Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTruckee Electric System Master Plan SAVERS ENGINEERING S30 265 5934 ZS/101e"72 03:12pm P. 0011� } 3/ Sauers Engineering, In.e. Civil & Environmental Engineers Memorandum May 1 O,2002 TO: Board of Directors,and Joe Horvath,District Electrical Engineer FROM: Keith Knibb..Consulting Engineer SUBJECT: TRUCKEE ELECTRIC SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE We have completed the proposed Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study for the Electric System Master Plan Update. These documents need to be circulated to the 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 clerks 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 Electric System Master Plan Update: 1. Authorize the filing of the proposed Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study with the Offices of the Nevada County Clerk and Placer County Clerk. 2. Authorize the circulation of the proposed Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study with 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 June 5, 2002. 440 Lower Grass Valley Road,Suite A,Nevada City,CA 95959 (530)265-8021 Fax(530)265-6834 SAJERS ENGINEERING S90 Z65 6694 05/10/02 02:99pm P. 00Z NEGATIVE DECLARATION ( X) Proposed ( )Final NAME OF PROJECT: Truckee Electric System Master Plan Update LOCATION: Truckee, California Entity or Person Undertaking Project: (XX) Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 95959 Other ( ) Name: Address: Phone: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adoption of an update to the District's electric system master plan. 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: None. Date: By: Peter L. Holzmeister, General Manager SAUERS ENGINEERING 530 26S 6834 05/10/02 02:39pm P. 009 Truckee Donner Public Utility District ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY (Prepared pursuant to Article V of the Environmental Guidelines of the District) 1. Project Title: Electric System Master Plan Update 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road 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: See Attachment A, "Project Location Map". The master plan update encompass all of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. This includes portions of Nevada and Placer Counties. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Truckee Donner Public Utility District 11570 Donner Pass Road P.O. Box 309 Truckee, CA 96160-0309 6. General Plan Designation: 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, County of Nevada,and County of Placer making the project compatible with existing planning and zoning. The electric system improvements proposed in the master plan are intended to allow the continued implementation of the general plans of the three jurisdictions. 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 areas of little or no existing development, improvements are proposed to accommodate a projected level of development based on general plan uses and densities. Should there be changes to general plan designations,these changes would be analyzed, and the master plan and facilities fees revised if appropriate,as part of an ongoing update process. 7. Zoning: Zoning varies throughout the master plan study area. The master plan update used the existing zoning as defined by the appropriate planning agency to project the level of development to be accommodated by the master plan improvements and paid for by facilities fees. This included all zoning districts within the District boundaries and those areas within the District's sphere of influence which were included in the master plan. 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) A copy of the FINAL DRAFT Electric System Master Plan Update is available at the Truckee Donner Public Utility District office, 11570 Donner Pass Road, Truckee, California. The project is the adoption of the "Electric System Master Plan Update," an update of the District's existing"Electric System Master Plan" adopted in 1993. The updated master plan serves two primary functions. First, the master plan is a 1 SAUERS ENGINEERING 590 265 6834 0S/10/02 02:Sepm P. 004 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 a blueprint for the orderly expansion of the District's electric system to accommodate the anticipated growth and development of areas served by the District. The master plan will be used as the basis to evaluate the District's electric facilities fee. The facilities fee is the implementation of Government Code 66000 et seq., commonly referred to as AB 1600. Government Code 66000 et seq. provides a mechanism by which the District may establish fees on new development for electric system improvements attributable to new development. The master plan analyzes the existing electric system to see if it is adequate to meet the demands of the District's customers. Electric system components included in the analysis are availability of supply, overhead and underground transmission and distribution systems, substations, switch gear, and transformers. Design criteria in the master plan will establish a level of service for each of the electric system components and determine the adequacy of the existing system. This is also the level of service applied to the design of proposed future projects in the master plan. The master plan identifies current system deficiencies and proposed system improvements needed to provide the defined level of service. The master plan also gives growth projections of new residential and commercial electric services within the master plan study area. The projections are based on and are consistent with the general plans of the Town of Truckee, County of Nevada, and County of Placer for areas within their respective planning jurisdictions. 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. There are a number of new electric system facilities proposed in the master plan. Because the locations are approximate, no site specific issues are discussed in this initial study. Rather, 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. No individual proposed project will be constructed without a separate decision by the District's Board of Directors. Potential projects identified in the master plan include the following: 1. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line from Highway 267 to the intersection of Ponderosa and Palisades Dr. 2. Reconductor existing 1 phase overhead line to 3 phase adjacent to Jeffrey Pine from the intersection of Ponderosa and Palisades Dr. to Highway 267 3. Reconductor existing 1 phase overhead line to 3 phase through Sugar Pine Estates along Alder Dr. to Alder Creek Rd. 4. Construct new 3 phase overhead line along Alder Creek Rd. from the intersection of Alder Drive to Highway 89 and the Prosser Lakeview area. 2 SAILERS ENGINEERING S30 255 S334 05110102 02:39pm P. 00S 5. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line along Northwoods Blvd. ..rom the intersection of Northwoods and Northwoods to Donner Pass Road. 6. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line from intersection of Alder Dr.and Beacon Rd to Pannonia Ranchos via Alder Dr.,Rainbow Dr.,and Prosser Dam Rd. T Recunductur existing 3 phase overhead line along Northwoods Blvd. from the Tahoe Donner substation to Muhlebach and from the Tahoe Donner substation to Ratnshorn. 8. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line along Skislope Way from the Tahoe Donner substation to Herringbone Dr. 9. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead tine along Deerfield Dr. from Highway 89 South to Coldstream Rd. 10. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line from the intersection of Deerfield Dr. and Coldstream j Rd.to the end of the circuit at Northwoods Blvd. and Donner Pass Rd. 1. Upgrade the Donner Lake Substation from 3.75 to 15 MVA. 12. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line along Skislope Way from the intersection of Skislope and Herringbone Dr, to Teton Way. 13. Reconductor existing 1 phase overhead line to 3 phase through Pannonia Ranches from the intersection of Prosser Dam Rd. and Mt. Roseview Dr. along ML Roseview Dr.and Dove Terrace. 14. Convert existing 1 phase underground tap line to 3 phase configuration between Dove Terrace and Union Mills Rd. 15. Convert existing overhead feeder gateway circuits to an underground configuration for Truckee Substation feeder circuits T2,T3,and T4. 16. Convert existing overhead feeder gateway circuits to an underground configuration via existing 6"conduit for Truckee Substation feeder circuit TL 17, Extend 3 phase feeder under SPPC's 60 kv line for connection to Tahoe Donner Substation feeder circuit TDI via existing 6"conduit installed in 2000. I& Reconductor existing 1 phase overhead line to 3 phase along Skislope Way from Teton to Davos and along Davos to Northwoods Blvd, 19. Construct new feeder to be underbuilt on SPPC's 60 kv line that connects Donner Lake and Tahoe Donner substations. 20, Reconductor existing I phase overhead line to 3 phase along South Shore Dr.from 14036 South Shore Dr.to Donner State Park. 3 SAUER5 ENGINEERING 5B0 255 BB34 05/23/02 02;55pm P. 005 21. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line along Northwoods Blvd. from Muhlebach to Ramshom. 22. Convert existing I phase underground tap lute to 3 phase configuration through Donner State Park from Donner Pass Rd.to the end of South Shore Dr. 23. Reconductor existing 3 phase overhead line along West River St. between Highway 267 and Deerfield Dr. i 24, Extend underground 3 phase along the new section of Soaring Way between the end of the existing Soaring Way and Joerger Rd. 25. Extend 3 phase underground feeder from Mantis Valley Well area along Joerger Rd.to Truckee Sanitary y District(TSD) offices via existing 6"conduit. 26, Extend 3 phase feeder underground along Glenshire Dr. and through the Glenshire Bridge via existing conduit installed in 2000, 27. Construct new Glenshire Substation,2.5 MVA. 12.5i 14.4 kv,located along Glenshire Dr.near Berkshire Cir. 28. Extend 3 phase underground feeder along Joerger Rd, from the TSD offices to Highway 267. 29. Extend 3 phase underground feeder along Pioneer Trail Rd. (proposed new access road to Tahoe Donner)from the intersection of Pioneer Trail Rd.and Thayer Dr. to Northwoods Blvd. 30. Extend 3 phase underground feeder along Bridge St,and Euer Valley Rd.from the intersection of Bridge St.and Jibboom St.in Downtown Truckee to Pioneer Trail Rd. 31. Extend feeder to serve end of Mattis Valley Substation feeder circuit 3 at Northwood$and Donner Pass Rd.via existing conduit installed through new Donner Pass Rd.bridge over Interstate 80. Remove existing overhead crossing of Interstate 80 adjacent to Agricultural Inspection Station. The master plan is prepared as a planning tool to assist the District in(1)identifying existing electric system deficiencies and budgeting for corrections of such deficiencies,(2)anticipating areas where growth is likely to occur,consistent with the general plans of the Town of Truckee,Nevada County,and Placer County,and identifying system improvements necessary to serve such growth,and,(3)analyzing and evaluating electric facilities fees. Government Code Section 66000 et seq.requires that agencies charging facilities fees to developers establish a rational basis for those fees. The master plan satisfies the intent of the Code with regards to the establishment of a capital improvements plan. By analyzing the adequacy of the District's existing electric system and the need for future system improvements to accommodate anticipated new development;the share of costs can be determined on an equitable basis. 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (and permits needed): No other agencies are required to approve or give a permit for the adoption of the master plan update. Sucre agencies may become involved in approving or permitting construction of some of the individual improvements proposed in the 4 SAVERS ENGINEERING 530 2S5 3334 05110t02 02:33pm P. 007 master plan. These agencies may include the Town of Truckee,Nevada County,Placer County,Caltrans, Lahontan Regional'Water Quality Control Board,and others. 10. Environmental Setting of the Project: The Truckee Donner Pub]in Utility District is located on the cast slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains approximately 100 mites east of Sacramento and 40 miles southwest of Reno,Nevada. The project area ranges in elevation from approximately 5,600 feet to approximately 7,600 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 District in route from Lake Tahoe to Pyramid Lake in Nevada. Tributaries include Donner Creek,Trout Creek,Martis Creek,Cold Creek,and Prosser Creek. Lakes in the area include Donner Lake,Prosser Creek Reservoir,Martis Creek Lake and Boca Reservoir. The project area contains numerous cultural resources both prehistoric and historic. The project area contains portions of the overland emigrant trail,the Dutch Flat and Donner Lake Wagon Road,the transcontinental railroad and historic Old Highway 40. Old town Truckee contains over 160 historic structures. The project area also contains a number of prehistoric archaeological sites associated with Native American inhabitation of the region_ The flora and fauna of the Truckee area are typical for mountainous regions o`'the east slope of the Sierras. The District can be generally characterized as lodgepole-fir belt,Jeffery pine belt and sagebrush belt(Storer et. al. 1963). 5 SAUERS ENGINEERING S30 2SS B554 0G/10/02 02:2)spm P. 009 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 Resource..- ❑ Utilities and Serme 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 he 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 an attached sheet 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 6 SAUERS ENGINEERING 550 EGG 5554 0S110J02 02:S9pm o. 009 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 loud agency cites in the parenthesev,fallowing 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 nit expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based an a project-specific screening analysis). 2) Ail answers must take acco-mt of the whole action involved,including off-site as well m on-site,cumulative as well as project-level,indirect as well as direct,and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "PotentiallySignificant I ac[°'is a ro riate if an effect is significant or potentially significant.or if the lead 1°P' PPS P 8 P Y g agency lacks information to make a finding of insignificance, If there are one or more"Potentially Significant Lmpeet"entries when the determination is made,EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated"applies where the incorporation of miigation 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 fiering,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 he 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 So Issues(and Supporting Information Sources) Impact Mitigated Impact Impact Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) U (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably nut need further explanation.) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (source i(s): ) Ll I] Ll b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over theproject? ( ) c) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( ) Q U 7 SAUERS ENGINEERING S90 2SS GeS4 0St10/02 02:99Pm P. 010 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cutnulatively 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? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Seismicity: seiche or tsunami? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Landslidesormudslides? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading or fill? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ M g) Expansive soils? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ M h) Unique geologic or physical features?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ M 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? ( ) ❑ fj Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?O ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? O ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? { ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Alter air movement,moisture,or temperature,or cause any change in climate? { ) 8 SAUERS ENGINEERING S20 265 68S4 05,110/02 02:29pm P. 011 Potentially Potentially significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact ❑ d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ❑ ❑❑ VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? ( ) ❑ ❑ e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) 0 ❑ ❑ f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? ( ) ❑ g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 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)? ( ) ❑ 0 ❑ c) Locally designated natural communities(e.g. oak ❑ forest, costal habitat,etc.)? ( ) ❑ ❑ d) Wetland habitat(e.g. marsh,riparian and vernal ❑ pool)? ( ) ❑ ❑ e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ❑ Q VIll. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Wound the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?() ❑ Ll 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)? ( ) ❑ Lj b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ❑ ❑ c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health ❑ bazard? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 SAVERS ENGINEERING 530 ZSS 5834 0S/10/02 02:39pm P. 012 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential healthhazards? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 11 e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass,or trees? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ XL 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? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Police protection? { ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Schools? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? O ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Other governmental services? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Storm water drainage?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ XIII.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Create light or glare? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Affect historical resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic culture values?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?( ) ❑ ❑ 10 SAUERS ENGINEERING EDO ZSG S934 0S/10J0Z oz:33pm P. 013 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact ;Mitigated Impact Impact XV. RECREATION. Wordd the praposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ D b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ XV1.MANDATORY FTNDINGS 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ III) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ❑ ❑ ❑ A 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.) ❑ ❑ W ❑ 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 odic 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 whare they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identity which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. 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. 11 SAUERS ENGINEERING 630 2SS SSS4 05110/02 02:39pm P. 014 Explanations for Checklist Answers: I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. a,b- The master plan update is based on the general plans of the Town of Truckee, County of Nevada, and County of Placer for their respective jurisdictions within the master plan study area. Construction of master plan improvements for new development would be in response to land use and environmental planning decisions made by the appropriate agency and would not be in conflict with those plans. Adoption of the master plan or construction of master plan improvements will have no affect on land use or planning. c- There are no notable agricultural resources in the District or master plan study area. II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. a- The projections of new residential and commercial electric service customers used for the master plan update are based on population projections from the Town of Truckee general plan. Through the regular process of review and update, the master plan and facilities fees may be revised to reflect any changes in planning agency population projections. b - Adoption of the electric system master plan update will give the District the tools to provide an adequate public electric supply system to accommodate continued growth within the Truckee area. Public electric supply is one of many public services necessary to accommodate growth but does not contribute significantly to the location, intensity or density of such growth. These growth related issues are dealt with on a regional basis by the appropriate planning agencies, in this case the Town of Truckee, Nevada County, and Placer County. Construction of master plan improvements in response to regional planning decisions will avoid shortages in public electric supply and allow implementation of the appropriate general plans. c- By identifying and providing electric system improvements needed to accommodate new development, the master plan helps avoid potential adverse impacts to existing housing associated with additional demands on the existing electric system. III GEOPHYSICAL a, b, c, d, - Adoption of the master plan update and facilities fees will not involve any of the listed f, g, h geophysical impacts . Prior to construction of improvement projects,the District regularly conducts investigations to determine the suitability of proposed project sites to avoid geophysical impacts. e- Construction of improvement projects may involve changes in topography from excavations, grading, and fill for such projects as underground conduit,vaults, and substations. The design and construction of all District projects routinely include soil stabilization and erosion control measures utilizing accepted best management practices. This is not considered a potentially significant impact. IV. WATER a- Some of the master plan improvement projects may involve changes in absorption rates or surface runoff due to the placement of impervious surfaces such as buildings or pavement. District electric projects are typically small in scope,usually 5,000 square feet or less, and are not expected to adversely affect drainage. These issues would be studied in more detail during the planning for the individual projects but are not considered potentially significant. b, c, d, e- Adoption of the master plan update is not expected to have any affect on the listed resources. 12 SAUERS ENGINEERING 680 265 6664 06,110/02 02:SSpm P. 015 V. AIR QUALITY a,b, c, d- Adoption and implementation of the master plan update will not affect air quality resources. Also, construction and operation of electric system improvements is not expected to impact air quality resources. VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION a,b, c,d, - Adoption and implementation of the master plan update will not impact transportation or e,f, g circulation. The District routinely provides access and parking for operations equipment and personnel to avoid impacts to off-site facilities. VIL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a,b, c,d,- Adoption and implementation of the master plan update will not impact the fisted biological e, resources. Individual electric system improvement projects are typically of such small scale as to not affect natural communities or wildlife habitat or migration corridors. Studies in compliance with CEQA for proposed individual improvements would identify any potential impacts. VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES a,b- There are no adopted energy conservation plans affected by the master plan update improvements. IX. HAZARDS a,b, c,d,- There are no risks of hazards associated with the adoption of the master plan. e, X. NOISE a,It- Except for short term increases in noise associated with construction of proposed master plan improvements, there will be no noise impacts. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES a,b, c, d,- Adoption and implementation of the master plan update will not have an affect on the listed e public services. XH. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a- The master plan update and facilities fees are intended to provide planning and funding for new electric systems. This is considered beneficial to the electric utility. b,c, d,e, Adoption and implementation of the master plan update and facilities fees would not have an f- affect on the listed utilities and service systems. XIL AESTHETICS a,b, c- Although some electric facilities such overhead wire,poles, and substations may be visible to the public, they are not considered aesthetically offensive or have negative aesthetic impact. XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES a,b, c,d,- Adoption and implementation of the master plan update is not expected to affect cultural e, resources. The District routinely conducts cultural resource investigations prior to construction projects to identify and avoid impacts. This issue would be evaluated for any individual project through the CEQA compliance process. 13 SAUERS ENGINEERING S90 265 6654 06/10,102 02:59pm P. 016 XV. RECREATION a,b- The adoption and implementation of the master plan update and facilities fees will not affect recreational opportunities. XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a- As discussed in the explanations to checklist items, the adoption and implementation of the master plan update is not expected to have an affect on the listed resources. These issues will be studied in greater detail through the CEQA compliance process for any individual improvement project which may be undertaken by the District. b - The master plan update have the potential to achieve both short term and long term environmental goals. By continuing to provide the public electric supply to accommodate the growth anticipated by the appropriate planning agencies,the master plan update will allow the implementation of adopted land use and environmental plans. c - Public electric 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 either the Town of Truckee,Nevada County, or Placer County. 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 electric 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. d- Adoption and implementation of the master plan update and facilities fees will allow the District to continue to provide and adequate public electric supply. Provisions of a safe and reliable electric supply is considered to have a beneficial effect on human beings. INITIAL STUDY PREPARERS This Initial Study was prepared for the Truckee Donner Public Utility District by Sauers Engineering, Inc. The report was primarily authored by Keith Knibb, P.E. 14 SAJER5 EN9INEERIN3 990 Z55 5994 05t10102 02:09pm P. 017 REFERENCES These references are available for review at the Tnickee Donner Public Utility District office, 11570 Donner Pass Road,Truckee, California. 1. FINAL DRAFT Electric System Master Plan Update,Truckee Donner Public Utility District, March 2002 2. Electric System Master Plan,Truckee Donner Public Utility District,April 1993. 3. Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study, Electric System Master Plan,Truckee Donner Public Utility District,April,1993. 4. Storer and Usinger,Sierra Nevada Natural History.University of California Press. 1963. 15