Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCEQA Attachment 1ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY 1. Project Title: 2019 Electric System Master Plan 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road Truckee, California 96161 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Sanna Schlosser 530-582-3945 4. Project Location: Truckee, California and surrounding area. The Master Plan encompasses the District's existing electric system service area. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road Truckee, California 96161 6. General Plan Description: General plan designations vary throughout the master plan study area. The master plan update is in part based on the current general plan designations of the Town of Truckee. The electric system improvements proposed in the Master Plan are intended to allow the implementation of the general plans within the Town of Truckee. In areas of existing development, improvements are proposed to provide an adequate level of service to existing customers and to accommodate infill development to the extent indicated in the appropriate general plan. For currently undeveloped areas, improvements are proposed to accommodate projected levels of development based on general plan uses and densities. 7. Zoning: Zoning varies throughout the master plan study area and is defined by the appropriate planning agency. 8. Description of Project: The project is the adoption of the 2019 Electric System Master Plan, which is an update of the District's existing Electric System Master Plan that was adopted in December 2014. The updated master plan serves a number of functions. First, the master plan is a comprehensive planning report providing information on existing District electric system facilities and the current level of service provided to the District's customers. Second, the master plan is an outline for the orderly expansion of the District's electric system to accommodate anticipated growth and development of areas served by the District. The master plan documents analysis of the existing electric system to determine if it adequately meets the demands of District customers. Electric system components included in the analysis include substations, protective equipment, and overhead and underground distribution facilities. The master plan identifies current system deficiencies and proposed system improvements needed to provide the defined level of service. Design criteria described in the master plan establish the desired level of service for each of the electric system components and determine the adequacy of the existing system. This level of service is also applied to the design of proposed future projects. The master plan utilizes growth projections of new residential and commercial water services within the master plan study area. These projections are based on and are consistent with the general plans of Town of Truckee for areas within their planning jurisdiction. The master plan identifies electric system improvements which will be needed to accommodate the projected future development. Implementation of the master plan with regard to construction of proposed new facilities to accommodate development would be in response to land use planning conducted through the appropriate planning agency. The site locations of individual projects are defined to the planning level. As such, site specific issues are not discussed in this Initial Study. Environmental issues related to the proposed electric system improvements are discussed in general with potential impacts and levels of significance identified in terms of projects previously undertaken by the District that are similar in scope to the proposed improvements. Adoption of the master plan will not, in and of itself, constitute a decision to construct any of the proposed improvements discussed in the master plan. In the future, when the need to proceed with a given project has been identified, a detailed design will be prepared and an appropriate environmental review will be conducted. No individual proposed project will be constructed without a separate decision by the District's Board of Directors. 9. Other Agencies Whose Approval is Required (and permits needed): No other agencies are required to approve or grant a permit for the adoption of the Master Plan update. Other agencies such as the Town of Truckee, Nevada County, Placer County, Caltrans, and the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board will likely be involved with permitting when the District's moves forward with the construction of a given project. 10. Environmental Setting of the Project: The Truckee Donner Public Utility District's service area is located on the east slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains approximately 100 miles east of Sacramento and 40 miles southwest of Reno, Nevada. The service area ranges in elevation from approximately 5,600 feet to approximately 7,500 feet above sea level. The area is a mix of residential subdivisions, commercial and retail centers, recreational facilities including skiing and golf, a regional airport, and large areas of undeveloped forest and rangeland. The Truckee River flows through the area en route from Lake Tahoe to Pyramid Lake in Nevada. Local tributaries include Cold Creek, Donner Creek, Martis Creek, Prosser Creek and Trout Creek. Local lakes include Donner Lake, Martis Creek Lake and Prosser Creek Reservoir. The area contains numerous cultural resources both prehistoric and historic. Historic resources include overland emigrant trail, the Dutch Flat and Donner Lake Wagon Road, the transcontinental railroad and historic Old Highway 40. The Town of Truckee contains over 160 historic structures. There are also prehistoric archaeological sites associated with Native American inhabitation of the region. The flora and fauna of the Truckee area are typical for mountainous regions of the east slope of the Sierras. APPENDIX G ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM NOTE: The following is a sample form that may be tailored to satisfy individual agencies' needs and project circumstances. It may be used to meet the requirements for an initial study when the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines have been met. Substantial evidence of potential impacts that are not listed on this form must also be considered. The sample questions in this form are intended to encourage thoughtful assessment of impacts, and do not necessarily represent thresholds of significance. 1. Project title: 2019 Electric System Master Plan 2. Lead agency name and address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road, Truckee, CA 96161 3. Contact person and phone number: 4. Project location: Truckee, CA 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road, Truckee, CA 96161 6. General plan designation: 7. Zoning: Varied 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. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Long term, system -wide planning document which will be used for budgeting and planning purposes. Individual projects will go through CEQA process during design, as needed. No specific project are being reviewed for approval with this document. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) The Master Plan includes locations throughout the Town of Truckee. This includes residential, Commercial, industrial, undeveloped, and open space land uses and settings. Most projects would occur adjacent to existing roadways within residential neighborhoods. Page 1 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Approval from other public agencies is not required. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? No, California Native American tribes have not been consulted, and this is not required. NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. Page 2 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," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. []Aesthetics Biological Resources Geology/Soils F—]Hydrology/Water Quality Noise ❑Recreation Utilities / Service Systems DETERMINATION Agriculture / Forestry Resources Cultural Resources Greenhouse Gas Emissions Land Use / Planning Population / Housing nTransportation 11 Wildfire Air Quality Energy ❑Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Tribal Cultural Resources ❑Mandatory Findings of Significance On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a 6NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ►1q L2,0 Signature Date Sum. Sklosser Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 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 would 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. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" 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. 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 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify 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 in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," 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. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Page 4 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ �✓ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings ❑✓ within a state scenic highway? c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced ❑ ❑ ❑ from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ ❑ adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring ✓❑ Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code ✓ Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to ❑ ❑ ❑ non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of ❑ Farmland, to forest land ❑ ❑ non-agricultural use or conversion of to non -forest use? III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ Elquality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment El ❑ ❑ under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? 11 E E Page 5 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, ❑ policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional by the California Department ❑ ❑ ❑ plans, policies, regulations or of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established ❑ ❑ ❑ native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? ❑ ❑ ❑ a VI. ENERGY. Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy F F resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable ❑ El ❑ 21 energy or energy efficiency? VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based ❑ ❑ F on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ Page 6 Potentially Significant Issues Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: Less Than Significant With Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 Page 7 Less Than Significant Potentially Significant With Mitigation Less Than Significant No Issues i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; Impact El Incorporated Impact ❑ Impact ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or El ❑ ❑✓ offsite; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage El ❑ Elsystems Fv or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede flood flows? or redirect d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of due to inundation? El El ❑ pollutants project e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality ❑ ❑ Elcontrol plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑✓ b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the ❑ ❑ ❑ purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the 0 F �✓ state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, �✓ specific plan or other land use plan? XIII. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess in the local or noise ❑ ❑ ❑ of standards established general plan ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels? ❑ El ❑ groundborne c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑✓ airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and ❑ ❑ ❑ businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing ❑ El F R] elsewhere? XV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Page 8 Less Than Significant Potentially Significant With Mitigation Less Than Significant No Issues Impact Fire protection? ❑ Incorporated ❑ Impact ❑ Impact ❑✓ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ XVI. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that El El ❑ substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might El El❑ P have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XVII. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, ❑ ❑ ❑ F subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or ❑ ❑ ❑ incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑✓ the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical ❑ ❑ ❑ resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the ❑ ❑ ❑ criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Page 9 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development duringEl El F 2✓ normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has to the demand in El El El capacity serve project's projected addition to the providers existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise Fv impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and El ❑ ❑ 21 reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XX. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to from the ❑ ❑ ❑ pollutant concentrations a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire ❑ �✓ risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? rlasignificant risks, including d) Expose people or structures toflooding downslo a or downstream floodin or landslides, as a result of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to substantially 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 the ❑ ❑ ❑ plant or animal community, substantially reduce 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? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are in the effects of ❑ ❑ ❑ considerable when viewed connection with past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ✓❑ indirectly? Page 10