|
|
    |
Preface Executive Summary 1 - Introduction 2 - Project Description 3 - Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures 4 - Alternatives to the Project 5 - List of Persons Preparing this EIR 6 - Bibliography Appendices A - Notice of Preparation B - Responses to Notice of Preparation C - Goals, Objectives, Policies, Implementation Actions and Strategies D - General Plan Update Opinion Surveys |
CHAPTER 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROPOSED ACTIONS AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES The proposed actions (i.e., the "project") for which this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared are adoption of a revised and updated Grass Valley General Plan. The nine elements of the General Plan being updated include Land Use, Circulation (transportation), Open Space and Conservation (now a combined element), Noise, Safety, Community Design, Historical, and Recreation. Elements considered, but not included in this update are Housing, Mineral Management, Nevada County Airpark Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and Energy. The currently adopted versions of these latter four elements remain in force and effect. The objectives of the revised and updated Grass Valley General Plan (referred to throughout this report as "the Plan") are to meet requirements of State Planning Law and to guide the City's land use planning for 20 years following Plan adoption. A general plan is commonly referred to as a city's land use charter or constitution. All land use policies and decisions must conform to the general plan. The Grass Valley General Plan covers all lands within the City of Grass Valley and the surrounding Planning Area. The City of Grass Valley will adopt, implement, and administer the Plan. This EIR evaluates potential environmental effects of the updated Grass Valley General Plan. Two Plan alternatives were considered during Plan development. The relative environmental merits of each alternative are also analyzed in this EIR. 1.2 PROCEDURES This EIR has been prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines for CEQA Implementation (California Administrative Code [CAC], Title 14, Chapter 3 - hereafter referred to as the CEQA Guidelines). The Lead Agency (defined by CEQA as the agency with the ultimate authority to approve or deny the project) responsible for the EIR is the City of Grass Valley. Section 15121(a) of the CEQA Guidelines defines an EIR as an informational document that will: ...inform public agency decision-makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project. CEQA applies to all discretionary projects. CEQA Guidelines §15357 defines a discretionary project as one that requires the public agency to exercise judgement in approving an action. This is distinct from projects where approval is given simply by determining if the action conforms to applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations. Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines requires the decision-makers to balance project benefits against any unavoidable environmental effects. If the benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, the decision-makers may adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, stating specific reasons to support their actions. Program EIR CEQA provides a mechanism known as a "Program EIR" for projects that involve a complex series of related actions. According to §15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, a program EIR may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either:
The General Plan Update is such a project. It provides a plan for development of the City of Grass Valley, based on policies, which are intended to underlie most land use decisions, and a land use map, which is a graphic expression of the policies. The text and map(s) that comprise the Plan must be detailed enough so that the users of the Plan can reach the same general conclusions regarding the appropriate use of any parcel of land. Given the long-term nature of a general plan, the text and maps should be general enough to allow a degree of flexibility in decision-making as times change. (OPR1998). Considering the level of generalization and flexibility inherent in the General Plan, the program EIR provides the appropriate level of detail and analysis. In a similar vein, the State General Plan Guidelines (OPR1998) declare that "A well-prepared general plan EIR covering broad geographic areas can increase the possibility that negative declarations can be issued at a later time for specific project proposals within the planning areas." Section 15146(b) of the CEQA Guidelines recognizes that a programmatic general plan EIR will not be as detailed as an EIR for a specific construction project. Thus, subsequent CEQA documentation may be necessary for certain actions under the adopted general plan. If subsequent or supplemental documentation is required for a proposed activity under the Plan, this EIR can be incorporated by reference to significantly reduce the required documentation. If needed, a subsequent EIR can focus very narrowly on those project-specific environmental effects that were not considered in the program EIR. A program EIR will "allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts." Section 15168(c) prescribes that: Subsequent activities in the program must be examined in the light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. 1. If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the program EIR, a new Initial Study would need to be prepared leading to either an EIR or a Negative Declaration. 2. If the agency finds that pursuant to §15162 [of the CEQA Guidelines] no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. 3. An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the program EIR into subsequent actions in the program. 4. Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the program EIR. 5. A program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with subsequent activities if it deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a good and detailed analysis of the program, many subsequent activities could be found to be within the scope of the project described in the program EIR, and no further environmental documents would be required. In addition to the above, §15183 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that projects that are consistent with a general plan for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site; environmental effects that were not analyzed as significant effects in the general plan EIR; potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior general plan EIR; or previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the general plan EIR. It is anticipated that the general plan EIR will reduce the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies for projects qualifying for streamlined review under §15183. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) will be subject to a 45-day review period, during which the public and all responsible, trustee, or other interested agencies may comment orally or in writing on the contents of the DEIR. Although not a requirement of CEQA (see §15087(g) of the CEQA Guidelines), lead agencies are encouraged by CEQA to hold public hearings on Draft EIRs to receive comments during the review period. These procedures allow the public and appropriate agencies to participate in the environmental review process and provide input to the Lead Agency. Agencies that will use or review this EIR in conjunction with current or future approvals and/or administration of resources for which they have jurisdiction are identified in Table 1-1. Table 1-1 Future Permits, Approvals, and Environmental Review/Consultation Agency
Purpose of Review
A "Responsible Agency" is any public agency other than the Lead Agency that has discretionary approval power over the project. For example, the City, acting as Lead Agency, could approve a project that involves construction of a wastewater treatment plant. However, only the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board has the authority as a Responsible Agency to grant Waste Discharge Requirements for the treatment plant, without which it cannot legally operate. A "Trustee Agency" is an agency with legal jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project that are held in trust by that agency for the people of the State of California (i.e., California Department of Fish and Game). The above-referenced agencies will have jurisdiction over projects developed under the updated General Plan. CEQA Guidelines §15132 requires that each comment made during the public review period be responded to in writing. A Final EIR (FEIR) includes:
Upon Final EIR completion, the City of Grass Valley can certify that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and that information in it was reviewed and considered prior to deciding on Plan adoption. The City will then make its required findings under CEQA regarding the project's environmental effects. Finally, the City will adopt a Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program as required by §15097 of the CEQA Guidelines. The purpose of the Mitigation Monitoring Program is to ensure that mitigation measures are actually implemented. Section 15097 indicates that the Mitigation Monitoring Plan may consist of policies included in the General Plan. Prescribed mitigation measures included in this EIR will be imposed by the City. Future developers, the City itself, and any parties involved in Plan implementation or actions under the Plan will be subject to these mitigation requirements. 1.3 METHODOLOGY/SCOPE OF EIR As discussed above, this EIR evaluates the potential environmental effects of the Grass Valley General Plan. Included in the analysis are direct, cumulative, and growth-inducing effects. Many Plan goals, objectives, policies, and implementation strategies are recognized by this EIR as viable mitigation measures. An Initial Study completed for the project provided a preliminary environmental assessment of the project, identified potential environmental concerns, and was used as a basis for the Notice of Preparation (NOP), which was circulated to interested agencies on August 7, 1998. The NOP provided responsible and trustee agencies an opportunity to comment on the project and the scope of the EIR, thereby contributing to the ultimate EIR scope in terms of environmental issues that are analyzed. The Initial Study, Notice of Preparation, and a distribution list of agencies that received the NOP appear as Appendix A to this Draft EIR. Written comments of those agencies that responded to the NOP appear as Appendix B. In addition to the agency comments on the NOP, public input has contributed to development of the scope of the EIR. The City of Grass Valley City Council appointed a General Plan Update Steering Committee to review documents associated with the General Plan update and advise City staff and the City's consultants. The Committee met 28 times over a period of several months to identify issues of concern and assist in formulating Plan goals, objectives, policies, and alternatives, many of which have been directly incorporated into this EIR. All Steering Committee meetings were open to the public. Additionally, 6 community workshops were held. A comprehensive public opinion survey was administered at one workshop. Survey results were analyzed and used to formulate Plan alternatives. Further public input will be received in public hearings before the Grass Valley Planning Commission and City Council. Based on the Initial Study, NOP comments, and public input, this EIR focuses on the following broad environmental topics: Geology and Soils
Hydrology and Water Quality
Biological Resources
Air Quality
Public Services and Utilities
Land Use, Population and Housing
Transportation and Circulation
Noise
Public Safety/Hazards
Cultural Resources
Parks and Recreation
Conservation and Open Space
The General Plan update process has included preparation of a series of working documents and technical reports released at intervals during the process. Prepared early in the General Plan process, the Background Report described existing conditions that apply to the Planning Area and served as a basis for the "environmental setting" portion of this EIR. The Background Report contains chapters addressing the following topics:
The General Plan Direction/Goals, Objectives and Policies technical report broadly expressed the Steering Committee's understanding of the environment in which the General Plan is being updated and provided general direction to future planning. The latter drew from the Background Report, the 1995 Nevada County General Plan Update, the Sierra Business Council document Planning for Prosperity, and numerous Steering Committee meetings. Other working papers include:
Upon review and discussion of the documents described above, a draft General Plan containing the nine updated elements and this Draft EIR were prepared. The updated General Plan incorporates much of the information in the above working documents. The following format is used in this report to describe existing environmental conditions, potential project-related impacts, and mitigation measures for each of the topical areas stated above: SETTING Existing environmental and regulatory conditions specific to each topical area listed above will be described. IMPACTS Impact Evaluation Criteria: The standard by which impacts are measured or the threshold of significance is presented. The purpose is to establish the level at which an environmental impact will be considered significant. Impact #: Each identified environmental impact is numbered for reference Discussion/Conclusion: This is a discussion of the impact and a statement of the type (i.e., direct, indirect, cumulative, or growth-inducing impact) and level of significance. MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure #: Each mitigation measure will be listed by a reference number and linked to the impact that it addresses. Effectiveness of Measure: This section states whether the recommended mitigation measure will reduce the impact to a less than significant level based on Impact Evaluation Criteria. The above format is intended to conform to standards for adequacy of an EIR as described in §15151 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states: An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection, but for adequacy, completeness, and good faith effort at full disclosure. 1.4 EIR ORGANIZATION Section One generally describes the project and the reason(s) for preparing the EIR. It also explains CEQA's purposes and requirements and briefly summarizes how the CEQA process proceeds. Section Two describes the project in greater detail, including project goals and objectives, general Planning Area environmental setting, project alternatives, and related City actions needed to adopt the Plan. Section Three describes and evaluates impacts, including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, and identifies mitigation measures to reduce impacts to insignificant levels. This section follows the format described in Section 1.3 above. Also considered in Section Three are impacts not found to be significant, growth-inducing impacts, significant irreversible environmental changes that would occur under the Plan, and irreversible commitments of non-renewable resources. Section Four evaluates Plan alternatives based on Section Three findings. CEQA requires an EIR to evaluate a "range of reasonable alternatives" to the proposed project that ostensibly might achieve most of the project objectives while having less environmental impact than the project as proposed. The project alternatives analyzed for their relative environmental merits are essentially different growth scenarios presented and analyzed in the Northern Emphasis and Southern Emphasis Alternatives. The "preferred alternative," which is essentially a hybrid of the Northerly Emphasis and Southerly Emphasis alternatives, was selected by the Steering Committee. This "preferred alternative" constitutes "the project" for purposes of this EIR. The "reasonable range" of alternatives to the project addressed in Section Four of this document includes the "No Project" Alternative (which consists of build-out of the 1982 General Plan), the Northerly Emphasis Alternative and the Southerly Emphasis Alternative. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15126(d)(2), a "no project" alternative must also be presented in the EIR to compare the project's environmental consequences to those associated with maintaining status quo (as defined in the CEQA Guidelines). CEQA does not require all alternatives to be analyzed in as great detail as the project per se. Thus, the proposed project will be comprehensively analyzed in Section Three, while Section Four will briefly summarize the other three General Plan alternatives and the "no project" alternative, and compare the environmental consequences of all three in relation to the environmental consequences of the project. The City will ultimately adopt the project or an alternative to the project, taking environmental and other factors into consideration. Section Five includes individuals and agencies contacted for information during EIR preparation and the preparers of the EIR. Section Six includes references to published literature or technical reports cited in the text. Appendices includes the following:
The Goals, Objectives, Policies, Implementation Actions and Strategies found in Appendix C are referenced throughout the document to address various environmental impacts. 1.5 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE CEQA Guidelines §15150 provides for incorporating other documents into the EIR by reference. When a document is incorporated by reference, the incorporated document is considered to be part of the EIR. Incorporation by reference rather than repeating the entire incorporated text allows the EIR to focus on the environmental consequences and still incorporate necessary technical and auxiliary information without becoming an extremely long document. Incorporated by reference are the City of Grass Valley General Plan Update Background Report and the City of Grass Valley General Plan Update. Documents incorporated by reference are made available for public review at the same time and place(s) that this Draft EIR is available for review. Incorporation by reference allows those public decision-makers and interested public to review technical material that is summarized in the EIR without needlessly cluttering the EIR itself with this material. 1.6 AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The Draft EIR and any material incorporated by reference, are available for public review at the City of Grass Valley Planning Department, 125 East Main Street, Grass Valley, and at the Grass Valley Public Library, 207 Mill Street, Grass Valley. Any person may contact the Planning Department at (530) 274-4330 for information about other locations where the documents will be available for review. |