Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDonner Tract Water System CEQA Review RECD JUN � � 2 Sauers Engineering, c. Civil & Environmental Engineers Memorandum June 12, 2002 TO: Board of Directors, and Ed Taylor, Water Utility Manager FROM: Keith Knibb, Consulting Engineer SUBJECT: DONNER TRACT WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION - CEQA REVIEW We have completed the proposed Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study for the Donner Tract Water System Extension. These documents need to be circulated to the Nevada County Clerk, State Clearinghouse, 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. RECOMMENDATION I recommend the Board take the following actions regarding the environmental review for the Donner Tract Water System Extension: 1. Authorize the filing of the proposed Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study with the Office of the Nevada County Clerk. 2. Authorize the circulation of the proposed 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 Negative Declaration at the regular Board Meeting on July 17, 2002. 440 Lower Grass Valley Road, Suite A, Nevada City, CA 95959 (530)265-8021 Fax (530)265-6834 NEGATIVE DECLARATION NAME OF PROJECT: Donner Tract Water System Extension LOCATION: Truckee, California ( X ) Proposed Entity or Person Undertaking Project: { } Final (XX) Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 95959 Other{ ) Name: Address: Phone: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Extension of District's existing water system, including distribution pipelines, services, and fire hydrants, into the Donner Tract area to provide water service to approximately 43 lots. 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: MI. Construction shall be restricted Monday through Friday, 7:00 am - 6:00 pm and Saturdays from 10:00 am- 5:00 pm. Construction plans shall include reference to these restricted hours of construction. M2. If artifacts,paleontological or cultural, or unusual amounts of stone,bone, shell,or artifacts related to the early settlement of the Truckee area are uncovered during construction activity,work shall be halted and a qualified archeologist shall be consulted for an on-site review. Mitigation measures, as recommended by the archeologist in accordance with Appendix K of the CEQA. Guidelines, shall be implemented prior to recommencement of construction activity. If any bone appears to be human, California law mandates that the Nevada County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission be contacted. Date: By Peter L. Holzmeister, General Manager Truckee Donner Public Utility District ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY (Prepared pursuant to Article V of the Environmental Guidelines of the District) 1. Project Title: Donner Tract Water System Extension 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: Donner Tract is a small residential area located between the north shore of Donner Lake and Interstate 80 in the southwest corner of the Town of Truckee. (See Locator Map,Exhibit A) 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 96160-0309 6. General Plan Designation: Residential 7. Zoning: Medium Density Residential(MDR) 1-2 du/acre S. 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 proposed project involves the extension of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District's water system to serve residences in Donner Tract. The Donner Tract area has been part of the District's Donner Lake Assessment District No. 00-1 since 2001; however,the residences continue to be served by two separate water systems. As a result of this project,water services previously provided by the Donner Tract Improvement Association (DTIA)will be replaced by services to be provided by the Truckee Donner Public Utility District(TDPUD). The extension of the District's water system to this area will involve constructing new water distribution pipelines and water service laterals and installing new fire hydrants so that the water service extension conforms to District Standards. The purpose of the project is to improve upon the current level of service. 1 -7 Background Donner Tract is a small residential area bordering Donner Lake Road on the north shore of Donner Lake. (See Exhibit B)The area has 43 lots suitable for development,of which,28 lots are currently occupied by permanent and seasonal residences. The Donner Tract Improvement Association owns two discrete water systems which serve residents on the east and west sides of the area. The Association has no water treatment facilities or operations and maintenance personnel. There are also no functioning fire hydrants. On the west side, above Tanager Lane are two springs that supply water to a 10,000 gallon redwood tank. Although there are two springs, one spring is a redundant water source that is used only during times of water shortage. The primary spring flows to the tank by gravity and then overflows to a natural drainage Swale which passes beside the tank. The redundant spring has a small dedicated pump that is activated on an as-needed basis. The two homeowners located below the tank indicate that they very rarely need to operate this pump. A total of nine water services are connected to this system. (See Exhibit C and Exhibit F) No water treatment occurs prior to distribution. On the east side of Donner Tract, at the end of Oriole Lane is a redwood tank that supplies water to 16 services. Water is collected in a spring box above the tank and then flows by gravity to the tank and onward to the residences. As stated, no water treatment occurs. Residents report that during most of the year the tank is overflowing and discharging spring water to a natural drainage swale located just below the tank. (Refer to Exibit E and Exhibit F) According the Bob Emerson, a Donner Tract resident, there are three or four residences that do not rely on the Donner Tract Water System for their water service. A private spring located adjacent to Robin Lane has been developed and the system includes its own spring box and pump house. It is not known at this time if the water extension project will include these homeowners;however,they are within the TDPUD assessment district and will benefit from the fire protection that will be offered by TDPUD after the water service extension. The District has indicated that they do not plan on retaining any of Donner Tract's existing infrastructure. The Donner Tract Water System will continue to be property of the Donner Lrke Improvement Association and may or may not continue to function depending upon the wishes of the residents in that area. Consequently,the issues surrounding the abandonment of tanks,changes in drainage paths and potential impacts to wetland areas will be addressed if and when the Donner Lake Improvement Association decides to abandon their existing system. The District is simply fulfilling the request of Donner Tract residents to extend its water system to the area in order to provide safe,reliable potable water service and additional fire protection. The current level of fire protection and water treatment are inadequate. In 2001, water samples obtained from the distribution system tested positive for coliform bacteria. Consequently, the Nevada County Environmental Health Department issued a boil water notice and a letter of compliance,identifying four options. The four options cited in the letter dated November 19, 2001 are the following: 1. Truckee Donner PUD must provide a"will serve" letter indicating they will provide water to DTIA by summer 2002; 2. Retain a qualified engineer to evaluate the sources for redevelopment and/or replacing the storage tanks. If you decide to continue using the sources,obtain monthly water samples of the spring sources in accordance with my letter of October 30, 2001 throughout the winter months; 3. Develop another water source; 2 4. Provide water treatment plant plans by a qualified sanitary engineer to comply with the Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule for flocculation, coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection of both water sources plus tank replacements. As a result of this letter,the Donner Tract Improvement Association has opted to pursue potable water service from Truckee Donner Public Utility District and the District is prepared to comply with DTIA's request. Project Characteristics The Truckee Donner Public Utility District is not purchasing the Donner Tract Water System and will not assume ownership of any of the existing infrastructure. Consequently, abandonment of existing tanks and springs is not part of the proposed project and will not be addressed in this study. In the event that the springs are abandoned, a thorough study should be conducted to identify probable changes in drainage paths and the potential effects to wetland areas. New pipeline construction will occur within existing roads and rights-of-way. Very little surface restoration will be required given that the only paved portions of roadway correspond to private driveways. Pipeline construction will be typical of recent District projects involving the installation of distribution mains, service laterals, water services, fire hydrant assemblies, and valves. Materials and construction shall be in accordance with current District standards. Alternatives to the Proposed Project No project-If the District decided not to pursue the proposed project,the Donner Tract system would continue to be operated by the Donner Tract Improvement Association. The"No Project" alternative does not offer any advantages over the proposed project in terms of improving potable water quality and fire protection to the Donner Tract Water System customers. Therefore,the proposed project, District operation and maintenance of the Donner,Tract Water System, is considered the preferred alternative. 9. Other agencies whose approval is required: State of California, Department of Health Services, Office of Drinking Water California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Town of Truckee 10. Environmental Setting of the Project: The project site is situated on approximately 25 acres located on the north side of Donner Lake (see Exhibit B), between Donner Lake Road and Interstate 80. Donner Lake is situated on the east slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains at the base of Donner Summit. Elevations within the site range from 6,000 to 6,200 feet. The area is heavily treed with various species of native pines and also contains several seasonal drainages,all of which discharge into Donner Lake. 11. Discussion of Water Source: The proposed project involves utilizing a different water source. Water previously supplied by local springs will be substituted by water to be supplied by the District's existing water sources. The District's primary water source in the area is Donner Lake. The Truckee Donner Public Utility District constructed a new lake intake structure in 2001 that is capable of producing up t `, _00,gallons per minute of water. There will be no cumulative affect to Donner Lake because the water that will �withdrawn from the lake will be replaced by spring water flowing into the lake. 3 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 M Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality M 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 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I) 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 15063(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):() b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?O c) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? Q 5 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g.through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Displace existing housing,especially affordable housing? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ III. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving. a) Seismicity: fault rupture? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Seismicity: ground shaking or liquefaction? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Seismicity: seiche or tsunami? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Landslides or mudslides? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading or fill? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I) Subsidence of the land? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Expansive soils? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Unique geologic or physical features?O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? () ❑ ❑ ❑ 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?() ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Impacts to groundwater quality? O ❑ ❑ ❑ V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 6 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? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Create objectionable odors? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Q ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g. farm equipment)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? () ❑ ❑ ❑ d)- Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? U ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [} ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Rail,waterbome or air traffic impacts? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ 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)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Locally designated species(e.g.heritage trees)? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Locally designated natural communities(e.g.oak forest,costal habitat, etc.)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Wetland habitat(e.g.marsh,riparian and veinal pool)? () ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? O ❑ ❑ ❑ VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? () ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? Q ❑ ❑ ❑ 7 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? O ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? () ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass,or trees? O ® ® ❑ 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? O b) Police protection? O ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Schools? O ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? O ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Other governmental services? O ❑ ❑ ❑ XH. 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?O ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Communications systems? O ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? O d) Sewer or septic tanks?0 ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Storm water drainage?() ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Solid waste disposal?O ❑ ❑ ❑ XIII.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?O ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?O ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Create light or glare?O ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources?O ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Disturb archaeological resources? O ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Affect historical resources? O ❑ ❑ ❑ El d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic culture values?O ❑ ❑ ❑ 8 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues(and supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?() ❑ ❑ ❑ XV. RECREATION. Wouldtheproposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities?() ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?() ❑ ❑ ❑ XVL 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term,to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? ❑ ❑ ❑ 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.) ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? ❑ ❑ ❑ XVIL 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.) No earlier analyses were used in the preparation of this Initial Study. 9 b) Impacts adequately addressed. (Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document.) None 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.) None 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. L LAND USE AND PLANNING a,b- The extension of an existing water system and the corresponding operations and maintenance by the District is not expected to have any affect on land use and planning issues. The project will not extend water service to any areas which do not already have water service. c- There are no notable agricultural resources within the project area. II. POPULATION AND HOUSING a- The implementation of the project will impact an area of only 25 acres and will be designed to provide water service to approximately 43 customers. The small scale of this project will not exceed any official regional or local population projections. The project will not extend water service to any areas that do not already have water service. b- The project is extending an existing service in an already developed area. The extension is not considered a substantial contributor to growth. c- New pipeline construction will occur within existing roads and rights-of-way. III. GEOPHYSICAL a,b, c, d,- Implementation of the project will not involve any of the listed geophysical impacts. f, g, h e- Construction of the project may involve changes in topography from excavations. The design and construction of all District projects routinely include soil stabilization and erosion control measures utilizing accepted best management practices. This is considered a less than significant impact. IV. WATER a- The spring boxes and tanks will remain in place and spring water will continue to overflow to the existing drainage swales. The proposed project does not entail abandoning the springs. The springs will remain in use with the same drainage paths intact. As property of the Donner Lake Improvement Association, if the Association decides to decides to abandon the springs a separate initial study will need to be conducted to evaluate potential impacts to wetlands from changes in drainage paths. The impacts from the proposed project are considered less than significant. (Refer to Exhibits C, D, E, and F) 10 . .................___ b- Implementation of the project is not expected to have any affect on the listed water resources. c- Spring water currently overflowing from the redwood tanks discharges into Donner Lake. The amount of surface runoff originating from the springs will increase slightly as residents transition from using spring water to using water supplied by TDPUD. This will not result in any changes to drainage patterns as the existing drainage swales have more than adequate capacity to handle the additional flows. These impacts are considered less than significant. d- The project involves substituting the existing spring water sources with the District's water sources. The District's primary water source in the area is Donner Lake. Although less water will be consumed from the springs and more water will be drafted from Donner Lake,there will be no net change in amount of surface water because the spring water currently being used will subsequently flow into Donner Lake replacing the water that will be extracted. This is considered a less than significant impact. e- The proposed project does not involve abandoning the existing redwood tanks and springs. Spring water will continue to be discharged from its current point and will continue to follow existing drainage paths. This is considered a less than significant impact. f, g, h- The water demands of the new customers will be adequately supplied by the District's existing water sources, primarily by Donner Lake. Drafting water from Donner Lake will not have any impact on groundwater quantity, direction or rate of groundwater flow, or on the quality of groundwater in the Donner Tract area. V. AIR QUALITY a,b, c, d- Implementation of the project are not expected affect air quality resources. VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION a- During construction there will be an increase in vehicle trips to the project site associated with the contractor's activities. District operation and maintenance of the water system will involve additional service truck trips to the various facilities. This is considered a less than significant impact. b,c, d, e,- Implementation of the proposed project will not impact transportation or circulation. f, g VIL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a,b, c, e- Implementation of the project will not impact the listed biological resources The project is of such a small scale as to not affect natural communities,wildlife habitat, or migration corridors. d- Impacts to wetland habitat are considered less than significant because the proposed project does not involve abandoning the existing springs or changing, in any way,the existing drainage paths. Abandonment of the springs by the Donner Tract Improvement Association would require a detailed study of the potential impacts to wetland habitats before such work could occur. VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES a, b- The project will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans and will be constructed in accordance with District Standards. II IX. HAZARDS a,b, c, d- The project will have no impact on emergency responses. The project is not considered to e involve the creation of or exposure to a health hazard. The increased water supply reliability and water storage capacity will increase the level of fire protection for the project area. X. NOISE a- The project will not result in any long-term increase in noise levels,but will increase noise levels temporarily associated with construction activities. Restricting hours of operation will mitigate short term construction noise impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures: M1. Construction shall be restricted Monday through Friday, 7:00 am- 6:00 pm and Saturdays from 10:00 am- 5:00 pm. Construction plans shall include reference to these restricted hours of construction. Mitigation Monitoring: District Civil Engineer-District responsible for including conditions in construction plans, monitoring for compliance during construction. b- Construction activities associated with the project are not expected to involve exposing people to severe noise levels. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES a- The project will be an enhancement to the fire protection capabilities in the Donner Tract area. b, c, d, e- Implementation of the project will not have an affect on the listed public services. XIL UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a,b, d, e,- Implementation of the project will not have an affect on the listed utilities or service systems. f c- The project involves the small extension of an existing water distribution system. The additional demands for water created by the new customers are considered minimal. No alterations to the existing water treatment facilities will be needed as a result of the project. XIIL AESTHETICS a,b, c- The project involves the construction of new water pipelines. Although, evidence of various construction activities will be visible to the public,the project includes surface restoration and revegetation where applicable. The project will not have an aesthetically negative impact. XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES a, b- The majority of the pipeline construction as proposed by the District will occur within existing roadways and on currently developed parcels with very little potential for significant cultural resource impacts. In the event that significant resources are uncovered during excavation activities, mitigation measures have been developed to protect these resources and ensure that the project has a less than significant impact on cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: M2. If artifacts,paleontological or cultural, or unusual amounts of stone, bone, shell, or artifacts related to the early settlement of the Truckee area are uncovered during construction activity, 12 work shall be halted and a qualified archeologist shall be consulted for an on-site review. Mitigation measures, as recommended by the archeologist in accordance with Appendix K of the CEQA. Guidelines, shall be implemented prior to recommencement of construction activity. If any bone appears to be human, California law mandates that the Ncvada County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission be contacted. Mitigation Monitoring: District Civil Engineer- Conditions of this mitigation measure will be included in contract specifications and implemented, if necessary,by the District during construction. c, d, e- Implementation of the project will not have an impact on the listed cultural resources. XV. RECREATION a,b- The implementation of the project will not affect recreational opportunities. XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The determinations of mandatory findings of significance are supported by the discussions contained within the Initial Study. The Initial Study did not identify any potentially significant effects, and there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. REPORT PREPARATION This Initial Study was prepared under contract with the Truckee Donner Public Utility District by Sauers Engineering, Inc. Principal authors were Keith Knibb and Erik D. Johnson. Prepared4a4g_ Date: 2- 13 REFERENCES This reference is available for review at the Truckee Donner Public Utility District office, 11570 Donner Pass Road, Truckee, California. 1. USGS Truckee Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series 2. Letter from Nevada County Environmental Health Dept. to Donner Tract Improvement Association, dated November 19, 2001. 14 EXHIBIT A LOCATOR MAP 15 -o c w � 9 � nc -a w 0 Z Donner Tract Project Area In Z X ;u oo«Truckeek.. p Do—Lake •�• 3m 9 '1 a a Red my 0 5 0 W 9 K Me do City ckea D Lake a Aubu 0 Tahoe s ento 9 oa raaasc j EXHIBIT B USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 17 t ,.✓/� i 1 QI 4.� II}1 S i t t.f {{ < l a qt S t t T .v 1 )_ Qi nt ` Ile, i 0 i+ai 0 I W"i z �yt �tl Vi f 1 7 01 4 r'<'{ � k V > i v t , TRUCKEE DONNER EXHIBIT B Dormer Tract Water PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT SystmExtOrmlon U0G- Topo Map TRUCKEE. CAtlfORNU1 EXHIBITS C, D DONNER TRACT WATER SYSTEM: WEST 19 EXHIBIT . . y . y . , Existing o m gallon redwood tank\remain. The tank , one a two tanks mthe system and located on the maw of Donner Tract. # supp! ,_ere nine residences. ; EXHIBIT : « Overflow pipe discharging spring water»adrainage_k krk adjacent @ the redwood tank pictured above. 20 1 EXHIBITS E, F DONNER TRACT WATER SYSTEM: EAST 21 EXHIBIT E e r I `� r rp �F_n The larger of two redwood tanks m the Donner Tract development. This tank is located on the east side of Donner Tract and provides water to 16 domestic connections. EXHIBIT F The redwood tank overflows spring water to the drainage swale shown above. 22