Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFeatherstone Tank Well and Pump Station r Sauers Engineering, Inc . Civil & Environmental Engineers Memorandum October 14, 2004 TO: Board of Directors, and Ed Taylor, District Water Operations Manager FROM: Keith Knibb, Consulting Engineer SUBJECT: FEATHERSTONE TANK WELL AND PUMP STATION- CEQA 1. Why this matter is before the Board The District is proposing to construct a new production well and pump station at the site of the Featherstone Tank. Prior starting construction activities, the District is required to complete an environmental review in compliance with CEQA. 2. History The District's "Truckee Water System Master Plan Update," adopted in May, 2004, identified eight new production wells proposed for construction by the year 2025. The proposed Featherstone Tank Well constitutes one of those wells. In 2003, the District conducted a geologic test hole program whereby a number of test holes were drilled around the District to ascertain favorable locations for future production wells. A test hole was drilled at the Featherstone Tank site which showed promise as a high production, high quality water source. 3. New information We have prepared the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study for the Featherstone Tank Well and Pump Station. These documents need to be circulated to responsible and interested agencies and made available for public review. The District also needs to schedule a public hearing to receive comments. Filing the documents with the county clerk and state clearinghouse will trigger a thirty day review period. 4. Recommendation I recommend the Board take the following actions regarding the environmental review for the Featherstone Tank Well and Pump Station: 1. Authorize the filing of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study with the Office of the Nevada County Clerk. 2. Authorize the circulation of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study with responsible and interested agencies and with the State Clearinghouse. 3. Authorize publication of a Notice of Public Review Period and Public Hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration. 4. Schedule a public hearing for the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration at the regular Board Meeting on November 17, 2003. Attachments: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Initial Study NEGATIVE DECLARATION (XX)Proposed ( ) Final NAME OF PROJECT: Featherstone Tank Well and Pump Station LOCATION: Truckee, California Entity or Person Undertaking Project: (XX) Truckee Donner Public Utility District Other ( ) Name: Address: Phone: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project involves the construction of a new production well and pump station at the site of the existing Featherstone Tank near the Old Greenwood development. Finding: It is hereby found that the above named project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. Initial An initial study of this project was undertaken and prepared in accordance with Article V Study: of the District's local environmental guidelines and Section 15063 of the EIR Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act for the purpose of ascertaining whether this project might have a significant effect upon the environment. A copy of such initial study is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Such initial study documents reasons to support the above finding. Mitigation The following mitigation measures have been included in the project to avoid potentially Measures: significant effects: M-1. Temporary BMPs will be incorporated into the project design to be implemented before and during construction. BMPs include preservation of existing vegetation,placement of straw mulch, covering temporary spoils piles to protect from rainfall, and removal of spoils material to permanent locations protected from offsite migration. M-2. Permanent BMPs will include revegetation of exposed soil areas, asphalt pavement on pipeline trenches, pump station access road and parking area, and permanent disposal of surplus excavated material at an acceptable location protected from offsite migration. M-3. Fugitive dust emissions resulting from site clearing and any project improvements shall be minimized at all times utilizing control measures including dust palliative,regularly applied water, graveled or paved haul roads,etc. Access or haul roads adjacent to the project must be treated as necessary to prevent off-site migration and accumulation of dirt,soils,or other materials which can subsequently become entrained in ambient air,either from construction related vehicles or from any vehicle using adjacent affected roads. M-4. When transporting material during site preparation or construction, measures shall be used to prevent materials from spilling or blowing onto street and highways. Earthen materials, if transported, shall be adequately sprayed with water or covered prior to transport onto public roads. Vegetative material shall be tarped as necessary prior to transport. Specific control measures shall be noted on improvement and/or grading plans. Date: By: Peter L. Holzmeister, General Manager Publitc Utility District DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FOR FEATHERSTONE TANK WELL AND PUMP STATION OCTOBER, 2004 Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 11570 Donner Pass Road Truckee, CA 96160-0309 (530) 587-3896 ............................. ... ..........- Truckee Donner Public Utility District ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY (Prepared pursuant to Article V of the Environmental Guidelines of the District) 1. Project Title: Featherstone Tank Well and Pump Station 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 96160-0309 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Peter L. Holzmeister, General Manager (530) 582-3916 4. Project Location: 12701 Fairway Drive (Featherstone Tank Site) Old Greenwood Development,Truckee, Nevada County,CA Nevada County Assessor's Parcel Number 19-720-04 See below: "Featherstone Tank Well, Project Vicinity Map." 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 96160-0309 6. General Plan Designation: 7. Zoning: 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation,) Project Purpose The project will provide an additional source of supply for the District's water system. The proposed project involves the construction, operation, and maintenance of a new production well and pump station. Because of the well's location in the water system, it will directly or indirectly benefit the entire system. The project will convey water from the proposed Featherstone Well into the existing distribution system in the Old Greenwood development which inter-ties with the District's town distribution system. Background The project will consist of the drilling, construction,development, and test pumping of a new production well followed by the construction of a new well pump station, chlorination facilities, pipeline, 1 --- underground electrical facilities, and pavement on the site of the existing Featherstone Tank located on Fairway Drive in the Old Greenwood development. The 0.47 acre project site is currently developed as a tank site and includes an existing 360,000 gallon water storage tank. The District is proposing to acquire an easement covering the tank site property to facilitate the well and pump station project. During the planning and construction of Old Greenwood, the proposed project site has been developed as a site for water system facilities. Along with the tank, the site includes pipelines tied into the distribution system, electrical facilities, and communication facilities. The site has been graded and an access road exists from the well site to Fairway Drive. The District's "Truckee Water System Master Plan Update,"adopted in May, 2004, identified eight new production wells proposed for construction by the year 2025. The proposed Featherstone Tank Well constitutes one of those wells. In 2003, the District conducted a geologic test hole program whereby a number of test holes were drilled around the District to ascertain favorable locations for future production wells. A test hole was drilled at the Featherstone Tank site which showed promise as a high production, high quality water source. Project Characteristics The new production well will involve the construction of a new well and casing followed by the construction of a well pump station. Well construction will consist of drilling a well borehole 1,000 to 1,200 feet below ground surface and installing a steel casing the length of the borehole. The well will be packed with gravel outside of the casing and a cement sanitary seal will be poured in the upper 100 to 200 feet of the borehole to isolate upper groundwater zones from the production well. Well construction will also include well development and pump testing. Water extracted from the well during development and testing will be discharged to the surface by spray irrigation through a series of sprinklers near the well site. There will be an estimated 14,400,000 gallons of water discharged during development and testing, ,f ,:r+ r Featherstone Tank and Proposed Well/Pump Station Site 2 Construction of the pump station will include an approximately 500 square foot building for the well pump station and chlorination facilities. The existing aggregate base driveway and portion of the graded pad will be a paved totaling approximately 5,500 square feet. Construction of underground utilities will be minimal since pipelines and conduits are already constructed at the site in anticipation of a pump station being constructed next to the tank. The project is expected to include a total of approximately 0.05 acres of ground disturbance. Pump station equipment will 'include a well pump and motor, control valves, pipe and fittings, electrical controls, instrumentation,telemetry equipment, and water meter. The chlorination equipment will include storage facilities for liquid chlorine solution, transfer and metering pumps, analytical equipment, and safety equipment_ The building will be constructed of rough textured masonry block with a steel or asphalt composition shingle roof. The building will include floor drains to allow wash-down of the facilities. Floor drains will discharge to a subsurface infiltration trench. Runoff from new impervious surfaces will be channeled to the infiltration trench as well. The infiltration trench will be sized to accommodate runoff from a 1-hour,20-year storm as defined by the Lahontan Regional Board. Figure 1 Featherstone Tank Well PROJECT LOCATION MAP f lE 1 4 Iq PROJECT LOCATION=.- a � > ,F` y �....._+..� h ( K fi=` _ vu'n.�re.l.a—'..v-d• r y ?" ` ', f } 4 I r riS7fi+REEtt4D ` t ,`' fy9 F y` I x � d�Pf-,-,d y �f `✓- `'�Y. � � � " ���zz' � fit ' v OlYMN'iC$LYQ, a 1 o 1200e Site Address Unknown,i9 3 9. Other agencies whose approval is required(and permits needed): State of California, Department of Health Services, Office of Drinking Water(Well Permit) California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region (Temporary Land Application Permit) 10. Environmental Setting of the Project: The project is located in the Old Greenwood planned development east of downtown Truckee. Old Greenwood is a mixed use development including residential, lodging, and recreational facilities. Old Greenwood includes a 0.47 acre parcel with a graded pad for a water storage tank and pump station. A welded steel water storage tank was constructed on the site in 2000. Tank construction also included pipelines and underground electrical and communication conduits and an access road from Fairway Drive to the tank/pump station site. The well and pump station will be constructed on the prepared pad adjacent to the existing tank. Existing water storage tank and graded well/pump View of tank, well/pump station site, and access station pad road Tank/pump station access road Electrical and communications equipment adjacent to access road 4 ............. ................ . ..... ............ ._. . ._. _ Following construction of the well, the well will be developed and pump tested. This will require well water to be discharged to the surface over a four to five day period. A series of irrigation sprinklers will be temporarily placed east of the well site to allow spray irrigation disposal of the well water. The disposal area is covered by grasses,various shrubs, and fir trees. Areas downslope of the temporary disposal area are generally basin sagebrush. Temporary well water disposal area. Sprinklers will View ease of project site showing area downslope of be placed along bench and spray downslope to temporary well water disposal area. disposal area The areas surrounding the project site include undeveloped open space as well as developed areas such as a golf course, lodge and recreational facilities, and residences. The Old Greenwood golf course, a portion of which is located directly across Fairway Drive from the project site access road, is currently under construction. Old Greenwood club house and lodge facilities are located nearby to the west, and a construction staging area is adjacent to the project parcel to the south. y S P u6 zr( . y C a. Ty ry View west from the project site showing Old View southwest from the project site showing the Greenwood golf course through trees Old Greenwood club house and lodge 5 _. The Featherstone Tank is located in the Town of Truckee,east of the downtown area,between Interstate 80 and the Truckee River. Elevation of the project site is approximately 5,960 feet above sea level. According to the Information Center for the Environment, U.C. Davis, the project area is located in an Urban Agricultural Complex vegetation classification including Eastside Ponderosa Pine Forest and Great Basin Mixed Shrub. Other vegetation classifications surrounding the project area include Basin Sagebrush,Jeffrey Pine, and Mixed Conifer-Fir. Because the construction of the well and pump station will take place on the existing graded pad,there will be no disturbance to vegetation, wildlife habitat, streams, riparian zones, or wetland features. The existing water storage tank and site of the proposed pump station are generally screened from view by trees which surround the site on three sides and a hill one side. The new pump station will be approximately half the height of the tank so should be less visible to the surrounding area. 4 View of the water storage tank from Fairway Drive View of the project site from the direction of the Old Greenwood lodge and club house area. Tank is partially visible through trees in the center of the photo. 6 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected. The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact'or"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Geophysical ❑ Energy and Mineral Resources ❑ Aesthetics Water ❑ Hazards ❑ Cultural Resources Air Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination. (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached sheets have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment,but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a"potentially significant impact'or"potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ Signature Date Peter L. Holzmeister General Manager Truckee Donner Public Utility District Printed Name For 7 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact"answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g.the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g.the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved,including off-site as well as on-site,cumulative as well as project-level,indirect as well as direct,and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact"is appropriate if an effect is significant or potentially significant,or if the lead agency lacks information to make a finding of insignificance. If there are one or more"Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made,EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated"applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from"Potentially Significant Impact"to a"Less than Significant Impact". The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses", may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15%3(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans,zoning ordinances). See the sample question below. A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones. Sample Question: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and Supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) ❑ ❑ ❑ (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (source#(s):) ❑ ❑ ❑ CR to Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? () ❑ ❑ ❑ CR c) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? (1) ❑ ❑ ❑ 8 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact H. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? () ❑ ❑ ❑ Qd b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ER c) Displace existing housing,especially affordable housing? () ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 III. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Seismicity: fault rupture? () ❑ ❑ ❑ Is b) Seismicity: ground shaking or liquefaction? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 c) Seismicity: seiche or tsunami? O ❑ ❑ ❑ cm d) Landslides or mudslides? () ❑ ❑ ❑ N e) Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading or fill? O ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Subsidence of the land? O ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Expansive soils? () ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Unique geologic or physical features?O ❑ ❑ ❑ N IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? () ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g.temperature,dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? () ❑ ® ❑ ❑ d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements? () ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions or withdrawals,or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?() ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?() ❑ ❑ a (a h) Impacts to groundwater quality? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ca V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? O ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? O ❑ ❑ ❑ cm 9 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) Alter air movement,moisture,or temperature,or cause any change in climate? () ❑ ❑ ❑ C9 d) Create objectionable odors? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? O ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.farm equipment)?() ❑ ❑ ❑ CR c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? () ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? O ❑ ❑ ❑ CR e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? O ❑ ❑ ❑ CR f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation(e.g.bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? O ❑ ❑ ❑ C9 g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? O ❑ ❑ ❑ VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to. a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitat (including but not limited to plants,fish,insects, animals,and birds)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ CR b) Locally designated species(e.g. heritage trees)? O ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Locally designated natural communities(e.g. oak forest,costal habitat,etc.)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ CS d) Wetland habitat(e.g.marsh,riparian and vernal pool)? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? O ❑ ❑ ❑ VIIL ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? O ❑ ❑ ❑ CR b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? () ❑ ❑ ❑ N IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances(including,but not limited to: oil, pesticides,chemicals or radiation)? () ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 10 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health ❑ ❑ ❑ hazard? () d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential ❑ ❑ ❑ health hazards? () e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass,or trees? () ❑ ❑ ❑ CR X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? O ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? O ❑ ❑ ❑ XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? () ❑ ❑ ❑ Q9 b) Police protection'? O ❑ ❑ ❑ 13 c) Schools? () ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 d) Maintenance of public facilities,including roads? O ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Other governmental services? () ❑ ❑ ❑ C9 XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Communications systems? () ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? () ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Sewer or septic tanks?() ❑ ❑ ❑ CR e) Storm water drainage?() ❑ ❑ ❑ N f) Solid waste disposal?() ❑ ❑ ❑ ca XIII.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?O ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?O ❑ ❑ ❑ ER c) Create light or glare?() ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources?() ❑ ❑ ❑ to Disturb archaeological resources? () ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Affect historical resources? () ❑ ❑ ❑ cm d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic culture values?O ❑ ❑ ❑ ca I1 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant Issues(and supporting Information,Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?() ❑ ❑ ❑ 3 XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities?() ❑ ❑ ❑ CR b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?O ❑ ❑ ❑ CR XVI.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 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 the major periods of California history or prehistory? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3 to Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term,to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? ❑ ❑ ❑ ca c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a.project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects.) ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3 XVII.EARLIER ANALYSIS. Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. 12 c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are"potentially significant" or"potentially significant unless mitigated", describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. No earlier analysis were used in preparation of this Initial Study. EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST ANSWERS A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. I. LAND USE AND PLANNING This project involves the construction of water system facilities to provide water service to existing and proposed development within the Town of Truckee. The Town of Truckee adopted a General Plan and associated environmental documents in 1996 which included the areas to be served by the proposed Featherstone Tank well and pump station. The General Plan sets forth the land use and planning policies for the town. Provision of water supply facilities allows the implementation of the General Plan. The project will result in the construction of a new well, pump stations, and underground utilities. The new facilities will be an acceptable land use based on the land use and zoning designation of the project parcels. The operation and maintenance of the water system by the District is not expected to have any affect on land use and planning issues. Mitigation Measures: None required II. POPULATION AND HOUSING The project as proposed will accommodate the continued development of the District's water system service area consistent with the population and housing elements of the Town's general plan. The project does have the potential to serve a population greater than the current population in accordance with the general plan. The project will not extend service into areas not already served by the system. Although the project will accommodate growth, it is not considered to either directly or indirectly induce growth. Water service would be made available to undeveloped areas only after complying with all other planning, land use, and environmental requirements imposed by the appropriate jurisdictional agencies. Mitigation Measures: None required III. GEOPHYSICAL The project will require a modest amount of grading to prepare the pump station building pad and parking area. Pipeline and underground electrical construction will involve excavation and backfill of trenches. As is standard with all District construction projects of this type, grading and excavations will include surface restoration either with paving or other permanent erosion control measures. This is considered a less than significant impact. Typical soils in the area of the project site consist of a mixture of sands, gravels, volcanics,and decomposed organic topsoil with underlying volcanic rock such as basalt. These soils are not considered potentially expansive. There are no unique physical or geologic features associated with the project site. Mitigation Measures: None required 13 IV. WATER There will be a slight increase in the amount of impervious surface as a result of this project including the pump station building and paved area. This is expected to be approximately Ll 16 square feet. Drainage will flow from the impervious areas to a detention basin. The detention basin will be sized to accommodate runoff from a 1-hour, 20-year storm as defined by the Lahontan Regional Board. This is considered a less than significant impact. During well development and pump testing of the proposed well, water from the well will be discharged via spray irrigation to an vegetated area near the well site. Water will be conveyed from the well through a pipeline to a number of sprinkler heads where it will be applied to the surface and allowed to percolate back into the ground. This discharge will be under a Temporary Land Application Permit administered by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board- Lahontan Region. The permit allows for land application discharges including pump/well testing. The discharge must be monitored to assure it does not reach any surface waters. The District has contracted for well development and pump testing monitoring services for this project to assure compliance with permit conditions. This is considered a less than significant impact. The project includes a new production water well and will consequently involve the withdrawal of groundwater. The District has established a groundwater monitoring program through adoption of its Groundwater Management Plan. The Groundwater Management Plan provides estimates of safe aquifer yield for the Martis Valley Aquifer. This is the amount of groundwater which can be withdrawn without adversely affecting the aquifer when compared to the amount of estimated aquifer recharge. The proposed Prosser Village Well is consistent with the Groundwater Management Plan. Appendix B includes a report by District's Consulting Hydrogeologist indicating there should be no significant impact from the operation of the new well. There may be some alteration in the direction of flow of groundwater near the well as groundwater is taken into the well by pumping. This is not considered a significant impact. Groundwater quality will be protected by the installation of a sanitary seal in accordance with the State Department of Health Service requirements for construction of public water supply wells. The sanitary seal will be constructed to a depth of 200 feet below ground surface to assure there will be no influence from surface water. During construction, there is a potential for excavated material to migrate offsite in the event of a rain storm event. Best management practices (BMPs) will be incorporated into the project to protect water quality during and after construction. This is considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigated. Mitigation Measures: M-1. Temporary BMPs will be incorporated into the project design to be implemented before and during construction. BMPs include preservation of existing vegetation, placement of straw mulch,covering temporary spoils piles to protect from rainfall, and removal of spoils material to permanent locations protected from offsite migration. M-2. Permanent BMPs will include revegetation of exposed soil areas, asphalt pavement on pipeline trenches, pump station access road and parking area, and permanent disposal of surplus excavated material at an acceptable location protected from offsite migration. V. AIR QUALITY There will be no air emissions from the well or pump station. There may be incidental emissions during construction from contractor's operations including vehicles and mechanical equipment. 14 Construction activities have the potential to generate PM10 emissions through the release of fugitive dust associated with grading and excavation activities. The following mitigation measures are added to the project to reduce potential impacts to less than significant: Mitigation Measures: M-3. Fugitive dust emissions resulting from site clearing and any project improvements shall be minimized at all times utilizing control measures including dust palliative,regularly applied water, graveled or paved haul roads, etc. Access or haul roads adjacent to the project must be treated as necessary to prevent off-site migration and accumulation of dirt, soils, or other materials which can subsequently become entrained in ambient air, either from construction related vehicles or from any vehicle using adjacent affected roads. M-4. When transporting material during site preparation or construction, measures shall be used to prevent materials from spilling or blowing onto street and highways. Earthen materials, if transported, shall be adequately sprayed with water or covered prior to transport onto public roads. Vegetative material shall be tarped as necessary prior to transport. Specific control measures shall be noted on improvement and/or grading plans. VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION During construction there will be an increase in vehicle trips to the project site associated with the contractor's activities. This is considered a less than significant impact. During operation of the well pump station,there will be a slight increase in traffic as operations personnel conduct routine maintenance at the facility. Operator will typically visit the pump station once a day. This is considered a less than significant impact. The project will not have any affect on emergency access, access to nearby uses, or alternative transportation. The project will include parking for District vehicles at the pump station site. Mitigation Measures: None required VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Construction of the well and pump station will take place over a relatively small area, approximately 2,000 square feet. The project site has already been graded and graveled and there will be no vegetation disturbance. The project site is not considered habitat for threatened or endangered species of plants or animals. The site contains no locally designated species or natural communities. The site is in an upland area containing no wetlands. The project will have no impact on wildlife dispersal or migration. Mitigation Measures: None required VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES The pump stations will use electrical energy. In selecting well pump motors, the District routinely specifies the use of high efficiency motors to avoid using electricity in a wasteful manner. The use of electric energy at District pump stations is considered modest, typical of a local commercial/industrial operation. The local electric service provider, the District, has the capacity to provide the additional electrical energy needed for this project. This is considered less than significant. Energy use for the project during construction will be limited to fuel used by contractor's equipment including excavators, trucks,personnel vehicles, generators, welding machines, and drilling and pumping equipment. This is considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None required 15 IX. HAZARDS During construction there is a risk of accidental release of hazardous substances such as fuel or oil from spillage. District construction contracts require the contractor to be prepared for such accidents and provide clean-up which in this case would likely be limited to the project site. This is considered a less than significant impact. The production well pump station will include chlorination facilities utilizing a liquid chlorine solution. This may be considered an environmental or personnel safety hazard if accidentally released. As is routine for this type of facility, the District will provide safety equipment and training in conformance with County hazardous material requirements. This will include secondary containment for storage of the solution and personnel safety equipment such as sink and eye wash facilities. This is considered a less than significant impact. The project will have no impact on emergency responses. Mitigation Measures: None required X. NOISE During construction of the well, there will be increased noise levels associated with the operation of the drilling rig and equipment. Because of the distance to any sensitive receptors, these noise levels are considered a less than significant impact. During pump station construction,there will be an increase in noise levels associated with contractor operations including operation of mechanical equipment such as a backhoe, generator, and compressor. This is considered a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: None required XI. PUBLIC SERVICES The project will not result in the need for new or altered government services. The project is based on and consistent with the general plan of the Town of Truckee including projections for the need for public services. Mitigation Measures: None required XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The project will result in improvements to the District's water system by increasing the capacity and reliability of the system. Following construction,the project will not generate any appreciable amount of solid waste. Solid waste generated during construction will be disposed of by the contractor at the local refuse transfer station. Mitigation Measures: None required XIII. AESTHETICS The pump station site may be visible from Fairway Drive, however because of the surrounding trees, the view would be filtered. Building materials and colors will be chosen to complement the stations's surroundings. Materials will include a rough-hewn split face masonry block building with metal or asphalt shingle roof. Because of the relatively small size of the buildings and the choice of materials, this is considered a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: None required 16 XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES An archeological review was conducted for the project site in connection with the geologic test hole project. The report,titled "Donner Lake Water System Rehabilitation Phase 2/Old Greenwood Test Wells, Heritage Resource Inventory, Phase L" by Susan Lindstrom, is available for review at the District office. The report concludes that there are no potential impacts to heritage resources associated with the proposed project. Mitigation Measures: None required XV. RECREATION The project is based on and consistent with the general plan of the Town of Truckee including projections for needed recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures: None required XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project will take place on a relatively small site which has been developed as a water storage tank and pump station site and will not affect plant or animal species or habitat or eliminate prehistoric or historic resources. The project achieves both short term and long term environmental goals by increasing water supply reliability, avoiding potential shortages, and allowing the implementation of adopted land use and environmental plans. Public water supply is one of many services needed to allow the continued orderly growth and development of the Truckee area. Issues related to growth and development including intensity, density, location,and timing, among others, are the responsibility of the appropriate planning agency, in this case the Town of Truckee. Similarly any impacts associated with the growth and development of the Truckee area are also the responsibility of the appropriate agencies and are addressed in the various land use and environmental plans adopted by those agencies. The provision of a public water supply is not considered a significant contribution towards impacts which may be associated with the continued growth and development of the Truckee area as defined by the appropriate planning agency. Implementation of this project will allow the District to continue to provide an adequate public water supply. Provisions of a safe and reliable water supply is considered to have a beneficial effect on human beings. REPORT PREPARATION This Initial Study was prepared under contract with the Truckee Donner Public Utility District by Sauers Engineering, Inc. Principal author was Keith Knibb. Prepared by: Date: October 15 2004 17 REFERENCES These references are available for review at the Truckee Donner Public Utility District office, 11570 Donner Pass Road,Truckee,California. 1. USGS Martis Peak Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series. 2. Truckee Water System Water Master Plan Update, Truckee Donner Public Utility District, May 2003 3. Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study,Truckee Water System Water Master Plan Update,Truckee Donner Public Utility District, May 2003 4. Donner Lake Water System Rehabilitation Phase 2/Old Greenwood Test Wells, Heritage Resource Inventory,Phase 1, Susan Lindstrom, Ph.D.,July 2003 18 APPENDIX A Prosser Village Production Well-site Evaluation Prepared by Aqua Hydrogeologic Consulting, LLC July, 2003 19 r z TANK SITE FINDINGS t • A nominal 6-inch diameter borehole was drilled to a total depth of 930 feet below ground surface. Geologic samples and water quality samples were collected to total depth. A geophysical survey was completed to a depth of 350 feet. • During the drilling of the borehole from 720 feet to total depth of 930 feet, zones of coarse rounded gravels were encountered with very little clay. Drilling could not proceed below 930 feet because the formation material was filling the f borehole as fast as the material was being air-lifted out. Water production from the bottom of the borehole was measured as 213 gpm. • After the geophysical survey was completed to 350 feet, the borehole was abandoned per State of California regulations TANK SITE RECOMMENDATIONS At this location, it is anticipated that a production well constructed to a depth of 1,000 to 1,200 feet will be capable of producing between 1,000 and 2,000 gpm. Because the exploration borehole was only drilled to a depth of 930 feet, the production rating of this well may be conservative. Final production of the well may exceed 2,000 gpm. Based on results of the water samples collected during the exploration drilling, it is anticipated that the production well water pumped will meet State of California drinking water standards for iron, manganese, and arsenic. FIELD ACTIVITY AT TANK SITE This section presents results of the drilling, geology, and water chemistry results at the Tank site. The following details the field activity at this site. 6_1 Drillin Drilling commenced on September 25, 2003 at 5:09 p.m. with the drilling and installation of an 8-inch diameter blank steel surface conductor casing to a depth of 30 feet. A nominal 6-inch diameter borehole was drilled to a total depth of 930 feet using the air- reverse dual tube drilling method. At a depth of 930 feet the downhole drilling conditions prevented proceeding with completion of the borehole to the projected depth of 1,200 feet. Total time spent drilling the borehole was 48 hours and 30 minutes. Drilling of the borehole was completed on September 27, 2003 at 5:39 p.m. After the borehole was drilled, a geophysical survey was completed to a depth 350 feet. Due to downhole conditions, the geophysical survey was not able to be completed below 350 feet. Due to computer hardware problems experienced by the geophysical survey company a copy of the geophysical survey is not available at this time. After the geophysical survey was completed, the borehole was abandoned as per State of California regulations. During drilling air-lift results form the bottom of the borehole produced 213 gpm. A static water level of 238 feet(5,718 feet elevation) below land surface was measured prior to abandonment. 6_2 Geoloev Geologic samples were collected at 10-foot intervals while advancing the borehole to total depth. These samples were logged by AquA personnel. In summary, alluvial material was encountered to a depth of 40 feet. Below 40 feet and to a depth of 720 feet basalt of the Lousetown Formation was encountered. This basalt appeared to be fractured and capable of producing ground water. Below 720 feet to total depth of 930 feet, alluvial material containing coarse rounded gravel was encountered. This 210 foot alluvial interval contained very little fine grained material such as clay. Coarse round gravel was the predominate material encountered. A geologic log of borehole is included in Appendix A 663 Water Quality results Water quality samples were collected at 40-foot intervals starting at 280 feet and continuing to a depth of 920 feet. The water samples were submitted to Sierra Environmental Monitoring, Reno, Nevada for analysis of arsenic, iron, and manganese. Results of testing and analysis indicate that arsenic meets the proposed drinking water standard of 10 ppb in all samples except at 780 feet where the level was measured to be 13 ppb. Water analysis indicates the water meets drinking water standards for iron and manganese, except for the area between 380 and 500 feet , where the water exceeds the manganese standard. A bar graph showing the water sample results is included on the following page as figure 4. Table 3 lists the actual laboratory data. Laboratory analysis reports are included in Appendix B. 5 Table 3. Water Chemistry Results for Tank Site Arsenic Iron Man anese Sam le De th Results Standard Results Standard Results Standard (m /L) (m /L) (m /L) (m 1L) (m /L) (m /L) 280 <0.005 0.01 0.36 0.3 0.055 0.05 320 0.601 0.01 0.11 0.3 0.05 0.05 340 <0.005 0.01 0.2 0.3 0.047 0.05 380 <0.005 0.01 0.11 0.3 0.09 0.05 420 <0.005 0.01 0.1 0.3 0.094 0.05 460 <0.005 0.01 0.12 0.3 0.067 0.05 500 <0.005 0.01 0.13 0.3 0.052 0.05 540 <0.005 0.01 0.11 0.3 0.036 0.05 590 0.001 0.01 0.08 0.3 0.029 0.05 620 0.001 0.01 0.09 0.3 0.022 0.05 660 O.00I 0.01 0.13 0.3 0.029 0.05 700 6005 0.01 0.11 0.3 0.025 0.05 740 0.001 0.01 <0.05 0.3 0.017 0.05 780 0.013 0.01 <0.05 0.3 0.033 0.05 820 0.007 0.01 <0.05 0.3 0.028 0.05 860 0.006 0.01 0.06 0.3 0.047 0.05 900 0.007 0.01 0.14 0.3 0.045 0.05 920 0.004 0.01 0.09 0.3 0.041 0.05 red indicates values exceeds drinking water standards ! .4 Summary and Potential Based on drilling and water quality results, a production well constructed at this location should be drilled to an approximate depth of 1,000 to 1,200 feet. It is anticipated that the yield of a production well completed to the proposed depth would be capable of yielding approximately 2,000 gpm. Final production of the well may exceed 2,000 gpm dependent upon the geologic material encountered below the exploration depth reached of 930 feet. Based on results of the water samples collected during the exploration drilling program, it is anticipated that the production well water would meet State of California drinking water standards for iron, manganese, and arsenic. k