program, as this results in lower rate of sewer spills and extends the economic life of collection system assets. Determination 6: Having one agency performing collection services could result in an overall reduced cost of providing collection services, with centralized maintenance and administration. Many regional wastewater treatment facilities only provide wastewater treatment, similar to TTSA. TTSA, however, has the authority to perform wastewater collection services in addition to wastewater treatment. Although member agencies currently perform wastewater collection services, these agencies provide the service at different cost and efficiency levels. Administrative costs could be spread over the entire system, were TTSA to perform the service. A centralized billing system could allocate costs based on zones of benefit and efficiencies in maintenance personnel could also potentially be realized. 2011: Cortese-Knox Hertzberg allows consolidations and mergers under certain conditions, such as if two agencies pass substantially similar resolutions to consolidate, an agency has difficulty providing services for financial considerations, an agency is unable to find governing board members, or other difficulties in the provision of services. TSD appears to be well run, financially sound, has the ability to provide a high level of service, and has no difficulty in filling seats on its governing board. At this time, there does not appear to be a basis for LAFCo to consider a consolidation unless requested by the affected agencies. To date, none of the agencies have expressed interest in consolidation Management Efficiencies Determination 1: Both TTSA and TSD have organizational charts that outline efficient service delivery functions. Personnel in various divisions are cross-trained to provide continuous service delivery. Determination 2: The TSD Master Plan lacks some elements commonly included in wastewater master plans. It provides guidance for District management and timed programmed improvements. However, it has not been stamped and signed by a licensed professional engineer. It does not include specific, quantified estimates of the collection system capacity; rather, it provides conclusions in narrative form. Technical information that could be examined and validated is not presented. 2011: Quantified estimates of collection system capacity may not have been available at the time the 2000 Master Plan was prepared. Analytical tools have developed since 1995 that allow system capacity to be evaluated at any time. The District now has a fully functional hydraulic model that can be run any time information is needed regarding system capacity. Determination 3: TSD should review its service fees as described in Section of this Service Review. Michael Brandman Associates 33 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

38 Updates to Municipal Service Reviews Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update 2011: TSD conducted an in-house review of its fee schedule in TSD reviews all revenue sources and requirements as part of each annual budget cycle. Increases in the number of connections and increased property tax revenue have so far eliminated the need for any change in sewer service charges Local Accountability/Governance Determination 1: Attendance by the general public at most agency board meetings is modest. All of the agencies comply with necessary regulations (such as the Brown Act) and have regularly scheduled meetings to which the public is invited. TTSA and TSD have maintained relationships with the local media and are available to the ratepayers and the public. Agency budgets and rate changes are adopted at noticed public meetings to which the public is invited. Attendance may be modest because customers/ratepayers are generally satisfied with the agencies, or because the meetings take place at inconvenient times. Several districts have early-morning board meetings on weekdays, which could discourage public participation. 2011: TSD s Board meetings are held on the third Thursday of each month at 6 pm. Board meeting times and dates are set by the governing board of each respective agency to best meet the needs of their communities. Determination 2: The bifurcation of wastewater collection services from treatment and disposal services may result in some confusion for the public, additional costs to ratepayers due to some duplication of services (e.g., personnel, administrative costs, facilities), and less accountability. However, as described above, this model is used in other jurisdictions. 2011: The efficient and effective delivery of services by TSD and TTSA strongly suggests that the current model is very successful and appropriate for the region. Determination 3: Districts should experiment with different meeting days/times to try to increase public participation. Given the number of second/vacation homes in the respective agency boundaries, there is often an interest in weekend meetings in the Lake Tahoe region. Districts could make greater use of websites to foster public relations and participation. The two largest agencies, TSD and TTSA, have websites under construction. Other, smaller districts have full service websites that allow public contact and provide extensive information. All websites should post information regarding meeting times and locations, budgets and rates. The Internet is a relatively low-cost yet powerful method of involving the general public/customers/ratepayers in agency affairs. Greater dissemination of information can lead to greater interest in attending board meetings and participating in elections. It also allows the public, some of whom are not physically able to attend board meetings, to follow District activities remotely from their home or business. 2011: TSD and other member agencies currently maintain websites to provide the public with information about the operation of their agencies. Since 2006, TSD has maintained a fully functional 34 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

39 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Updates to Municipal Service Reviews website that provides the information cited above. Also as stated above, Board meetings are set by each agency to meet the needs of their constituencies. TSD s board meets the third Thursday of each month at 6 pm. Determination 4: It would be in the public interest if disagreements between TSD and NCSD could be resolved through mediation rather than litigation. Any changes in the voting structure and membership of TTSA could only occur through legislative amendments to the TTSA Act. Truckee Sanitary District opposes NCSD becoming a member of TTSA, but has stated that in the future it will only provide wastewater collection services through annexation rather than contracts. TSD has indicated that it is not interested in providing wastewater collection services to an expanded NCSD boundary. Meetings have been held to try to resolve these differences, but no common understanding has yet been reached. Past disagreements have often been resolved by litigation. 2011: NCSD provides wastewater collection services to Northstar-at-Tahoe Resort. The NCSD has access to TTSA facilities through an agreement with TSD to share sewer capacity to TTSA s treatment facility. In 2001, TTSA applied to Placer LAFCo on behalf of NCSD for annexation of NCSD s lands. To date no action has been taken on the application. All legal disputes between NCSD and TSD were resolved in An amendment to the service agreement was negotiated that resolved all boundary disputes and provided the terms and conditions under which NCSD could provide sewer service outside the agreed-upon boundary. There are no pending disagreements between the agencies at this time, and the amendment seems to be working as intended. Michael Brandman Associates 35 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

40

41 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis SECTION 5: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE PLAN, MAP, AND ANALYSIS Proposed Sphere of Influence Map and Annexation Plan The sphere of influence for TSD was established in 1983; the Nevada County portion was updated in The resulting sphere boundary is as shown in Exhibit 3. Since that time, the District has annexed territory at the request of landowners primarily within the boundaries of the Town of Truckee. The following sections provide analysis of the four determinations required by CKH in conjunction with LAFCo policies Present and Planned Land Uses As shown in Exhibit 3, current boundaries of the TSD include the Town of Truckee in Nevada County and a portion of the Martis Valley in Placer County. The current land use designations in the Town are summarized in Table 2. Table 2: Current Land Use the Town of Truckee Land Use Acres % of Total Permanent/Protected Open Space 4, Donner Lake Golf Course Vacant/Undeveloped 6, Mining Single-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential/Mobile Home Park Gray s Crossing Specific Plan Commercial/Office Public/Institutional Industrial Roads/Railway Right of Way/Other 2, Total 21, Source: Town of Truckee 2025 General Plan The TSD also serves the subdivisions adjacent to the Town in Placer County. The area is included in the Martis Valley Community Plan, which was completed in The planning area covers over 25,000 acres and includes both the TSD service area and the NCSD. The portion served by TSD consists of approximately 6,080 acres including the Ponderosa Palisades, Sierra Meadows, Ponderosa Ranchos, and Martiswood Estates subdivisions. The TSD territory is primarily residential (30 percent) and open space (60 percent). The land use designations are shown in Table 3. Michael Brandman Associates 37 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

42 Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Table 3: Land Use in Martis Valley Service Area Land Use Acres % of Total Forest Open Space 3, Water Forest-Residential (1 du/2.5 to 10.0 acres) Rural Residential (1 du/1.0 to 2.5 acres) Low and Medium Density Residential (1-5 du/acre) 1, Water Public/Quasi Public 31 <1 Total 6, Notes: d/u = dwelling units Source: Martis Valley Community Plan 2003 The District s current sphere includes the area north of the Town to the Nevada County line. The planned land use of areas in the sphere of influence of the Town is shown in Exhibit 4. The exhibit identifies three areas of potential development that mirror the areas zoned as PD in the Nevada County General Plan. The area in the west consists of 428 acres with 38 clustered residences, the area in the northeast and east includes 862 acres with 275 clustered residences, and the area to the southeast along the county boundary contains 862 acres with 189 clustered residences. The area to the southeast has recently been acquired by the Tahoe-Truckee Airport District and placed in conservation easement. Table 4 summarizes the planned land use in the Town s 2025 General Plan proposed sphere of influence. The actual sphere recently adopted by LAFCo is much smaller, but the land use of the proposed sphere helps to describe the land uses in portions of the District s sphere nonetheless. The Town s proposal retains all the residential designations from the County s General Plan and adds the open space and rural areas to a Resource Conservation/Open Space (RC/OS) designation. The RC/OS category is intended to preserve large open space areas containing significant natural resources. Some examples are forestland, rangeland, bikeways, trails, important wildlife habitat, wetlands, wildlife movement corridors, areas containing significant scenic vistas, and areas containing important mineral resources. 38 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

43

44

45 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Table 4: Planned Land Use in the Town s Sphere Area Land Use Acres % of Total High Density Residential Planned Residential Development Residential (0.33 du/acre) Residential (0.50 du/acre) Residential Cluster (10.00 acres) Resource Conservation/Open Space Total Notes: d/u = dwelling units Source: Town of Truckee, To the north of the Town s proposed sphere Nevada County has designated the areas as primarily forestland. These areas have been excluded from the proposed sphere as the land use designations do not indicate development levels that would require the District s services. An exception to this is a small area of planned development north of Prosser Lake along Highway 89; this area has been retained in the District s Long-term sphere. The Placer County portion of the sphere was adopted in It includes an area south of Donner Lake which is primarily forestland Present and Probable Need for Public Services and Facilities The District Wastewater Collection Master Plan 2000 has not been revised since it was published in The Plan s purpose was to identify and compare the anticipated facility needs of the District with projected financial resources over a five-year period. In addition to governmental constraints at the Federal and State levels, the Plan investigated local constraints affecting District policy and procedures from the Town of Truckee and the counties of Placer and Nevada. Since the plan was published, the District has reviewed, revised, and updated its capital improvement program. As discussed in the above section updating the 2004 Municipal Service Review determinations, most of the new developments discussed in the plan have been completed and most of the associated infrastructure needed to serve these developments has been installed and dedicated to the District. At this point, growth rates in the area have significantly slowed, and consequently, the District hashss not identified a need to prepare a comprehensive update to the Master Plan. The District does, however, update key sections of the plan regularly. Growth and flow projections are available through the District s new hydraulic model; maintenance and Infiltration and Inflow programs are comprehensive. Capital needs are documented in a current 5-year Capital Improvement Plan. The Wastewater Master Plan 2000 did consider buildout of existing and planned development within the TSD service area and other non-connected areas that may require services in the future. The plan Michael Brandman Associates 41 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

46 Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update published in 1995 anticipated service to 18,000 dwelling units by the year At present, the District serves 9,764 dwelling units and 840 commercial accounts. In 2006, the District participated with TTSA in completing a new wastewater treatment facility that serves the members of TTSA. Capacity was increased from 7.4 to 9.6 mgd, which was planned to accommodate growth through That estimate was based on the assumption of 400 to 800 new hookups per year. Because of economic conditions there have only been 303 new connections in The current conditions have extended the available capacity beyond 2015 and more probably to Much of the anticipated need would occur with growth in the Town of Truckee. During the last decade the Town added on the average 238 new dwellings per year. The Town estimates there is a capacity for 7000 additional dwelling units within their current boundaries. At the historic absorption rate, there would be complete buildout in 29 years. However, because of current economic conditions and the reduced growth rate, the Town now has a capacity of over 100 years of growth. An additional need would occur with the expansion of the Town s sphere of influence and development within the sphere. The Town proposed 502 new residential units in the 2025 General Plan Update. Since the Town adopted its General Plan, the planned development to the southeast has been purchased by the Tahoe Truckee Airport District and has been redesignated as a conservation easement. As a result, the Town s anticipated growth in the sphere area has been reduced to 313 units. Most of the new development would occur in the long term horizon. Additional need in the Placer County portion of the District and the proposed sphere area is uncertain. Northstar-at-Tahoe is a planned residential/recreational community in the Martis Valley area of Placer County. Although Northstar is not included in TSD s service area, the District has an agreement with NCSD to transport wastewater through the District system. The potential buildout at Northstar is approximately 2,500 units; in 1995, there were approximately about 1,200 units connected to NCSD s system. Since the East County Wastewater MSR was adopted in 2003, there has been no action taken to modify the Placer County portion of the TSD sphere of influence. The agreement between NCSD and TSD to share transmission lines to the TTSA facility remains in place. In 2009, the District completed a solar power plant that is capable of providing enough energy to meet the energy requirement at TSD s Administrative and Operations Facility. The project was funded in part by the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. The District s capital improvement budget over the next five years is estimated at $6 million. Of that total, $1.8 million is dedicated to pipeline and manhole rehabilitation projects. The District also anticipates an expansion of its corporate yard for approximately $980,000. There are no other major facility projects anticipated through FY Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

47 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Present Capacity of Facilities The TSD collects and transmits wastewater to the treatment facility in the Town of Truckee operated and maintained by the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency (TTSA). The TSD operates and maintains approximately 350 miles of gravity pipelines containing 4,435 manholes, 9 miles of pressure pipeline, 41 lift stations. The system is monitored by a computerized telemetry and flow metering system. The collection system primarily serves 9,764 residential customers as well as 840 commercial customers. TSD collects sewage from the within the boundaries of the Town of Truckee as well as NCSD. In 2010, TSD collected an average of 1.91 mgd; the peak flow rate was 3.3 mgd experienced on New Year s Eve. TTSA also treats wastewater of four other agencies: North Tahoe Public Utility District, Squaw Valley Public Service District, Alpine Springs County Water District, and Tahoe City Public Utility District. The TTSA was formed by a special act of the California Legislature known as the Tahoe- Truckee Sanitation Agency Act, which became effective in November This Act created the TTSA for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage, industrial waste, and stormwater within the agency; prescribed its organization, powers, and duties; and repealed the North Lake Tahoe- Truckee River Sanitation Agency Act (Chapter 1503 of the Statutes of 1967). The TTSA wastewater treatment facility is located adjacent to the Truckee River and the Truckee Tahoe Airport in the Town of Truckee. The facility provides tertiary treatment of wastewater and is sized to treat maximum sewage flows that occur with the influx of seasonal residents and visitors during summer periods. The TTSA recently expanded its Water Reclamation Plant to a handling capacity of 9.6 mgd. The new treatment facility was designed to accommodate between 400 to 800 new connections per year. At that rate the facility would need additional capacity after Because of the lack of construction due to economic conditions, the request for new connections has been reduced substantially. As a result, the new treatment facility could have an extended lifetime possibly sufficient to meet buildout demands of the Town s 2025 General Plan Social and Economic Communities of Interest Communities of interest include residential areas adjacent to the TSD boundaries and commercial or industrial areas that may be affected by a change in the sphere of influence. Such residential areas include subdivisions within the Town of Truckee, the community of Hirschdale to the northeast, the community along the south shore of Donner Lake, and the Sierra Meadows subdivision of Martis Valley. The District boundaries include much of the Town of Truckee, and there are subdivisions within the Town that are in the current District sphere of influence and not served. Some of the subdivisions north of I-80 along SR-89 have been developed but are on septic systems. The Hirschdale subdivision, consisting of 20 residences, receives services from TDPUD but not TSD. Hirschdale is unique since surrounding areas receive services from only TSD or neither agency. Michael Brandman Associates 43 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

48 Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Northstar-at-Tahoe is a planned residential/recreational community in the Martis Valley area of Placer County. Although Northstar is not in TSD s service area, the District has an agreement with Northstar Community Services District to transport wastewater through the District system. The Sierra Meadows subdivision, also in Placer County, includes 490 lots most of which are on septic systems. Ponderosa Palisades lies partially within the Town limits and partially in Placer County; it includes 379 lots that are on septic systems. There are several subdivisions lying adjacent to the District boundaries that are on septic systems, some of which are within the current sphere boundaries. Prosser Heights, a small subdivision located north of I-80 and west of SR-89 within the Town of Truckee, includes 126 lots and is characterized by large lots. All developed parcels use individual septic systems. Prosser Lakeview Estates, located 2.5 miles north of I-80 and east of SR-89 in the Town of Truckee, includes 736 residential lots with onsite septic systems. To the east of Prosser Lakeview Estates lie several large lot subdivisions Pannonia Ranchos, Alder Hill, Prosser Woods, and New Frontier where lots are approximately an acre. To the east of Truckee and the District boundaries lie Juniper Hills, Juniper Heights, The Meadows, and Buckhorn Ridges. This area includes 116 large, rural residential lots all on septic systems. Further east is Floriston; this community is rather remote, and a great deal of study would be required to determine whether connection to the District system would be feasible. The current sphere extends north of Truckee to the Sierra County line. It includes the territory around Boca and Prosser reservoirs, which has potential for development. However, the majority of the territory is forestland and owned by the federal government Summary of Determinations Present and Planned Land Use Present land use is categorized in two distinct areas that are related to the population centers in the District. The primary population center is the Town of Truckee. Present land use is 23 percent residential, 19 percent open space, 1.5 percent commercial office, and 12 percent roadways and railway rights-of-way. There is also a large portion of vacant and undeveloped land, about 28 percent, but half of that is designated as resource conservation open space to allow for management of mineral resources and to limit development. Surrounding the Town, in Nevada County, the land use is primarily forest with the exception of the community of Hirschdale and the Juniper Hills subdivision. Juniper Hills consists of large, rural residential lots that are primarily on septic systems with insufficient density to make connection to a sewer system economically feasible. The District extends south of the Town into Placer County in the Martis Valley. Land use in the Martis Valley is primarily split between residential uses and open space. The Martis Community Plan is the guideline for development in the Martis Valley portion of Placer County. The community plan area extends well east of the TSD boundaries. It includes the Northstar community and the 44 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

49 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Sphere of Influence Plan, Map, and Analysis territory served by the NCSD. Land use in that area is primarily forestland and is of anticipated lowdensity residential just north of the Martis Creek and SR Present and Probable Need for Services The need for services will depend on the rate of construction in the current sphere and within the boundaries of the district. Truckee has sufficient growth capacity for 30 to 100 years within the Town boundaries. The large range is due to the impacts of the economy on growth projections. The previously anticipated growth rate of 238 new dwellings per year has been significantly reduced due to the economy. Similarly, growth within the Town s sphere and the Martis Valley will be reduced Present Capacity of Facilities Wastewater services are provided by TSD, which serves as the collection district, and TTSA, which operates the regional wastewater treatment facility. The TTSA recently expanded its Water Reclamation Plant to a capacity of a peak seven-day average flow, in the summer months, of 9.6 mgd. There is sufficient capacity at the facility to accommodate growth through 2015 and beyond. The additional needs of the collection system will be addressed by the land use authority through conditions of approval Social and Economic Communities of Interest The District boundaries include much of the Town of Truckee. Within the Town s boundaries there are subdivisions that rely on septic systems and are not served. Some of the subdivisions north of I- 80 along SR-89 have been developed but are also on septic systems. Similarly, the community of Hirschdale just east of the town receives potable water from TDPUD but relies on septic systems. The Northstar community lies adjacent to the District s southern boundary and should be considered a community of interest. The NCSD provides wastewater collection services to Northstar, but contracts with the TSD for sewage treatment and disposal at the TTSA treatment facility. Michael Brandman Associates 45 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

50

51 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Recommendations SECTION 6: RECOMMENDATIONS Sphere of Influence Boundary Recommendations for the Sphere boundary must take into consideration CKH requirements for definite boundaries. Of equal importance are Nevada LAFCo policies that preclude adding territory to the sphere of influence that is unlikely to require municipal services. The District s sphere in Nevada County includes all the territory north of the Town of Truckee to the Sierra County line. Except for the area to the northwest of Prosser Lake, much of that territory is designated as forestland and unlikely to develop. The Placer County portion of the sphere includes a large area south of Donner Lake designated as Timberland. Based on Nevada LAFCo policies, this area- should be excluded from the District s sphere. The District s current sphere of influence also includes several areas within Truckee s boundaries (but not in the District) that are developed or are slated for development. Although many of these subdivisions rely on septic systems, there may be a need to connect to a municipal wastewater collection system at some future date. There are also additional areas in the Town s sphere that are intended for development but are not in the District s boundaries. These areas should be included to coincide with potential urbanization and annexation to the Town of Truckee. Another key LAFCo policy is the designation of an Area of Concern. By definition, an Area of Concern is a geographic area beyond the sphere of influence in which land use decisions or other governmental actions of one local agency (Acting Agency) impact directly or indirectly upon another local agency (Concerned Agency). Candidates for the area of concern designation are areas adjacent to the District in Placer County, south of Donner Lake and the Northstar area., Given these considerations, the proposed sphere should be reduced with the addition of several Areas of Concern. These are shown in Exhibit Sphere of Influence Plan LAFCo policies identify three designations which may be applied within or adjacent to an agency s sphere of influence, The following recommendations for the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere Plan, as shown in Exhibit 5. Near-Term Sphere: The near-term sphere includes areas within the boundaries of the Town of Truckee and areas of planned development in the Town s near-term sphere of influence. The Town s near-term sphere identifies an area to the northwest adjacent to the Tahoe Donner subdivision to be developed in the next 5 years. Long-Term Sphere: The long-term sphere should include areas identified in the Town s long-term sphere, such as the areas to the west of the Tahoe Donner subdivision, the area north Michael Brandman Associates 47 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

52 Recommendations Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update and west of Donner Lake, the area northeast of Truckee, and the Hirschdale subdivision. In addition, the long-term sphere should extend north of the Town to include the area along SR-89 just to the northwest of Prosser Lake, which is shown in the Nevada County General Plan as an area with potential for development. The area around Boca Reservoir should be included as well, since the Nevada County General Plan has designated that area for multiple uses. Areas of Concern: Areas of concern should be identified for portions of the current sphere that are designated as forestland in Nevada County. It is unlikely that area will develop but may be of concern to the District if the County entertained a development proposal. The other areas of concern would be located in Placer County. One overlaps the sphere of influence of the NCSD. Since the District conveys wastewater from Northstar to the treatment facility, it does have an interest in potential additional demands on its system. The Area of Concern designation would help focus attention on the potential conflict between the spheres of influence of the two agencies. Since the principal county for NCSD is Placer County and the principal county for TSD is Nevada County, consultation between the two LAFCos is needed. At present, an MOU (Appendix A) exists between Placer LAFCo and Nevada LAFCo that essentially recognizes the concerns of multi-county special districts and provides a mechanism for consultation. Similarly, the area south of Donner Lake in Placer County that was proposed to be included in the TSD sphere would be an ideal candidate for designation as an Area of Concern. The Area of Concern designation would help focus attention on the shared interests of the two agencies. The Area of Concern is defined on page Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

53 /2011 5_Rec_SOI.mxd Michael Brandman Associates Source: Nevada County GIS (2010), ESRI World Imagery. Area of Concern Long-Term Sphere Near-Term Sphere Sphere of Influence Northstar Community Services District (NCSD) Truckee Sanitary District Truckee Town Limits Legend NORTH 0 Miles ak r L 2.5 Donne e 80 Pr os s 267 Placer County Nevada County 80 NEVADA COUNTY LAFCO TRUCKEE SANITARY DISTRICT SPHERE PLAN UPDATE Martis Creek Lake Wildlife Area þ } er La ke Sierra County Exhibit 5 Recommended Sphere Boundary and Sphere Plan 89 þ } 89 þ } ir B oc a R es er v o Nevada County Califor nia Nevada

54

55 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Conclusions SECTION 7: CONCLUSIONS The analyses presented in this study leads to the following conclusions: The municipal service review for the District has concluded the capacity is available for the current sphere of influence. The TTSA, which receives wastewater from the TSD, has increased its treatment plant capacity to 9.6 mgd, which is sufficient to accommodate growth past With regard to the four determinations required by CKH: - Present and planned land use: The District includes the Town of Truckee as the major population center. The Town contains 23 percent residential use with 28 percent vacant land. About half the vacant land is designated as resource conservation open space to allow for mineral resource management and to limit residential development. Outside the Town but within the present sphere in Nevada County, land use is designated primarily as forestland. The area also includes some development, in Hirschdale and Juniper Hills, on septic systems. To the south of Truckee the TSD boundaries encompass the residential communities in the Martis Valley and a large area designated as forestland. Land use designations in the Nevada County General Plan are consistent with those in the Town s sphere in that areas designated for development are intended to remain available for development. Other areas will remain as resource conservation areas or open space. - Present and probable need for public services and facilities: Because of the current economic conditions, the area has experienced very slow growth in the last year. Additional housing opportunities in the Truckee area to accommodate present needs and allow for anticipated growth will require additional wastewater services, particularly within the Town s sphere of influence. Developers will be required to expand the existing collection system, if necessary. - Present capacity of facilities: There is sufficient capacity for services to the proposed sphere of influence. Because of the current economic conditions, the additional capacity that became available in 2008 will enable the TSD to accommodate growth through Social and economic communities of interest: The relevant communities of interest include the Town of Truckee, Hirschdale, the Martis Valley communities south of Truckee, and the Northstar community. Many areas within the Town boundaries are outside the TSD and rely on septic systems. Northstar is connected to the TSD to convey wastewater to the TTSA treatment facility. The recommended sphere is reduced from the previously adopted sphere and falls under the General Rule exemption, so no additional environmental review is required. Nevada LAFCo policies limit the proposed sphere of influence to areas of potential development. The recommended sphere of influence complies with LAFCo policies and CKH. Michael Brandman Associates 51 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

56 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update CEQA SECTION 8: CEQA Actions taken by LAFCO are subject to CEQA. For CEQA purposes, Nevada LAFCo is the lead agency to complete an environmental analysis of the impacts of the proposed sphere of influence. A reduced sphere is proposed that eliminates the area north of Town that is currently forest and designated in the Nevada County General Plan as forest. The reduction in the sphere requires an Initial Study that would include a discussion of any potential impacts on climate change. The CEQA analysis determined that a negative declaration is appropriate for the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere Plan. The Initial Study and Negative Declaration determination is included in Appendix B. 52 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

57 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Acronyms and Abbreviations SECTION 9: ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AFY CEQA CIP acre-feet per year California Environmental Quality Act Capital Improvement Plan CKH Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 DOF DRA EIR FY GHG HUD I & I IS LAFCo mgd MORGA MOU MSR ND OAL OPR PRD PUD RCOS TDPUD California Department of Finance District Reorganization Act Environmental Impact Report fiscal year greenhouse gas(es) Housing and Urban Development Department Inflow and Infiltration Initial Study Local Agency Formation Commission million gallons per day Municipal Organization Act Memorandum of Understanding Municipal Service Review Negative Declaration Office of Administrative Law Governor s Office of Planning and Research planned residential development Public Utility District zoning designation for resource conservation/open space Truckee Donner Public Utilities District Michael Brandman Associates 53 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

58 Acronyms and Abbreviations Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update TSD TTSA Truckee Sanitary District Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency 54 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

59 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Bibliography SECTION 10: BIBLIOGRAPHY Beals, Marcia General Manager Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency. Personal communication: . March 18, Beals, Marcia General Manager Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency. Personal Communication: Telephone February 17, California Department of Finance (CDOF). 2009a. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, , with 2000 Benchmark. Sacramento, California, May Website: Accessed July 15, Cotton Bridges Associates Municipal Service Review Western Nevada County General Government Services. July 15, Governor s Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force Our Vision for the California Delta. January 29, Website: Accessed March 4, Governor s Office of Planning and Research CEQA: The California Environmental Quality Act - Statutes and Guidelines. Governor s Office of Planning and Research Local Agency Formation Commission Municipal Service Review Guidelines Volume 1 and Volume 2. August. Nevada County Nevada County General Plan. Nevada LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada Policies. August 28. Nevada LAFCo. 2006a. Municipal Service Review Eastern Nevada County General Government Services. April. Nevada LAFCo East County Water Services Municipal Services Review. April. Nevada LAFCo Final Eastern Nevada County Wastewater Municipal Service Review. November 26. Parker, Jay Chief Engineer Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency. Personal Communication: Telephone February 2, Placer County Martis Valley Community Plan. December 16. Quad Knopf Municipal Service Review Eastern Nevada County General Government Services. April. State of California Growth Within Bounds: Report of the Commission on Local Governance for the 21st Century. January. Town of Truckee Annual Operating Budget and 5 Year Capital Improvement Project Budget. May 28. Michael Brandman Associates 55 H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

60 Bibliography Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Town of Truckee Housing Element. Adopted October 20, Town of Truckee Town of Truckee 2007 Annual Report Community Development. March 24. Town of Truckee General Plan. Town of Truckee Draft Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update. Town of Truckee Memorandum of Understanding between the Truckee Tahoe Airport District and the Town of Truckee. August. Town of Truckee Memorandum of Understanding between the Truckee Tahoe Airport District and the Town of Truckee. October. Treson, Blake District Engineer Truckee Sanitary District. Personal communication: . January 11. Truckee Donner Public Utilities District Urban Water Management Plan. November. Truckee Sanitary District. 2010a. Website: Accessed February 19, Truckee Sanitary District. 2010b. Approved Capital Budget for FY and 5-year Improvement Program. June 24. Truckee Sanitary District TSD Code Ordinance Truckee Sanitary District Truckee Sanitary District Wastewater Master Plan February Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

61 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Appendix A: Agreement Between Placer and Nevada LAFCos for Coordination on Cross-County Proposals Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

62

63

64

65 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Appendix B: CEQA Analysis Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

66

67 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse No Supplement to Town of Truckee General Plan EIR Prepared by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County for the Update of the Truckee Sanitar y District Sphere of Influence July 2011

68

69 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Final Supplemental EIR Purpose This document is the finalizing addendum to the Draft Supplement to the Final EIR of the Town of Truckee 2025 General Plan, prepared by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County to provide analysis of environmental impacts of the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update. This final SEIR has been prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act ( et seq., California Code of Regulations, Title 14). This document, together with the DSEIR prepared in March 2011, constitutes the FSEIR for the proposed project. Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations stipulates than an EIR must be prepared for any project that may have a significant impact on the environment. The Update of the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence is a project as defined by the referenced code. Upon preliminary review, LAFCo determined that the project may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and, therefore, an EIR was required. Although the proposed sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District is reduced significantly through the update, the development of areas within the updated sphere of influence will result in environmental impacts. Because these areas (except for the Hobart Mills Planned Development Area north of the Town) are within the Town of Truckee boundaries or the territory included in the Town s sphere of influence, the Town s General Plan controls the land use and development potential of the territory included in the proposed Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence. The Town of Truckee General Plan EIR provides an analysis of the impacts of development in the subject area; it also includes specific mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts. The present document incorporates by reference all findings and mitigation measures adopted in the Town s General Plan 2025 EIR. Final Supplemental EIR Requirements As described in the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15132), following the preparation of a Draft Supplemental EIR and the public review and comment period, an FSEIR must be prepared that consists of: DSEIR or a revision of the Draft; List of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DSEIR; Comments and recommendations on the DSEIR (verbatim or in summary); and Responses to the significant environmental comments raised in the review and consultation process Use of the Final Supplemental EIR in the decision making process The Truckee 2025 General Plan EIR, as supplemented by this FSEIR, together with economic, social and technical information, will be used by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County to decide on the project, which is the update of the sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District. Upon review of the FSEIR, and prior to making determinations on the sphere of influence, LAFCo must certify that: The FSEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; 3

70 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Final Supplemental EIR The FSEIR was presented to the Commission in a public meeting and the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the FSEIR prior to considering the project; and, The FSEIR reflects the Commission s independent judgment and analysis. In conjunction with the certification of the FSEIR, the Commission must prepare one or more written findings of fact for each significant environmental impact identified in the document. These findings must either state that: The project has been changed (including adoption of mitigation measures) to avoid or substantially reduce the magnitude of the impact; Changes to the project are within another agency s jurisdiction and have been or should be adopted; or Specific considerations make mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible. If any of the impacts identified in the FSEIR cannot be reduced to a level that is less than significant, the Commission may issue a Statement of Overriding Considerations for approval of the project if specific social, economic, or other factors justify the project s unavoidable adverse environmental effects. If the Commission decides to approve the project for which the FSEIR has been prepared, the Commission will issue a Notice of Determination. Summary of Public Review Because the subject environmental document is a supplement to an existing Environmental Impact Report, a new Notice of Preparation (NOP) was not required. The DSEIR and Notice of Availability were provided to agencies, organizations and individuals known to LAFCo as having an interest in the project on April 20, 2011; the notice advised that LAFCo would be considering the environmental document as well as the Sphere of Influence Update at a noticed public hearing on July 21, A Notice of Completion was forwarded along with the DSEIR to the Governor s Office of Planning and Research at the same time the NOA was circulated. (No state agencies submitted comments.) Following the release of the DSEIR there was a 30 day review period that extended to June 6, This period was later extended to June 30, 2011 to provide additional time for public review. In addition to distribution of the DSEIR as described above, the document was posted on the LAFCo website. 4

71 SUPPLEMENT TO TOWN OF TRUCKEE GENERAL PLAN EIR The Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County has prepared a supplement to the Town of Truckee 2025 General Plan Environmental Impact Report in order to review the environmental impacts of updating the sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence. WHY A SUPPLEMENT IS NEEDED Truckee Sanitary District provides wastewater collection services to lands in eastern Nevada and Placer counties. Nevada LAFCo, as the Principal County LAFCo for the Truckee Sanitary District, is preparing a sphere of influence update for the District, as required by California Government Code Section 56425(g). Nevada LAFCo s proposed adoption of an updated sphere of influence for Truckee Sanitary District (TSD) will establish the basis for expansion of the District s boundaries and service area over the ensuing 20 years, in response to development consistent with the land use designations and zoning requirements established by the applicable land use authority, the Town of Truckee. The Town and its sphere of influence (adopted by Nevada LAFCo December 16, 2010) encompass the District s existing service area and its entire proposed sphere of influence in Nevada County, with the exception of the small area known as Hobart Mills, located north of the Town. In 2006, the Town of Truckee updated its General Plan (GP), revising the Town s land use designations and map as well as the principles, goals, and policies of the 1996 General Plan. The Truckee 2025 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GP EIR), certified by the Town November 16, 2006 (Resolution ) and assigned State Clearinghouse No , assessed the potential environmental consequences of adoption and implementation of the updated General Plan. Thus the Town GP EIR s assessments of potential environmental consequences of projects proposed under the General Plan apply to future development requiring the wastewater collection services of TSD, except in Hobart Mills, which is outside the Town s sphere of influence. Although the Town s GP EIR does not explicitly address update of the District s sphere of influence, it fully examines the impacts of development within the portion of the District s boundaries and sphere of influence that are within the Town s boundaries and sphere of influence. This supplement to the Town s GP EIR explicitly incorporates the update of the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence into the project description, constituting a substantial change to the Town s GP EIR project description. SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act) requires a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) to update the spheres of influence

72 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR ( spheres ) for all local agencies within the LAFCo s jurisdiction. A sphere of influence is defined by Government Code as a plan for the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency or municipality. As part of the decision-making process, a LAFCo is required to review and consider the potential environmental effects that could result from the proposed Sphere of Influence Plan Update. Nevada LAFCo has prepared and proposes to adopt an Update to the Sphere of Influence Plan of the Truckee Sanitary District, which provides sewage collection services to territory in Nevada and Placer Counties. A Public Review Draft of the proposed Sphere Update is posted online, accessible via link from LAFCo s website, <nclafco.com>. As shown on the attached regional map (Exhibit 1), Truckee Sanitary District is located in the eastern parts of Nevada and Placer counties, approximately 12 miles north of Lake Tahoe; 30 miles west of Reno, Nevada; and 100 miles east of Sacramento. Formed in 1906, the District covers an area of approximately 39 square miles, including territory in the Town of Truckee as well as in unincorporated Nevada and Placer Counties. The District is located within the high mountain environment of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. Topography varies widely, with elevations ranging from a low point of 5,700 feet at the Truckee River near Boca, to nearly 7,500 feet in upland areas in the Tahoe Donner neighborhood in the northwestern portion of the District. Forested upland areas are concentrated within the western and northern parts of the Town. Moderate rolling terrain of treed rangeland and scrub extends southeast of the Truckee River to the Martis Valley. Donner Lake, an 830-acre freshwater lake, is a dominant feature occupying much of the area between I-80 and the Placer County line west of the Town proper. A map showing the Truckee Sanitary District s current boundaries and the recommended sphere of influence for the District is included herein as Exhibit 2. In accord with the CKH Act and Nevada LAFCo policies, the sphere of influence represents an area where development may reasonably be expected to occur and require the District s services within the next 20 years. A sphere does not identify or define specific development projects or land uses for an area. It should be noted that the recommended sphere does not include any territory beyond the District s existing sphere boundaries but in fact reduces the sphere. TSD s current sphere, which includes most of the territory north of the Town of Truckee and extends to the northern Nevada County boundary with Sierra County, was established in 1983 and updated in However, Nevada LAFCo has adopted a policy excluding from spheres areas that are not likely to be developed, and the CKH Act requires that boundaries be logical and definite to avoid splitting parcels and creating unincorporated islands. In order to address those concerns, the recommended sphere for TSD removes previously included areas in Nevada and Placer Counties that are unlikely to require wastewater services within the Sphere Plan s 20-year timeframe either by virtue of ownership or land use designation. Much of this territory is forest land now held by the Tahoe National Forest and is therefore unlikely to develop or otherwise require the District s services. The recommended sphere, depicted in Exhibit 2, would include the following areas: Near-Term Sphere: Areas within the boundaries of the Town of Truckee and areas of planned development in the Town s near-term sphere of influence, including an area adjacent to the Truckee Donner subdivision and several parcels on Teton Way south of the Tahoe Donner development. 2

73 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR Long-Term Sphere: Areas assigned to the Town of Truckee s long-term sphere, including territory west of Tahoe Donner subdivision, the area north and west of Donner Lake, the area northeast of Truckee, and the Hirschdale subdivision. Also included in this designation would be the Hobart Mills area north of the Town and east of SR-89. With the exception of the Hobart Mills area, which is located in unincorporated Nevada County, the entire TSD Sphere of Influence would be within the Town of Truckee boundaries or sphere of influence. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Truckee GP EIR addresses the issues listed below; asterisks identify areas of environmental concern in which significant unavoidable impacts would occur under cumulative conditions rather than directly from implementation of the General Plan. Aesthetics and Visual Quality* Air Quality* Biological Resources* Cultural Resources Geology and Seismic Hazards Hazardous Materials and Natural Hazards Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Noise* Population, Employment and Housing* Public Services Traffic and Circulation* Utilities and Service Systems On February 16, 2010, amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines developed pursuant to Public Resources Code section to provide guidance to public agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and their effects in draft CEQA documents were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and filed with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations. The amendments became effective on March 18, This Supplement to the Truckee GP EIR therefore includes additional analysis covering that subject as relating to the TSD sphere of influence. 1. Aesthetics & Visual Quality The Town s General Plan policies and existing design and development standards are intended to ensure that new development complements the existing aesthetic environment of the Town and adjacent areas and does not impair scenic vistas, affect scenic corridors, or worsen conditions of light and glare. The GP EIR thus found the impacts to aesthetic and visual resources of implementation of the General Plan 2025 to be less than significant. However, development under the Town s 2025 General Plan, in conjunction with other development in the region, would incrementally change the character of the Truckee area from a natural, open space landscape to one that is more urbanized (2.E.1, p. 2-7). To the extent that sewer service is characteristic of urbanized development, such impact would in part arise from the District s provision of services. 3

74 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR 2. Air Quality Development will inevitably contribute to production of particulate matter (PM) and gases (e.g., carbon monoxide) from such sources as wood smoke, roadway dust, and construction activities as well as vehicle tailpipe emissions. The General Plan s goals, policies and actions would reduce the impact, however. Additionally, the Town s Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan applies controls that would further reduce PM emissions, as would the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District s CEQA guidelines. Efforts at the federal, State, and regional level will help reduce emissions of ozone precursor pollutants; and the General Plan 2025 policies will reduce vehicular traffic and thus emissions. Impacts on air quality from development within the Town s jurisdiction are thus judged as less than significant. Because the Town s jurisdiction encompasses the District s present and potential future service area, the same applies to the TSD Sphere Update. However, a significant portion of the impacts to air quality is generated by traffic and development outside the Town s jurisdiction. There are no feasible or reasonable measures the Town or TSD could take to mitigate the impact of sources beyond their jurisdictions, so the cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable (2.E.2, pp. 2-7 and 2-8). 3. Biological Resources Goals and policies of the Town s 2025 General Plan would protect habitat and sensitive biological resources; however, future development in the Town and elsewhere in the region would inevitably cause cumulative conversion of existing natural habitat to urban and suburban use, generally reducing habitat values for resident and migratory species (2.E.3, p. 2-8). To the extent that availability of wastewater collection services encourages development, the District s extension of services to presently unserved areas would contribute to that effect. 4. Cultural Resources The Town s GP EIR (4.4.D, p ) determined that, because of the protective policies, actions, and goals of the General Plan, its implementation would not contribute to significant impacts upon cultural resources. The same protections would apply to development supported by the District s wastewater collection. 5. Geology and Seismic Hazards Increasing population would increase numbers of people and structures exposed to seismic hazards, but application of standards consistent with the Uniform Building Code would generally reduce such hazards to less than significant levels. Provisions of the Town s 2025 General Plan would similarly reduce potential impacts on the development of mineral resources. The GP EIR (4.5.E, p ) therefore evaluated potential impacts relating to geology, soils and seismicity in the Town and its sphere as cumulatively less than significant. While installation of District pipelines and other infrastructure would disturb soils, such activity would also be subject to the provisions of the Town s General Plan and its impacts and thus reduced to less than significant levels. 6. Hazardous Material and Natural Hazards The GP EIR concludes (4.6-D, p ) that the Safety Element of the Town s 2025 General Plan, taken together with local, regional, state and federal regulations, would reduce potential impacts associated with hazards (e.g., hazardous materials spills, wildfire, avalanche) to less 4

75 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR than significant levels. The same regulations would apply to activities of the District and therefore similarly mitigate any risks attendant upon those activities. 7. Hydrology and Water Quality Extensive review of potential impacts and various Town, county, state and federal regulations that would have mitigating effects led to the GP EIR conclusion (4.7.D, p ) that projects undertaken under the 2025 General Plan and other regional projects would not cumulatively impact water quality in the area. Similarly, the GP Safety Element provides mitigation of potential flooding impacts to less than significant levels. Installation and operation of TSD sewage collection facilities complying with the applicable regulations would not add to the potential impacts. 8. Land Use The Town s General Plan includes several policies and proposed land use designations that are designed to mitigate for potential incompatibility between neighboring uses and would therefore prevent incompatible uses. The GP EIR (4.8.D, p ) concluded also that the GP would not divide an established community, conflict with established uses or with adopted land use or habitat plans or policies. Development that would be served by TSD wastewater collection facilities would have to comply with such provisions and consequently the District s activities also would have little or no impact on land use. 9. Noise The GP EIR states (2.E.4, p. 2.8) that cumulative increase in traffic as a result of development under the 2025 General Plan and elsewhere in the region would result in noise level increases in excess of 3 db at 12 different locations in the Town. Elsewhere (4.9.D, p ), however, the EIR notes that much of the anticipated impact results from through traffic from outside the area and that there are no feasible and reasonable measures available to mitigate this impact, which is therefore judged to be significant and unavoidable. Noise resulting from construction activity associated with development allowed under the Town s General Plan which would include the District s installation of pipelines and other wastewater collection facilities to serve such development is temporary, project-specific, and subject to mitigation to less than significant levels through application of measures defined in the Plan s Noise Element. 10. Population, Employment and Housing Implementation of the Truckee 2025 General Plan is evaluated in the GP EIR as having no significant impact in terms of displacing housing units or people (4.10.C.2, p ) and as likely benefiting employment and job growth (4.10.c3, p ). It acknowledges, however, that growth in other parts of the region (such as the Martis Valley) could contribute to imbalance between demand for and availability of affordable housing in the area. This could result in a cumulatively significant and unavoidable impact regionally, despite provisions of the Town s 2005 Housing Element aimed at providing additional affordable housing. It would seem that the availability of sewage collection service from TSD is more likely to enhance efforts to develop additional housing than to inhibit them. 11. Public Services The Truckee GP EIR considered potential impacts of the GP s implementation upon provision of police, fire protection, school and parks and recreation services, concluding in each 5

76 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR case that there would be no significant impact (4.11. A, B, C, and D; pp through 17). Consequently, TSD s incidental role in supporting development contemplated under the General Plan must also be considered to have no impact on public service delivery in Truckee and environs. 12. Traffic and Circulation With regard to vehicular traffic and circulation systems, the GP EIR identified four specific cumulative impacts that would be significant and unavoidable (4.12.A.6, pp through 57) despite certain ameliorating provisions of the General Plan. Impacts in other areas coming under the same heading (parking, public transit, trails and bikeway system, and air transportation) were all determined to be less than significant (4.12.B through E, pp through 68). Again, to the extent that the TSD s provision of wastewater collection may be considered to support development and population growth which in turn result in increased vehicular traffic, the District s activities may indirectly contribute to the impacts noted in the area of traffic and circulation. 13. Utilities and Service Systems The GP EIR found less than significant impacts relating to water service, wastewater collection and treatment, storm water collection and disposal, and solid waste collection and removal attributable to buildout under the Truckee General Plan (4.13.A through D, pp through 22). As previously noted, TSD contributions to any such impacts would be indirect, through its provision of service to development, and also less than significant. 14. Greenhouse Gases The District s Sphere Plan by itself would not generate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Only development within the sphere has potential to emit greenhouse gases. Any potential impacts would be addressed on a project-specific basis through implementation of applicable regulations. No plans, policies or regulations for reducing greenhouse gas emissions have been adopted by the Northern Sierra Air Pollution Control District, the County of Nevada, or the Town of Truckee. Therefore the applicable plan is the Scoping Plan adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the applicable adopted regulation is AB 32. The Scoping Plan states, The 2020 goal was established to be an aggressive, but achievable, mid-term target, and the 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal represents the level scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate (CARB 2008, page 4). The 2050 goal is in Executive Order S The year 2020 GHG emission reduction goal of AB 32 corresponds with the midterm target established by Executive Order S-3-05, which aims to reduce California s fair-share c ontribution of GHGs in 2050 to levels that will stabilize the climate. As noted in the Scoping Plan, the projected total business-as-usual emissions for year 2020 (estimated as 596 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent or MMTCO2e ) must be reduced approximately 30 percent to achieve the CARB s approved 2020 emission target of 427 MMTCO2e. The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple GHG emission sources and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target. Each source sector has a different emission reduction target. Most of the 6

77 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. As stated in the Scoping Plan, the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 GHG target include: Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards; Achieving a statewide renewable energy mix of 33 percent; Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system; Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, including California s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; and Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation. The proposed TSD sphere consists primarily of undeveloped territory within or around the Town of Truckee. (The District s service area is, of course, almost entirely developed.) There are presently no specific projects proposed for the District s sphere. The measures identified in the Scoping Plan apply only to specific projects. Measures recommended in the Scoping Plan mainly target reductions in the transportation and electricity sectors. Implementation of certain Scoping Plan measures may indirectly affect future development in the sphere, such as the low-carbon fuel standard and enactment of the Pavley standards, as part of California Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley), enacted on July 22, 2002, which required the CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. The CARB estimates that the regulation would reduce climate change emissions from the light-duty passenger vehicle fleet by an estimated 18 percent in 2020 and by 27 percent in 2030 (CARB 2004). The proposed adoption of TSD s Sphere Plan would not significantly hinder or delay the State s ability to meet the reduction targets contained in AB 32, or conflict with implementation of the Scoping Plan, because update of the Sphere Plan does not itself include development projects, require development, or change land use. Only specific development projects undertaken under policies and regulations of the Town would generate GHGs at comparatively low levels through transportation of personnel and materials and use of electricity to operate equipment. Therefore, update of the Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Plan would have a less than significant impact. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Review of the Truckee Sanitary District s Sphere of Influence Plan and its update as required are mandated by statute: California Government Code Section 56425(g). The following discussion of project alternatives is provided to inform the public and decision makers of the project alternatives and the positive and negative aspects of those alternatives. 7

78 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Supplemental EIR The first alternative is the No Project alternative, which assumes that the current Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence (as adopted by LAFCo in 1983 and updated in 1998) remains in place. 1. NO CHANGE: LAFCo could leave the existing sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District unchanged (i.e., the map would remain as it was when last updated in 1998). This would retain the territory north of the Town of Truckee (extending to the northern Nevada County line) within the District s sphere of influence, as well as a large area in Placer County south of Donner Lake. These areas are both largely held in public ownership by the Federal government and are designated by each county s General Plan for Forest use. Under the current General Plans and land ownership patterns, these areas are unlikely to require wastewater services. An accurate assessment of the cumulative and specific environmental impacts of extending wastewater services throughout this area would be difficult. 2. COTERMINOUS SPHERE: LAFCo could reduce the District s sphere of influence to include only the territory currently encompassed by the District boundaries. This alternative would prohibit future annexations to the District unless LAFCo approved a sphere of influence amendment for each proposal. Since each annexation proposal would need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, long-term planning would be compromised for the District as well as LAFCo. It appears that the adoption of a coterminous sphere would not result in significant environmental impacts. 3. ZERO OR MINUS SPHERE: The Policies of Nevada LAFCo allow the adoption of a zero or minus sphere under certain defined conditions (if the agency is either not providing services to a portion or all of its territory, or if the agency s services are no longer required). Because the District is actively serving territory throughout its boundaries, none of the conditions justifying adoption of a zero or minus sphere exists in the case of Truckee Sanitary District. 1 Regional Map 2 Recommended Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence 8

79

80

81

82

83 LAFCo of Nevada County Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Final Supplemental EIR COMMENTS RECEIVED AND RESPONSES Comments on the SEIR were provided by Truckee Donner Public Utility District in a letter from Legal Counsel Steve Gross dated May 25, That letter is included with this document as Attachment 1. Specific comments have been extracted and responded to separately, as follows: Comment 1: This comment expresses the writer s opinion that it is inappropriate to tier off the Town of Truckee General Plan EIR without additional review and analysis of the environmental impacts (of the update of the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence) outside the Town of Truckee s boundaries. Response to Comment 1: All territory recommended for inclusion in the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence, with the exception of the Hobart Mills Planned Development Area (discussed below), is located within either the Town s boundaries or its proposed sphere of influence. The Town s General Plan EIR analyzed the impacts of development and growth in the territory within the Town s boundaries and in the territory the Town then proposed to include in its sphere of influence. Because this territory had at the time been included either in the Truckee Sanitary District boundaries or within its sphere of influence, the Town s environmental analysis presumed development potential for these areas that included availability of public sewer service. The one portion of the recommended sphere of influence for the Truckee Sanitary District that is excluded from the Town s General Plan EIR is the Hobart Mills Planned Development Area located approximately four miles north of Truckee east of State Highway 89; the impacts of this area s development were analyzed by Nevada County in a Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted in April 2001 for a Master Plan and Use Permit for development on the site; an addendum to the County s Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared by LAFCo to clarify that territory s inclusion in the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence and to analyze the potential of sewer service provision to the area and related impacts. Comment 2: This comment expresses the writer s opinion that the Truckee Sanitary District is a customer of both TDPUD and Liberty Energy for electrical power and notes that the environmental impacts of receiving power from TDPUD are less than the impacts from receiving power from Liberty Energy. The comment states that the SEIR should include a discussion and analysis of environmental impacts and greenhouse gas emissions of TSD s consumption of electricity from its different service providers. Response to Comment 2: The purpose of the Supplemental EIR is to analyze the potential impacts of updating the sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District. The location of TSD facilities in either TDPUD s electrical service area or Liberty Energy s is not within the subject matter of the Truckee Sanitary District sphere of influence. The potential expansion of the TDPUD electrical service area will be addressed in the sphere of influence update for the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. 1 Letter from TDPUD Counsel (May 25, 2011) 6

84

85

86

87 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration Including Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration Initial Study Ref. Nevada County Planning File No. U99-004; Z99-001; EIS Pombo (Hobart Mills) Prepared by Nevada LAFCo July 1, 2011

88

89 Nevada LAFCo Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration ADDENDUM Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Article 11, Pombo Property (Hobart Mills) Planning File Nos. U99-004; Z99-01; EIS Comprehensive Master Plan and Use Permit The Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County (LAFCo) has prepared this addendum to the County of Nevada Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for a Comprehensive Master Plan and Use Permit for 133 acres known as the Hobart Mills site approximately four miles north of the Town of Truckee. The Comprehensive Master Plan and Use Permit were approved to facilitate the rezoning of the property from IDR (Interim Development Reserve) and IDR SC (Scenic Corridor) to establish 30 acres of M1-SP (Light Industrial Site Performance), 40 acres of REC-SP (Recreation - Site Performance), and 63 acres of OS-SP (Open Space- Site Performance). The Use Permit allowed a 3-acre seasonal bark and topsoil processing operation to continue and established a separate 0.47 acre concrete batch plant site. Improvements associated with the Use Permit include a fenced 1.04-acre equipment storage yard with a 4,800 square foot office building and a 19,600 square foot office/shop/maintenance building. The project site is served by a septic disposal system and development on the site is limited to an occupancy load that can be supported by the current sewage disposal system. Modifications to be considered by this Addendum include an addition to the Project Description to note the project area is within the sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District and would continue to be retained in the District s sphere of influence as it is updated by the Local Agency Formation Commission. This technical addendum has been prepared pursuant to Article 11, Section of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines to make minor technical changes to the project analyzed in a Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopted April 16, 2001 by the County of Nevada. None of the conditions described in calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. Scope and Purpose of this Addendum The project description is being amended to note that the subject territory is within the sphere of influence of the Truckee Sanitary District, which is a wastewater collection agency serving the Truckee area. Nevada LAFCo is updating the District s sphere of influence and would retain the area within the sphere. This change of project description does not require the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration, as none of the conditions described in Public Resources Code or CEQA Guidelines 15162, calling for preparation of a subsequent MND, have occurred. Therefore, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines 15164, preparation of this Addendum is appropriate. Substantial evidence supports this conclusion, including: 2

90 Nevada LAFCo Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Update Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration The change to the project description, noting that the territory is within the TSD sphere of influence, does not result in any change to the scope or scale of the project. County mitigation measures limit development of the site by adoption of an SP Site Performance Combining district for all three zoning districts on the site. The SP designation requires that all development on the site will be limited to an occupancy load that is supported by the current sewage disposal system; any subsequent site development shall include a cumulative analysis of all on-site development to monitor remaining capacity of the Centralized Sewage Disposal System. The site is located over three miles from the closest TSD connection point, and the topography would likely require installation of a pump station to convey wastewater flows to the TSD system, in addition to the installation of on-site collection system infrastructure within the site. Given the scope and scale of the project, connection to the TSD system would be problematic at best. Connection of the site to TSD s system would entail annexation of the territory to the District; annexation is subject to the provisions of CEQA and would require analysis and mitigation of environmental impacts of the associated project. All policies and mitigation measures adopted as part of the previous MND will remain in place under the revised project description. No new information has become available that would change the analysis or conclusions of the previous MND. The revised project will not result in any significant effects not discussed in the previous MND adopted for this project and will not increase the severity of any effects beyond what was disclosed and analyzed in the previous MND. Attachment: Initial Study, File No. U99-004; Z99-001; EIS99-009; Alfred & Karla Pombo, Landowners. 3

91 NEVADA COUNTY CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY Date of Initial Study Preparation: April 11, 2001 Prepared By: Tod Herman, Associate Planner File No: U99-004; Z99-001; EIS Assessors Parcel No: , -08, -09 Property Owner: Agent: Zoning: General Plan: Project Location: Alfred & Karla Pombo P.O. Box 1102 Truckee, CA (530) Dale Creighton Sylvester, Creighton & Ozanich 140 Litton Drive, Suite 240 Grass Valley, CA (530) IDR-SC & IDR (REC 40 ac.; M1 30 ac.; OS 50 ac.) PD (REC 40 ac.; IND 30 ac.; OS 50 ac.) Old Highway 89, approximately four miles north of the Town of Truckee. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Comprehensive Master Plan and Use Permit applications proposing: 1) Rezone 133 acres from the current IDR and IDR-SC (Interim Development Reserve) zone to establish 30 acres of M1-SP (Light Industrial Site Performance) 40 acres of REC-SP (Recreation Site Performance) and 63 acres of OS-SP (Open Space Site Performance). The Site Performance combining districts are proposing a master design theme and specific use regulations. The SC Scenic Corridor combining district (1,200 ) will remain on the westerly portion of the property. 2) Use Permit to re-establish the 3-acre seasonal bark and topsoil processing operation, and establish a separate 0.47-acre concrete batch plant site. The following improvements are proposed with the use permit: a fenced 1.04-acre equipment storage yard with a 4,800 square foot office building; and a 1.62-acre storage area with an attached office, shop, maintenance building totaling 19,600 square feet. The following land use approvals are needed for this project: A. Conditional Use Permit. B. Property Rezone Other Permits or Approvals Which May Be Necessary: Based on initial comments received, the following permits may be required from the designated agencies: 1. An Encroachment Permit from the California Department of Transportation. 2. Septic and stormwater permit approval from the Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board. 3. Annexation to the Truckee Fire Protection District. Attachments to Initial Study: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan Initial Study - Page 1

92

93 INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST INTRODUCTION This checklist is to be completed for all projects, which are not exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The information, analysis and conclusions contained in the checklist are the basis for deciding whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (ND) is to be prepared. Additionally, the checklist shall be used to focus an EIR on the effects determined to be potentially significant. The following abbreviations indicate the potential level of impact: Known Poten. Sig.: Known significant environmental impacts. Unknown Poten. Sig.: Unknown, potentially significant impacts, which need further review to determine significance level. Poten. Sig. and Mitig.: Potentially significant impacts which can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Not Sig.: Impacts which are not considered significant or no impact. Project Environmental Setting: The 133± acre project site is located east of the intersection of Highway 89 and Fiberboard Road, approximately four miles north of the Town of Truckee. The site has been substantially disturbed over the years, as it was once the location of the Hobart Mills town site dating back to before Many of the old buildings have been removed from the site, or modified by the more-recent lumber mill activities occurring through the 1950s. Subsequent to the lumber mill uses, the site has had various industrial operations as well. A small number of existing structures remain on site. The site is characterized as Upper Montane Mixed Conifer-Jeffery Pine-Sagebrush Forest. Mixed conifer tree cover and scattered brush dominate the site. Site elevation is approximately 5,800 feet. Relationship to Other Projects: The project site has been subject to two previous use permit applications for the top-soil operation, both of which have now expired. The current application proposes to perpetuate the top-soil operation on site, as well as expand the industrial uses on site. Any subsequent development of the recreation area will necessitate a use permit. As no proposal exists for the recreation area at this time, that use will be subject to a later application. Initial Study - Page 2

94

95 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. LAND USE: No mitigation measures are required. 2. HOUSING: No significant impacts are expected to occur. No mitigation measures are required. 3. GEOLOGIC PROCESSES: To reduce the potential impacts to geologic resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. Storm water generation from proposed buildings and parking areas shall be retained onsite through the use of retention/detention basins, resulting in no net increase in storm water runoff. B. Development is subject to review by and compliance with erosion control and storm water runoff standards adopted by the Lahontan Region of the State Water Quality Control Board. 4. WATER RESOURCES/FLOODING: To reduce the potential impacts to water resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The following water protection measures shall be implemented during on-site construction activities, and noted on the construction plans: 1. Sediment ponds shall be used to settle out turbid water at construction areas, or shall be transported to offsite sediment ponds. Before the first heavy storm, these sediment basins shall be cleaned of accumulated debris and the debris shall be transported outside the area for disposal. 2. The operation of heavy equipment in flowing water shall be avoided at all times. 3. Construction byproducts such as oil, cement, and wash water shall be prohibited from discharging from areas that might flow into the creek. 4. Potential pollutants such as temporary on-site toilets and petroleum products shall be collected and removed from the site after construction. B. The proposed sewage disposal system is subject to Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board, which currently implements a septic prohibition for this Truckee River Hydrologic Unit. Sewage disposal is subject to review by and compliance with standards adopted by the Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board. 5. AIR QUALITY: To reduce the potential impacts to air quality resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measure shall be required: A. All project development shall comply with the requirements of the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) as follows: 1. Alternatives to open burning of vegetative material on the project site shall be used by the project applicant unless deemed infeasible by the APCO. Among suitable alternatives are chipping, mulching, or conversion to biomass fuel. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that all adequate dust control measures are implemented in a timely manner during all phases of project development and construction. 3. All material excavated, stockpiled, or graded shall be sufficiently watered, treated, or covered to prevent fugitive dust from leaving the property boundaries and causing a public nuisance or a violation of an ambient air standard. Watering should occur at least twice daily, with complete site coverage. 4. All areas with vehicle traffic, including unpaved roads, shall be watered or have dust palliative applied as necessary for regular stabilization of dust emissions. 5. All land clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities on a project shall be suspended as necessary to prevent excessive windblown dust when winds are expected to exceed 20 mph. 6. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent public nuisance. 7. During construction, paved streets adjacent to the project shall be swept or washed at the end of each day, or as required to remove excessive accumulations of silt and/or mud which may have resulted from activities at the project site. Initial Study - Page 3

96 8. Acceptable materials that may be used for chemical soil stabilization include petroleum resins, asphaltic emulsions, acrylics, and adhesives, which do not violate Regional Water Quality Control Board of California Air Resources Board standards. 9. If serpentine rock is found is the area, the presence of asbestos, in the chrysotile or amphibole forms must be determined. Additional mitigation's may be needed on a site-specific basis. B. For the ongoing topsoil and bark processing plant, the operator shall continue to work with the NSAQMD office in fulfilling the requirements for the Permit to Operate. C. When the bark extraction area(s) are completed, the operator shall re-establish ground cover on the site through seeding and watering in accordance with the local grading ordinance. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: To reduce the impact the project traffic would have on surrounding roadways, the following mitigation measures are provided: A. Prior to final occupancy of any future buildings on site, the developer shall widen the westbound approach to the SR 89/Fiberboard Road intersection to accommodate trucks with 50 foot turning radii. A Stop Ahead warning sign (W3-1a) shall be placed on the westbound Fiberboard approach to warn drivers of the upcoming stop sign. B. Stop signs shall be placed on the side street approaches to Hobart Mills Road in the project vicinity. C. All new on-site roadways and existing on-site dirt roadways to be used by the project shall be paved. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: To reduce the potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The wet and seasonally wet meadow, seeps within the Jeffrey Pine riparian areas and the Plumas ivesia population (depicted on Figure 2 of the Biological Inventory as DM, WM, and IVSE) shall be designated as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) on a map exhibit associated with the SP Site Performance zoning district for the Planned Development. The SP shall specify that No construction shall occur within 100 feet of these ESAs, nor shall they be used as staging, parking, or storage areas for any subsequent use on site. B. As a condition to any subsequent development within the Recreation Area, the adjacent ESAs shall be fences with low perimeter fencing and posted in the field so that the public will be aware of the sensitive nature of these habitats. Off-road vehicles, mountain bikes, footpaths, wood collecting, or dogs shall not be permitted within these areas. C. To avoid the introduction of non-native, weedy plants which might adversely affect the ivesia, erosion control along roads or newly graded pads shall only utilize non-seed erosion control measures such as wood chips, sterile straw wattles, or erosion blankets. If locally collected seed is available, such seed may be used for erosion control. The seed mix shall first be approved by a qualified biologist as local, native seed before application at the project site. D. To avoid indirect impacts to the North Fork of Prosser Creek, on-site wet meadows, and the ivesia population, grading and earthmoving activities on site shall avoid changing the existing drainage patterns. 8. ENERGY: No significant impacts are expected to occur. No mitigation measures are required. 9. HEALTH HAZARDS/RISK OF UPSET: No mitigation measures are required. 10. NOISE: No mitigation measures are required. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES: To reduce the potential impacts to public services to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: Initial Study - Page 4

97 A. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new structures on site, the project developer shall complete annexation into the Truckee Fire Protection District. 12. SERVICE SYSTEMS: To offset the potential impacts associated with over development of this site, the following mitigation measure is required: A. The SP Site Performance combining district shall be used with all three zoning districts on site. Among the specific limitations of the combining district, all subsequent development within the Planned Development shall be limited to an occupancy load that is supported by the current sewage disposal system approved by the Nevada County Department of Environmental Health. The review and approval of any subsequent site development within the Planned Development shall include a cumulative analysis of all onsite development (relative to Uniform Building Code occupancy) to date to monitor remaining capacity of the Centralized Sewage Disposal System. 13. VISUAL: No significant impacts are expected to occur. No mitigation measures are required. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES: To reduce the potential impacts to cultural resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The following note shall be incorporated into any future Grading, Improvement or Construction Plans: All construction plans shall advise contractors and construction personnel involved in any form of ground disturbance, i.e. utility placement or maintenance, grading, etc., of the remote possibility of encountering subsurface cultural resources. If such resources are encountered or suspected, work shall be halted immediately and the Planning Department contacted. A professional archaeologist shall be consulted to access any discoveries and develop appropriate management recommendations for archaeological resource treatment. If bones are encountered and appear to be human, California Law requires that the Nevada County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission be contacted and, if Native American resources are involved, Native American Organizations and individuals recognized by the County shall be notified and consulted about any plans for treatment. 15. RECREATION: No mitigation measures are required. Initial Study - Page 5

98 Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 3A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 3B County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 4A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 4B RWQCB Prior to issuance of building permit 5A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit. During grading and construction activities. 5B Northern Sierra Air Quality Management On going during the topsoil operation. District 5C Northern Sierra Air Quality Management Upon completion of the topsoil operation. District 6A Department of Transportation and Sanitation Prior to final occupancy of the first building permit for new development on site. 6B Department of Transportation and Sanitation Prior to final occupancy of the first building permit for new development on site. 6C Department of Transportation and Sanitation As a condition of approval for any subsequent development permit(s). 7A County Planning Dept. Adoption of the zoning ordinance for the Planned Development. 7B County Planning Dept. Upon approval of subsequent development within the Recreation Areas. 7C County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 7D County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 11A County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of building permit 12A County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of any building permit 14A County Planning Dept.; County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit Initial Study - Page 6

99 1. LAND USE Environmental Setting: The project site is located along Highway 89, approximately four miles north of the Town of Truckee. The site is 133± acres and comprises of private land holdings. The site is bordered by U.S. Forest Service land to the south, east and north. A small number of existing residential units are located west of the project site along Klondike Flat Road. The site is zoned "IDR" and IDR-SC (Interim Development Reserve with the Scenic Corridor combining district) and the General Plan designation is Planned Development. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Structures and/or land-use incompatible with existing land-use? Q, R 1 b. The induction of growth or concentration of population? Q 1 c. The extension of sewer trunk lines or access roads with capacity to serve new development beyond this proposed project? 2, 3 d. The loss of open space? Q, S 1 e. Establishment of a use which would diminish or impair long term productivity of the environment? Q 1 f. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 1 g. Creation of an inconsistency or conflict between existing zoning, plans or other applicable land use controls? 1 h. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? Q, R 1 i. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Q, R 1, 2, 3 j. Affects on agricultural resources or operations, to soils or farmlands, or from incompatible land uses? G, L, Q 1 k. Disrupting or dividing the physical arrangement of an established community, including a low-income or minority community? 1 Impact Discussion: The project site is zoned "IDR" and the General Plan designation is Planned Development. Both zoning and General Plan designations note the following land use designations reserved for this site, pending approval of the Comprehensive Master Plan: Recreation 40-acres, Light Industrial 30- acres, and Open Space 50-acres. While the land use acreage (120 acres) does not fully add up to the property totals (133 acres), the proposal is increasing the area of Open Space to adjust for the difference. As such, the proposal s land use acreage is consistent with the General Plan and zoning for the site and the loss of Open Space area is not anticipated. Initial Study - Page 7

100 The project proposes the use of an on-site special design septic system. The project site is remote from the infrastructure services provided within the Town of Truckee. It is not feasible for this project to extend sewer or water services from the town out to this site. As such, the project will not result in growth-inducing impacts. The two proposed industrial areas, one including the existing topsoil operation site, are centrally located within the property and are substantially buffered from the neighboring properties. Highway 89 lies between the industrial areas and the closest residential development. Mitigation & Residual Impact: No mitigation measures are required. 2. HOUSING: Environmental Setting: The site is mostly undeveloped, except for the area occupied by the industrial bark operation. There are no residentially developed areas on the site. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Loss of existing affordable dwellings through demolition, removal? conversion, or 1 b. Displacement of a large number of current residents? 1 c. An effect on existing housing or create an additional demand for additional housing? 1 d. Altering the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the population of an area? 1 e. The inducement of substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly? 1 Impact Discussion: The site is currently designated Interim Development Reserve, which currently permits single family dwellings. The planned land use and zoning for the site, Light Industrial, Recreation, and Open Space does not permit residential development without a use permit. The project site is located in a rural area, which lacks public transportation and infrastructure to support affordable housing opportunities. The proposed project is not expected to affect existing housing supplies or creates a demand for additional housing. No significant impacts to housing are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended. Mitigation Measures: No significant impact to housing is expected to occur as a result of this project and no mitigation measures are recommended. 3. GEOLOGIC PROCESSES: Environmental Setting: Topography of the site is relatively flat with moderate slopes within the western portions of the site making it visually sheltered from Highway 89. There are no visible signs of erosion at the site. General Plan maps do not reflect any record of landslide activity and indicate low erosion potential in this area. Initial Study - Page 8

101 The project site is located in Eastern Nevada County in an area in an area of Quaternary and Historic faults. The site is designated as a Zone III-High seismic area. A north/south running Quaterernary fault (less than 2 million years old) is identified near the project site. An unnamed trace-fault was identified paralleling Highway 89, immediately west of the highway, running between Prosser Creek and Interstate 80. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Unstable earth conditions or changes to geologic substructure? N 1 b. Exposure to or production of unstable earth conditions such as landslides, earthquakes, liquefaction, soil creep, mudslides, ground failure (including expansive, compressible, collapsible soils), or similar hazards? N 1 c. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil by cuts, fills, or extensive grading? 1 d. Changes in topography or ground relief features? 1 e. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic, paleontologic, or physical features? 1 f. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, on or off the site? 1, 2, 9 g. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river, or stream, or the bed any bay, inlet or lake? 1 h. Excessive grading on slopes over 30 %? N 1 i. Vibrations, from short-term construction or long-term operation, which may affect adjoining areas? 1 j. Exposure of persons to potential impacts involving volcanic hazard, erosion, change in topography, unstable soil conditions from excavations, grading or fill, or other unique geologic or physical features? 1 Impact Discussion: A comprehensive soil and geotechnical report was provided for a project on the other side of Highway 89. The report reviewed seismic conditions and identified historic quake activity effecting the greater Truckee area. An unnamed trace-fault was identified paralleling Highway 89, immediately west of the highway, running between Prosser Creek and Interstate 80. Initial Study - Page 9

102 The major seismic risk is from ground shaking along one of the active faults within the influence area of the site. The major cause of structural damage during earthquakes is related to poor construction and inadequate ground preparation. All new construction is subject the Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards, as amended by the State of California. The UBC provides seismic design standards for the Zone III-High seismic area, which are intended to provide adequate and safe building construction. The project proposes two industrial areas. The western area is located on the backside of a gently sloping knoll. The eastern area near the center of the parcel is flat. A very limited amount of building site and road improvement grading can be expected to occur with the subsequent development within this Planned Development. These improvements are not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to geologic resources. Onsite slopes of 30%+ shall remain undisturbed. With regard to the topsoil plant site, the operation now imports spoils from various construction projects off-site. The earthen material is brought to the site and processed to produce a refined topsoil product. Limited amounts of bark (extracted from the previous lumber milling operations) is mixed with the spoils to produce the desired soil mix. There is no excavation of native earthen material from the site for this process. Future building and site development is subject to review by and compliance with erosion control and stormwater runoff standards adopted by the Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board. Additionally, the project is subject to the Nevada County Grading Ordinance, which provides for erosion control measures intended to limit impacts to soil and water resources. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To reduce the potential impacts to geologic resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. Storm water generation from proposed buildings and parking areas shall be retained onsite through the use of retention/detention basins, resulting in no net increase in stormwater runoff. B. Development is subject to review by and compliance with erosion control and storm water runoff standards adopted by the Lahontan Region of the State Water Quality Control Board. Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 3A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 3B County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 4. WATER RESOURCES/FLOODING: Environmental Setting: The subject site is located within the Prosser Creek and Truckee River Drainage Basin. Prosser Creek is located southwest of the project site. Prosser Reservoir is located approximately one mile to the southeast. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movement? I, Y 1 b. Changes in percolation rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? I, Y 1 c. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? I, Y 1 Initial Study - Page 10

103 Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) d. Substantial increase in storm water runoff? 1 e. Aggravation of an identified drainage problem or creation of a new one? 1 f. Discharge into surface waters, or alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, or thermal water pollution (i.e. eutrophication)? Y, I 1 g. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters, or need for private or public flood control projects? I, Y, 0 1 h. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding, placement of a project in a 100 year floodplain, or accelerated runoff? O 1 i. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwaters? I, Y 1 j. A change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or withdrawals? 1, 3 k. Substantial interference with or loss of ground water recharge capability? 1, 3 l. Overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? Or, a substantial increase in the existing overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? 1, 3 m. The use of substantial quantities of water? 1, 3 n. A substantial reduction in aquifer recharge? 1, 3 o. Substantial water quality degradation? Y 1, 3 p. A substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 1, 3 q. Significant changes in temperature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? Y 1 Impact Discussion: Riparian areas and wetland resources have been identified within the project site. The Biological Resource section addresses the potential impacts to these areas. Initial Study - Page 11

104 With the Use Permit, building and impervious surface areas total approximately 6 acres of the 133-acre Planned Development. However, the Planned Development proposes 30-acres of area designated for Industrial development. Storm water runoff will increase as a result of the construction of impervious surface areas and roadway improvements. The standard for development within the eastern County, requires storm water generation from proposed buildings and parking areas to be retained onsite through the use of retention/detention basins, resulting in no net increase in stormwater runoff. The biological survey recommends specific water protection measure for this site. The proposed water supply is from on-site wells. The project also proposes on-site sewage disposal. The Nevada County Health Department reviewed septic/soils testing, which identified suitable disposal areas. The proposed sewage disposal system is subject to Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To reduce the potential impacts water resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The following water protection measures shall be implemented during on-site construction activities, and noted on the construction plans: 1. Sediment ponds shall be used to settle out turbid water at construction areas, or shall be transported to offsite sediment ponds. Before the first heavy storm, these sediment basins shall be cleaned of accumulated debris and the debris shall be transported outside the area for disposal. 2. The operation of heavy equipment in flowing water shall be avoided at all times. 3. Construction byproducts such as oil, cement, and wash water shall be prohibited from discharging from areas that might flow into the creek. 4. Potential pollutants such as temporary on-site toilets and petroleum products shall be collected and removed from the site after construction. B. The proposed sewage disposal system is subject to Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board, which currently implements a septic prohibition for this Truckee River Hydrologic Unit. Sewage disposal is subject to review by and compliance with standards adopted by the Lahontan Region-State Water Quality Control Board. Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 4A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 4B RWQCB Prior to issuance of building permit 5. AIR QUALITY: Environmental Setting: Eastern Nevada County has exceeded the California Ambient Air Quality Standard (CAAQS) for particulate matter (PM10), and the 24 hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM10) but is not yet designated as federal non-attainment for PM10. The major sources of PM10 in eastern Nevada County are from the use of wood heating devices, residential open burning, prescribed burning, and sanding of roads in the winter. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? 9 b. A violation of any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? 9 Initial Study - Page 12

105 Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) c. Exposure of pollutants? sensitive receptors to 9 d. The creation of objectionable smoke, ash or odors? 9 e. Dust generation? 9 f. Exceeding any potentially significant thresholds adopted in County Plans and Goals? Q g. The alteration of air movement, moisture, temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 9 Impact Discussion: The Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) has reviewed and provided comment on proposed project. The town of Truckee occasionally exceeds state and federal standards for particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10). The construction activities associated with new development, and the ongoing topsoil operation, will have to potential to generate significant amounts of dust if not properly controlled. In order to reduce potential air quality impacts, the NSAQMD has provided conditions of approval and mitigation measures. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To offset the potentially adverse impacts associated with air quality resources the following mitigation measure shall be required: A. All project development shall comply with the requirements of the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) as follows: 1. Alternatives to open burning of vegetative material on the project site shall be used by the project applicant unless deemed infeasible by the APCO. Among suitable alternatives are chipping, mulching, or conversion to biomass fuel. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that all adequate dust control measures are implemented in a timely manner during all phases of project development and construction. 3. All material excavated, stockpiled, or graded shall be sufficiently watered, treated, or covered to prevent fugitive dust from leaving the property boundaries and causing a public nuisance or a violation of an ambient air standard. Watering should occur at least twice daily, with complete site coverage. 4. All areas with vehicle traffic, including unpaved roads, shall be watered or have dust palliative applied as necessary for regular stabilization of dust emissions. 5. All land clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities on a project shall be suspended as necessary to prevent excessive windblown dust when winds are expected to exceed 20 mph. 6. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent public nuisance. 7. During construction, paved streets adjacent to the project shall be swept or washed at the end of each day, or as required to remove excessive accumulations of silt and/or mud which may have resulted from activities at the project site. 8. Acceptable materials that may be used for chemical soil stabilization include petroleum resins, asphaltic emulsions, acrylics, and adhesives, which do not violate Regional Water Quality Control Board of California Air Resources Board standards. 9. If serpentine rock is found is the area, the presence of asbestos, in the chrysotile or amphibole forms must be determined. Additional mitigation's may be needed on a site-specific basis. B. For the ongoing topsoil and bark processing plant, the operator shall continue to work with the NSAQMD office in fulfilling the requirements for the Permit to Operate. Initial Study - Page 13

106 C. When the bark extraction area(s) are completed, the operator shall re-establish ground cover on the site through seeding and watering in accordance with the Grading Ordinance. Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 5A County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction 1-9 permit. During grading and construction activities. 5B Northern Sierra Air Quality Management On going during the topsoil operation. District 5C Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District Upon completion of the topsoil operation. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: Environmental Setting: The primary access into the project site is via State Highway 89 to Fiberboard Road and on to Hobart Mills Road. The on-site roadways are two lanes and approximately 32 feet in width. Hobart Mills Road is the old alignment of Highway 89, and is used in part by the residents in Russel Valley and visitors to the Tahoe Timber Trails campground north of this project site. The California Department of Transportation provides agency authority for State Highway 89. Both Fiberboard Road and Highway 89 are two lanes at the subject intersection. The intersection is non-signalized, access from Fiberboard Road onto Highway 89 is controlled by stop sign. There are no auxiliary lanes on Highway 89 at the subject intersection. Highway 89 is posted for 55 mph. Highway 89 is the primary north-south arterial highway connecting Truckee/Lake Tahoe to Sierraville and points north. Highway 89 is listed as a Scenic Highway, within the California Scenic Highway System and part of the Federal Yuba-Donner Scenic Byway. Highway 89 is also designated as a Nevada County Scenic Corridor. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Generation of additional vehicular movement in relation to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? Substantial capacity impacts is defined as exceeding the designated level of service for the local roadway network. Substantial change relative to existing traffic load is defined as resulting in increasing the existing traffic levels for the local roadway network by more than 25%? Z 2, 10 b. A need for private or public road maintenance, or need for new roads? Z 2, 10 c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? 1 Initial Study - Page 14

107 Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) d. Hazards to safety from design features, e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses, e.g. farm equipment? Z 2, 10 e. A substantial impact upon existing transit systems or alteration of present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Z 2, 10 f. An alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic? 2, 10 g. An increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians, including short-term construction and long-term operational? 2, 10 h. Inadequate: Sight distance? 2, 10 Ingress/egress? 2, 10 General road capacity? 2, 10 Emergency access (4290 Standard)? 2, 10 i. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 2, 10 j. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation, e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks? 2, 10 Impact Discussion: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. has prepared a traffic analysis for this master plan. The analysis considers existing traffic levels (in segments and at critical intersections in the region) and factors the traffic generated by the project for both current and future traffic conditions (based on projected growth rates and known projects in the area). The conclusions of the traffic analysis are that the proposed development would not generate traffic volumes that would increase traffic levels to exceed the acceptable LOS standards. Additionally, the project will generate additional heavy truck traffic, which will have impacts on the local on-site roadways. Mitigation Measures: To reduce the impact the project traffic would have on surrounding roadways, the following mitigation measures are provided: A. Prior to final occupancy of any future buildings on site, the developer shall widen the westbound approach to the SR 89/Fiberboard Road intersection to accommodate trucks with 50 foot turning radii. A Stop Ahead warning sign (W3-1a) shall be placed on the westbound Fiberboard approach to warn drivers of the upcoming stop sign. B. Stop signs shall be placed on the side street approaches to Hobart Mills Road in the project vicinity. C. All new on-site roadways and existing on-site dirt roadways to be used by the project shall be paved. Mitigation Monitoring Program Initial Study - Page 15

108 MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 6A Department of Transportation and Sanitation Prior to final occupancy of the first building permit for new development on site. 6B Department of Transportation and Sanitation Prior to final occupancy of the first building permit for new development on site. 6C Department of Transportation and Sanitation As a condition of approval for any subsequent development permit(s). 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Environmental setting: The 133-acre project site is substantially undeveloped and includes one mobile home and existing/unimproved roads. The site is characterized as Upper Montane Mixed Conifer-Jeffery Pine-Sagebrush Forest. Mixed conifer tree cover and scattered brush dominate the site. The site is located within the Prosser Creek and Truckee River Drainage Basin and is located approximately one mile northwest of Prosser Reservoir. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. A loss or disturbance to a unique, rare or threatened, or endangered species of plant or animal, or habitat of species within the community? 1 b. A reduction in the numbers or restrictions in the range of any unique, rare or endangered, or threatened species of plants or animals? 1 c. A reduction in the extent, diversity, or quality of native vegetation, including brush removal for fire prevention and flood control improvements? 1 d. A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of animals or plants? 1 e. A reduction in the diversity or numbers of animals on-site, including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish or invertebrates? 1 f A substantially diminished habitat or a deterioration of existing fish, wildlife or plant habitat, for foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.? 1 g. The introduction of a barrier to movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species? 1 Initial Study - Page 16

109 Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) h. Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise, human presence and/or domestic animals) which could hinder the normal activities of wildlife? 1 i. The introduction of a new species of plant, wildlife or fish into an area, or, a barrier to the migration and movement of animals? 1 j. The reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 1 Impact Discussion: A site-specific Biological Inventory was conducted to evaluate the various biological resources on site. The 133-acre site contains various plant communities of Sagebrush/Bitterbrush, Jeffery Pine Forest, Quaking Aspen, Grasslands, Wet Meadow, and Seasonally Wet Meadow. The project area is within the range of a number of special status plant species. Two rare plants are known to occur in the kinds of plant communities found on site, Plumas ivesia and Lemmon s clover. Both of these species tend to grow in the ecotone between the seasonally wet meadow and the adjacent bitterbrush scrub. With regard to potential wildlife impacts, most of the notable wildlife habitat on site is associated with the wet meadow areas. No special status wildlife species were observed during the surveys on site. The two proposed Light Industrial areas are located mostly within the Sagebrush and Grassland plant communities, and within previously disturbed areas associated with the bark extraction activities. The more sensitive biological communities identified within the Biological Inventory are all located within areas proposed for the Open Space land use designation. The Biological Inventory cautions against indirect impacts to some of these more sensitive plan communities and recommends a number of mitigation measures. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To reduce the potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The wet and seasonally wet meadow, seeps within the Jeffrey Pine riparian areas and the Plumas ivesia population (depicted on Figure 2 of the Biological Inventory as DM, WM, and IVSE) shall be designated as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) on a map exhibit associated with the SP Site Performance zoning district for the Planned Development. The SP shall specify that No construction shall occur within 100 feet of these ESAs, nor shall they be used as staging, parking, or storage areas for any subsequent use on site. B. As a condition to any subsequent development within the Recreation Area, the adjacent ESAs shall be fences with low perimeter fencing and posted in the field so that the public will be aware of the sensitive nature of these habitats. Off-road vehicles, mountain bikes, footpaths, wood collecting, or dogs shall not be permitted within these areas. C. To avoid the introduction of non-native, weedy plants which might adversely affect the ivesia, erosion control along roads or newly graded pads shall only utilize non-seed erosion control measures such as wood chips, sterile straw wattles, or erosion blankets. If locally collected seed is available, such seed may be used for erosion control. The seed mix shall first be approved by a qualified biologist as local, native seed before application at the project site. D. To avoid indirect impacts to the North Fork of Prosser Creek, on-site wet meadows, and the ivesia population, grading and earthmoving activities on site shall avoid changing the existing drainage patterns. Initial Study - Page 17

110 Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 7A County Planning Dept. Adoption of the zoning ordinance for the Planned Development. 7B County Planning Dept. Upon approval of subsequent development within the Recreation Areas. 7C County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 7D County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 8. ENERGY: Environmental Setting: Energy uses for the buildings within the project will include electrical service and LPG gas. Exterior operations will require diesel powered heavy equipment and generators. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. A substantial increase in demand, especially during peak periods, upon existing sources of energy? b. A requirement for the development of new sources of energy or expansion of existing facilities? c. The use of fuel or energy in a wasteful or inefficient manner? d. The necessity to extend power lines requiring new easements? e. A conflict with an adopted energy conservation plan? Impact discussion: Electric service is currently available to the project site. This project is not expected to result in any significant changes in energy needs or expansion of services. Mitigation Measures: No significant impacts to energy are expected to occur as a result of this project and no mitigation measures are recommended. 9. HEALTH HAZARDS/RISK OF UPSET: Environmental Setting: The proposed use is subject to compliance with County standards for the storage of certain quantities of potentially hazardous materials that may be stored on site. a. In the known history of this property, have there been any past uses, storage, or discharge of hazardous materials? (Examples include, but are not limited to, fuel or oil stored in underground tanks, pesticides, solvents, or other chemicals.) Yes Maybe No b. Will the proposed project involve the use, production or disposal of materials which pose a hazard to people or animal, or plant populations in the area effected? Yes Maybe No Initial Study - Page 18

111 Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? 3 b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 3 c. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, gas, biocides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 3 d. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? Impact Discussion: The industrial areas are specifically located within the County to contain those land uses that have an increased exposure to hazards, or risks of explosion, that could potentially result from the allowance of uses involving a greater daytime population density. Those businesses that normally handle or use hazardous materials are required to file a Business Plan with the Nevada County Department of Environmental Health. Depending on the quantities of hazardous materials, the Business Plan may also require a Risk Management Prevention Plan (RMPP). County codes and the Environmental Health Department s conditions of approval will require all subsequent development within the Industrial areas to comply with County standards, and obtain the necessary permits (RMPP). For the use permit, the storage and use of hazardous materials and fuel will be subject to review and permit approval by Nevada County Department of Environmental Health. No abnormal impacts are anticipated to occur with the proposed development. Mitigation & Residual Impact: No mitigation measures are required. 10. NOISE: Environmental Setting: Historically, the project site has been to source of various industrial activities including two separate lumber mills and, most recently, the top soil operation. The project site is 133 acres and contains a significant amount of buffer area. The project site is bordered by undeveloped U.S. Forest Service lands to the south, east and north. The closest residential development is approximately three-quarters of a mile away. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Long-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding County thresholds? Q, R 1 b. Short-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding County thresholds? Q, R 1 c. A project-generated substantial increase in the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas, either day or night? Q, R 1 Impact Discussion: Chapter 9 (Noise) of the Nevada County General Plan (NCGP) establishes maximum allowable noise levels and land use compatibility standards. Specifically, Policy 9.1 establishes criteria for acceptable exterior noise exposures in terms of day, evening and nighttime average and maximum noise levels for various land use designations. These standards have been adopted into the County s Zoning Ordinance. Given Initial Study - Page 19

112 the remote location of the project site, relative to residential development, significant noise issues are not anticipated by the project. Mitigation & Residual Impact: No mitigation measures are required. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Environmental Setting: The following public services are provided to this site: Fire: The California Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection. Police: Law enforcement services are provided by the Nevada County Sheriff. Other: Solid waste generated either during the development of the site or after occupancy, are disposed of at a transfer station in Placer County. Road maintenance is discussed in Section 6 of this document. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input a. FIRE PROTECTION Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) 1) An increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? 11, 15 2) A substantial increase in expenditures for fire protection? 11, 15 3) Exposure of people to hazardous wastes/material? 3 b. POLICE PROTECTION A substantial increase in expenditures for police protection? c. SCHOOLS 1) A substantial increase in the number of school children in the attendance area? 2) Aggravation of an existing facilities overcrowding? 3) A negative impact on student access routes to or from school property during normal working hours? d. OTHER An effect upon or a need for any other new or altered public facilities, utility or government services? 1 Impact Discussion: Limited fire protection services are provided to the project site in general. The California Department of Forestry and U.S. Forest Service provides limited fire protection service, generally for wild land fires, to the area. The project site is approximately 3 miles outside of the Truckee Fire Protection District but within the district Sphere of Influence. In order to ensure adequate fire protection service, the Truckee Fire Protection District has requested that prior to construction, the project site be annexed into the district. The extension of fire protection services by the Truckee Fire Protection District to the proposed project and adjoining residential uses is not expected to result in significant impacts or expenditures for services as mitigation impact fees will be required as part of the annexation. Initial Study - Page 20

113 The Truckee Fire Protection District and California Department of Forestry/Nevada County Fire Planner have reviewed and provided comment on the proposed project. State and County Codes require that development comply with minimum fire safety requirements, including water storage for fire flow, adequate access for fire equipment, and clearance of native brush from around structures. Conditions to satisfy these requirements will be included as a part of project approvals. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To reduce the potential impacts to public services to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new structures on site the project developer shall complete annexation into the Truckee Fire Protection District. Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 11A County Planning Dept. Prior to issuance of building permit 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS: Environmental Setting: The project is located outside of the Town of Truckee, approximately four miles north of the town limits. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) A need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to: a. Power or natural gas? b. Local or required water distribution facilities? c. Communication systems? 3 d. Local or regional water supplies? 3 e. Storm water drainage? 2 f. Sewer or septic systems? 3 g. Solid Waste disposal? Impact Discussion: The project proposes the use of an on-site special design septic system. In April 2000, Holdrege & Kull completed the evaluation and design of a centralized system for this property. Sewage disposal is subject to review and approval by the California Regional Water Quality Board-Lahontan Region (CRWQB). Domestic water is to be supplied by onsite wells. The preliminary soils testing for the on-site sewage disposal estimates the site being capable of handling approximately 5000 gallons of sewage waste generated per day. The preliminary design of the sewage disposal system, however, is for 2500 gallons of sewage per day. Based on this limitation, the Master Plan proposes an employee occupancy load factor (approximately 166 employees) to limit the development on the site.. The SP Site Performance combining district applied to all the zoning districts on site could establish this threshold. The project site is remote from the infrastructure services provided within the Town of Truckee. It is not feasible for this project to extend sewer or water services from the town out to this site. Domestic water source is proposed via on site groundwater wells. Storm water is to be retained on site, subject to California Regional Water Quality Control Board-Lahontan Region and Nevada County Department of Transportation and Sanitation review and approval. Electric service is existing and is available to serve this site. Initial Study - Page 21

114 Mitigation & Residual Impact: To offset the potential impacts associated with over development of this site, the following mitigation measure is required: A. The SP Site Performance combining district shall be used with all three zoning districts on site. Among the specific limitations of the combining district, all subsequent development within the Planned Development shall be limited to an occupancy load that is supported by the current sewage disposal system approved by the Nevada County Department of Environmental Health. The review and approval of any subsequent site development within the Planned Development shall include a cumulative analysis of all on-site development (relative to Uniform Building Code occupancy) to date to monitor remaining capacity of the Centralized Sewage Disposal System. MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 12A Planning Department Prior to issuance of building permit 13. VISUAL: Environmental Setting: The project site is located east of State Highway 89 and is accessed primarily from Fiberboard Road. Located four miles north of the town of Truckee, the area is generally rural and undeveloped. Highway 89 is listed as a Scenic Highway within the California Scenic Highway System and part of the Federal Donner Yuba-Donner Scenic Byway. The eastern portion of the site is within the Nevada County Scenic Corridor combining district. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. Demonstrable, negative, aesthetic effects on scenic vistas or views open to the public? 1 b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 1 c. A change to the visual character of the area? 1 d. Glare or night lighting which may affect adjoining areas? 1 e. A visually incompatible structure within a designated historic district? 1 Impact Discussion: The 133-acre project site is largely undeveloped with mixed conifer and pine forest. The site is separated from Highway 89 by an intervening parcel. The proposed land use designations for the site buffer the western portions of the property with the Open Space designation. Those portions of the property, which are within 1200 feet of Highway 89, will also retain the SC Scenic Corridor combining district. On-site topography also provides a visual barrier for the proposed Industrial areas. The closest Industrial area (not proposed for development with the Use Permit) is setback approximately 1000 ft. from Highway 89. The Industrial areas are not expected to be visible from existing residential uses or from Highway 89. The Master Plan proposes a Master Design Theme for on-site development. The Design Theme proposes standards for building architecture, landscaping, water conservation, plan types and maintenance, parking, signs and lighting, noise, air quality, and hazardous materials. Most of the Design Themes, however, appear to be a reprint of the previous Zoning Ordinance requirements. Despite this limitation, no significant off-site impacts to visual resources are expected to occur as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Initial Study - Page 22

115 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Environmental Setting: The 133-acre project site has is currently mostly undeveloped but had once been an active lumber mill site with its own community and town site. The lumber mill activities ceased in the 1950s, and after which the buildings were dismantled and removed from the site. South of the project site is the Alder Creek/Prosser Lake area, where a portion of the Donner Party wintered in the fall of There are numerous recorded historic and prehistoric archaeological sites in the greater Truckee/Martis Valley area. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. The disruption, alteration, destruction, or adverse effect on a recorded pre-historic or historic archaeological site? X 14 b. The distribution or removal of human remains? X 14 c. Increased potential for trespassing, vandalizing, or sabotaging of archaeological resources? X 14 d. Ground disturbances in an area with potential cultural resource sensitivity based on the location of known historic or prehistoric sites? X 14 e. The potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethic cultural values? X 14 f. Restricting existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 14 g. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? X 14 Impact Discussion: In 1989, Fiberboard Corporation proposed the construction of a new mill and facilities on the Hobart Mills site. An archeological inventory record search was first conducted by the North Central Information Center (NCIC) in Following that record search, Peek & Associates performed a cultural resource survey of the site. Before the results of their survey could be reported, Fiberboard divested all timber land holdings in the region and chose not to build the mill. Peek & Associates concluded their report in 1990, but provided no site evaluations or recommendations for the sites within the project area. With the new application for the use permit and comprehensive master plan, Peek & Associates completed their original work and was able to make recommendation based on the project being limited to the specific building areas proposed. A number of historic features were documented on this site, most of which are associated with the lumber mill activities dating back to the 1890s. Most of those structures have since been demolished. No prehistoric cultural materials were found in the project area except for an isolated basalt scraper. While the project design will minimize the potential for cultural resource impacts, there is always the possibility of future development uncovering additional resources. As such, a mitigation measure is included to protect possible non-identified archeological resources. Initial Study - Page 23

116 Mitigation Measures: No significant impacts to cultural resources are likely to occur, however; there is always a possibility of uncovering unanticipated subsurface features or artifacts. If such resources are encountered or suspected, work shall be halted immediately and a professional archaeologist consulted. An advisory statement will be included as a mitigation measure. Mitigation & Residual Impact: To reduce the potential impacts to cultural resources to a less than significant level the following mitigation measures shall be required: A. The following note shall be incorporated into any future Grading, Improvement or Construction Plans: All construction plans shall advise contractors and construction personnel involved in any form of ground disturbance, i.e. utility placement or maintenance, grading, etc., of the remote possibility of encountering subsurface cultural resources. If such resources are encountered or suspected, work shall be halted immediately and the Planning Department contacted. A professional archaeologist shall be consulted to access any discoveries and develop appropriate management recommendations for archaeological resource treatment. If bones are encountered and appear to be human, California Law requires that the Nevada County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission be contacted and, if Native American resources are involved, Native American Organizations and individuals recognized by the County shall be notified and consulted about any plans for treatment. Mitigation Monitoring Program MEASURE MONITORING AUTHORITY WHEN IMPLEMENTED 14A County Planning Dept.; County Building Dept. Prior to issuance of grading and construction permit 15. RECREATION: Environmental Setting: The project is located within the Truckee Donner Park & Recreation District. Will the proposal result in: Known Unknown Poten. Not Data Agency Poten. Poten. Sig. & Sig. Source Input Sig. Sig. Mitig. (App. A) (App. B) a. An increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks facilities? or other recreational Q 1 b. An affect on existing recreational facilities? Q 1 c. A conflict with established recreation uses of the area, including biking, equestrian and/or hiking trails? Q 1 Impact Discussion: The proposed project establishes 40 acres of land designated specifically for Recreation. However, given the limitations on sewage disposal, and the lack of a specific Recreation component to the Comprehensive Master Plan, it is likely any subsequent recreation activities on site will be passive forms of recreation. Formal existing recreation amenities do not exist on site. The project site is bounded by the Tahoe National Forest. These lands are available for a wide range of public outdoor recreation uses. The project is not expected to impact existing or future uses of the adjoining National Forest lands. Mitigation Measures: No significant impacts to recreation services are expected to occur as a result of this project. No increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities is expected and no mitigation measures are recommended. Initial Study - Page 24

117 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT Yes Maybe No Data Source Agency Input (App. A) (App. B) a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California's history or prehistory? Q 1 b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? Q 1 c. Does the project have environmental effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable (cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of the project are considered when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current, and probable future projects)? Q 1 d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Q 1 Alternatives to the Proposed Action: Does the project require the discussion and evaluation of a range of reasonable alternatives which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project? 1 RECOMMENDATION OF THE PROJECT PLANNER: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project will NOT have a significant adverse environmental effect, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is recommended. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse environmental effect, there would not be a significant effect in this case if mitigation measures described herein are included in the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is recommended. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant adverse environmental effect, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT should be prepared. April 16, 2001 Tod Herman, Associate Planner Date Initial Study - Page 25

118 APPENDIX A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DATA SOURCES A. State Division of Mines and Geology, Mineral Classification Map, 1990 B. State Department of Fish and Game, Migratory Deer Ranges, 1988 C. State Department of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity Data Base Maps, as updated D. State Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, 1990 E. State Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of the Chico Quadrangle, Calif F. State Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Map of California, G. State Dept. of Conservation, Important Farmland Map, as updated H. State Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection, Nevada County Hardwood Rangelands, 1993 I. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Quadrangle Topographic Maps, as updated J. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, ( GV Quad) 12/95 K. U. S. Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Nevada County, 1975 L. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey of the Tahoe National Forest, 1974 M. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Seismotechtronic Study of the Truckee/Lake Tahoe Area, 1986 (Generalized Geology and Major Faults in the Northeastern Sierra Nevada Map) N. U.S. Geological Service, Nevada County Landslide Activity Map, 1970, as found in the Draft Nevada County General Plan, Master Environmental Inventory, December 1991, Figure 8-3 O. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps, 1987 P. Wilson, Norman, Avalanche Hazard Study - Nevada County, 1982 Q. County of Nevada, Nevada County General Plan, 1995 R. County of Nevada, Land Use and Development Code Zoning Ordinance S. Draft Nevada County General Plan, Master Environmental Inventory, December 1991 T. All Final Environmental Impact Reports, certified by the County of Nevada U. Foothill Airport Land Use Commission, Nevada County Air Park Comprehensive Land Use Plan Safety Zones, as updated V. Foothill Airport Land Use Commission, Truckee-Tahoe Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan Safety Zones, as updated W. California Native Plant Society (James Smith and Ken Berg), Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California, 1994 X. Archaeological Survey prepared by Peak & Associates, dated April, Y. Susan Sanders Biological Consulting, Biological Inventory, dated March 11, Z. LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc., Hobart Mills Traffic Analysis, dated July 7, Initial Study - Page 26

119 APPENDIX B INDEX OF AGENCIES NOTE: An * indicates those agencies who provided input. 1. Planning Department * 2. Department of Transportation and Sanitation * 3. Environmental Health Department * 4. Building Inspection Department 5. Nevada County Transportation Commission 6. Sierra Pacific Power Co. 7. Nevada Irrigation District 8. Resource Conservation District 9. Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District * 10. CalTrans * 11. California Department of Forestry * 12. California Department of Fish & Game * 13. Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan Region) * 14. North Central Information Service, Anthropology Department, California State University, Sacramento * 15. Truckee Fire Protection District * 16. Town of Truckee * Initial Study - Page 27

120

121 Nevada LAFCo - Truckee Sanitary District Final Draft Sphere of Influence Plan Update Appendix C: Comments Received Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\3644\ \SOI\ SOI Plan Update.doc

122

123 June 10, 2011 Nevada County LAFCO SR Jones, Executive Officer RE: Truckee Sanitary District Sphere of Influence Plan Update The Northstar Community Services District has the following comments on the Public Review Draft of the Sphere of Influence Plan Update for the Truckee Sanitary District. The sections of the report regarding the spheres of influence of Truckee Sanitary District and NCSD could be misinterpreted. We request it be modified. For nearly twenty years, these two districts have cooperated to provide efficient and economical wastewater service. The report should delete reference to any "conflict" between these agencies, even if the conflict is intended to refer just to sphere of influence lines on a map. In addition, the area of concern in any new areas west of Highway 267 and adjacent the Northstar resort should reflect that NCSD is well suited to provide service in that area and as a result should be eliminated. Sincerely, Mike Staudenmayer General Manager