Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPollard Station Draft MNDINITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood TOWN OF TRUCKEE INITIAL STUDY PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pollard Station Senior Living Center September 2014 BACKGROUND Application: Application No. 12- 001 /MPA- DCA- DP- UP- TM -HDR Project Name: Pollard Station —A Senior Neighborhood Project Proponents / Applicant: Truckee Senior Neighborhood, LLC (10315A Stoneridge Drive, Truckee 96161) Lead Agency: Town of Truckee c/o Truckee Community Development Department 10183 Truckee Airport Road Truckee, CA 96161 -3306 Contact Person: John McLaughlin, Community Development Director (530) 582 -7820 e -mail: jmclaughlin @townoftruckee.com or Tom Parilo, Contract Planner (530) 265 -6393 e -mail: taparilo @sbcglobal.net Project Location: The 8.02 -acre project site is located at the west end of the terminus of Pine Cone Road, approximately 600 -feet west of Palisades Drive. Assessor's Parcel Number /Address: APN 19- 300 -19; 10335 Old Brockway Road General Plan: Downtown Specific Plan Area Zoning: Downtown Master Plan (DMP) Hilltop Master Plan: Downtown Medium Density Residential (DRM), with a Maximum Allowable Development of 94 Residential Units Page 1 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Existing Land Use: Vacant/Unimproved PROJECT PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES To provide a senior housing project, in a residential setting, with a range of living opportunities that will accommodate an "aging in place" neighborhood close to the downtown and local services to enable residents and /or aging family members to remain in the Truckee community. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Hilltop Master Plan (HMP) was adopted by the Town of Truckee's Town Council on August 7, 2008 (Resolution No. 2008 -03). The HMP was prepared to implement the Town of Truckee General Plan (November, 2006) and the Downtown Specific Plan (November, 1997). It is a planning and policy document establishing land use locations, types, density and intensity of use, development standards and design guidelines for future development. As adopted, the HMP was found to be consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the General Plan. The HMP established basic land uses, design standards, development requirements and a comprehensive infrastructure plan. The HMP Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is a program -level environmental document limited in specificity to the depth associated with a specific plan amendment (the Downtown Specific Plan was amended with the adoption of the HMP), rezoning and a master plan. Detailed grading and construction plans, site layouts, building elevations and similar development information were not included as part of the master plan. If required, subsequent project -level environmental review is to be completed prior to approval of any development project on parcels within the HMP. Generally, development consistent with the HMP can rely on the program level MND unless there are unique requirements applicable to the development of individual properties. Subsequent environmental documents will rely on analysis from the HMP program environmental document to the extent that it is applicable. The Pollard Station Senior Living Center project (the Project) was originally submitted to the Town of Truckee in 2009. Minimally, the project requires an amendment to the HMP to allow "senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing" as a use subject to a Use Permit in the DRM zone. The original project submittal also included a variety of other design and site development standards amendments. The project has undergone a number of revisions to minimize the number of amendments to the HMP. As modified with the February 13, 2014, re- submittal, the Project will only require two basic changes to the adopted HMP. The Town of Truckee has determined that a specific environmental document is required for this project. Where applicable and appropriate, the HMP program MND will be used as a basis for this analysis. The analysis and relevant mitigation measures from the HMP program MND are relied upon where applicable. These areas primarily include: the extension of off -site wet and dry utilities; construction of the Phase.1 backbone access including the extension of Old Brockway Road to the northeast; roundabout on Brockway Road as a primary access to the plan area; the Brockway Road frontage improvements; Legacy Trail and stairway from the Legacy Trail to Brockway Road. In addition, the biological, cultural resources and noise sections of the HMP program MND are relied upon for this analysis. According to CEQA Section 15002(a), this Initial Study will inform the Town of Truckee decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of the proposed project and identify ways to avoid or significantly avoid environmental damage associated with the Project. CEQA Section 15002(g) defines a "significant effect on the environment" as a substantial adverse change in the phVsical conditions which exist in the area affected by the Page 2 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station -- A Senior Neighborhood proposed project- The focus of this Initial Study is the examination of adverse change in the physical conditions that exist on or around the Project site. As noted, the current project description embodies a number of changes to bring the project into basic conformance with the HMP. These changes include: 1. All buildings adhere to the 35' maximum height limit for HMP 2. The senior lodge facility has been broken into 5 separate, semi- connected buildings to achieve a better pedestrian scale and overall reduction in building mass 3. The extension of Old Brockway Road to the northeast and construction of the roundabout on Brockway Road in accordance with the Phase 1 infrastructure requirements of the master plan 4. Increased on -site recreation amenities 5. Greater tree retention and open space 6. Design changes to accomplish pedestrian scale and breaking up of long walls with various forms of architectural articulation, street level access to the independent living buildings (Buildings 1 and 2 fronting on Pine Cone Road) and condominium garage doors setback to reduce visual impact Amendments to the HMP are now limited to the addition of senior living_ in the DRM zone and request to defer the comprehensive historic interpretation program to apply to the first development within the HMP that contains historic building resources. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Project is located within the central portion of the HMP Area along the eastern boundary, west of Pine Cone Road. W. Vol wt;d _� ; _ • � f T-rrn� _ _W ._ k. lip -%%- •0 r r . •+� H ILL >i OP MASTER PLAN J Page 3 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood The Project includes the following features: The Project is an age- restricted senior neighborhood consisting of multifamily residential condominiums along with assisted living. The Project proposes a variety of housing options, enabling an "aging -in- place" residential neighborhood for senior citizens. These housing options will encompass fully independent seniors to those needing assistance with various activities of daily living, including specialized care for seniors with various forms of dementia. Nursing and congregate care will not be offered. Pollard Station Senior Living Neighborhood is classified as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE). Sometimes called "assisted living" or "board and care" facilities, RCFEs are non - medical facilities that provide a level of care that includes assistance with activities of daily living. RCFEs serve persons 60 and older, providing room, board, housekeeping, supervision and personal care assistance with basic activities like personal hygiene, dressing, eating and walking. Facilities usually store and distribute medications for residents to self- administer. The care and supervision found in these facilities are for people unable to live alone, but who do not need 24 -hour nursing care. The residential options are characterized as follows: ® Independent Living (IL) — Independent Living units consist of one - bedroom and two - bedroom apartments within the lodge and individual condominiums units surrounding the lodge. All IL units have complete kitchens. Assisted Living (AL) — Assisted Living accommodations provides residential housing, along with personalized daily living support assistance. Memory Care (MC) — Memory Care accommodations (including Dementia and Alzheimer's) provides housing with specialized care tailored to the special needs of individuals with memory and dementia issues. Pollard Station will provide housing for independent and semi - independent seniors, typically aged 70 to 90, with an average entry age in the early 80s. However, residents 55 years of age or older are also eligible to reside in the project. In total, the Project proposes 126 separate residential units, ranging from studio apartments to 2- bedroom condominium units. The Project proposes two distinct residential building types as follows: Lodge Facility The Lodge Housing consists of a 5- building complex (with limited connecting corridors), providing a total of 86 senior living spaces consisting of eighteen (18) 1- bedroom and 2- bedroom Independent Living (IL) apartments and a combination of sixty -eight (68) Assisted Living (AL) Memory Care (MC) living spaces. O Building 1 - IL (Includes a first floor connecting lobby with Building 2) 0 2 stories (8,660 sq. ft.) o Six 1- bedroom units and two, 2- bedroom units • Building 2 - IL 0 2 stories (7,740 sq. ft.) o Eight 1- bedroom units and two 2- bedroom units • Building 3 - Main Lobby and Common Area (Includes a separate connecting corridor to Buildings 4 and 5) Page 4 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood 0 2 stories (20,045 sq. ft.) o Main lobby and common area amenities • Building 4 - AL 0 3 stories (21,438 sq. ft.) o Lower level parking garage, kitchen and employee room 0 36 studio units • Building 5 - MC 0 3 stories (18,575 sq. ft.) o Lower level kitchen and laundry room 0 12 studio units plus 20 "split units" which share a bathroom Common Area Amenities The Lodge provides common area amenities, back -of -house support space and under - structure surface parking. Within the Lodge, the Assisted Living and Memory Care buildings each have separate living, dining and activity areas designed for specialized needs of its residents. Additional common area amenities are available for use by all residents of the project and include the following: • Living and dining areas • Fitness and exercise room • Multi- purpose room • Activity rooms • Library • Personal care room IL Condominium Buildings • Lounges • Outdoor patios and sitting areas • Amphitheater • Walking trails • Bocce Ball • Community Garden The Project proposes 40 age- restricted, condominium units consisting of single, duplex, 4 -plex, and 8 -plex units surrounding the Senior Lodge Housing Buildings. Each condominium unit features 2- bedroom /2 bathroom, single floor living with senior oriented design amenities. Equivalent Dwelling Units As a senior housing development project in the DRM zoning district, the Project would qualify under density equivalents The Project proposes a total of 79 equivalent dwelling units. In total, the project proposes 126 separate senior living accommodations. These accommodations range from studio flats to one and two bedroom living units. . The number of dwelling unit equivalents are based on the number of bedrooms in each unit, in accordance with Table 2 -5, Chapter 18.08.020.B.2 of the Town of Truckee Development Code (as shown below). The following chart depicts the dwelling unit equivalent ratios for the proposed Project: PROJECT DENSITY - EQUIVALENT UNITS Lodge Facility Bedrooms Equivalent Units # of Living ! Accommodations Total Equivalent Units Page 5 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Studio 0.5 68 34.0 1- bedroom 0.67 14 9.4 2- bedroom 0.80 4 3.2 Sub -Total 86 46.6 Condominiums Bedrooms Equivalent Units # of Living Accommodations Total, Equivalent Units 2- bedroom 0.80 40 32.0 Total 126 78.6 Page 6 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Lot Coverage Coverage Type Area (sq. ft.) Acreage* Percentage* Building (footprint) 80,017 1.84 23 New AC /Concrete 86,112 1.98 25 Open Space 82,655 1.90 24 Landscaping 99,709 2.29 28 Total Area: 349,183 8.02 100 Figures have been rounded; therefore, may not equal the totals • Senior Lodge Facility For purposes of parking, the memory care "split" units are counted as 1 unit per bathroom. As such, the required number of parking stalls for the Senior Lodge Facility is based on a total of 76 units. Per Development Code Section 18.48.040, Table 3 -10, the required number of parking spaces is 0.5 spaces per unit plus an additional 1 space per 4 units for guests and employees, which translates to57 total parking spaces. A total of 57 parking stalls are provided for the lodge complex, including 14 covered spaces which are located in the lower level of Building #4. The remaining 43 spaces are located along Pine Cone Road, the fire access road surrounding the lodge and in front of the main lodge building (Building 3). • Condominiums 1 parking space per unit is required, with a minimum of half of the spaces to be covered. This project provides 1 covered space for each unit plus an additional 24 tandem driveway spaces where space allows. In the southern portion of the project near the 8- plex buildings, additional parking spaces are provided. Access The HMP abuts Brockway Road to the north and the existing Stonewood and Ponderosa Palisades Townhouse developments and Pine Cone Road to the east. The primary road access will be from Brockway Road in accordance with the Phase 1 infrastructure requirements of the HMP. This will include construction of the roundabout on Brockway Road in the northeastern portion of the HMP area. Pine Cone Road will be extended to the west and bisect the project site as a secondary access. Pine Cone Road will intersect Old Brockway Road extension on the west side of the development parcel. Old Brockway Road will be constructed to a width of 24 -feet and connect to Brockway Road using the existing road access (current "Old Brockway Road" to the Hilltop area Cottonwood Restaurant). Pedestrian circulation is provided through sidewalks on both sides of Pine Cone Road within the development and connecting pathways from various building clusters. Shared pedestrian access is proposed within the common driveway on the north side of Pine Cone Road within the northerly condominium complex. Page 7 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Phasing The project is anticipated to be constructed in multiple phases (phases may be modified, or combined to meet market demand), as follows: • Phase 1: Construction of the five lodge buildings and associated infrastructure, including: (1) water, sewer and electrical facilities to serve the site; (2) Pine Cone Road improvements on -site and repaving east of the project site to Palisades Drive; (3) Phase 1 roadway improvements to Brockway Road in accordance with the HMP; (4) single lane Roundabout. at Brockway Road; (5) Truckee River Legacy Trail as shown in the HMP; and (6) Fire access loop and parking around the lodge facility. (Timing: 2015/2016) • Phase 2: Construction of 8 condominiums (One 8 -plex building) (Timing: 2017); • Phase 3: Construction of 11 condominiums (One 8 -plex building plus units 22 -24) (Timing: 2018); • Phase 4: Construction of 10 condominiums (units 1 -8) north of Pine Cone Road plus units 20 and 21 south of Pine Cone Road (Timing: 2019); and • Phase 5: Construction of 11 condominiums (units 9 -19) north of Pine Cone Road (Timing: 2020). The timing of each phase may vary depending on market demand; however, each phase will begin within 2 years of recordation of the previous phase. Grading associated with development of the condominium buildings is proposed to occur concurrently with building permit issuance to avoid excessive disturbance and tree removal prior to each phase occurring to keep much of the site in a natural state prior to construction. Some on -site stockpiling to reduce off -site trucking may be required to store earthen materials excavated from earlier project phases. Stockpile quantities may vary depending on the order of phasing. Stockpiling, if required, will be located on the proposed building pad of units 5 -8 near the northeast corner of the site. The stockpile area is anticipated to be approximately 100' x 60' (not to exceed 10' in height) and shall be removed during construction of any phase north of Pine Cone Road. Phase I Infrastructure Improvements The following infrastructure features will be developed as part of Phase 1 of the Project as required by the HMP: • Extend Pine Cone Road including utilities to newly constructed Old Brockway Road • Construct a single lane roundabout at the new Old Brockway Road • Resurface Pine Cone Road from the project site to the intersection at Palisades Drive • Construct and extend sewer, water, storm drain, electrical, gas, telephone, cable TV and utilities to the project site. • Construct a portion of the Truckee River Legacy Trail from the existing trail in the Truckee Regional Park across the Plan Area to the Truckee Donner Public Utility District (TDPUD) north property boundary. Page 8 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Construct curb, gutter and sidewalk along the south side of Brockway Road from the new roundabout to South River Street. ® Construct a stairway connecting the Legacy Trail to Brockway Road sidewalk as shown in the HMP. Requested Actions: A. Amendments to theHMP as follows: 1. Amend the first paragraph, Chapter 3.G, (DRM) District, of the HMP to read as follows: "The Downtown Medium Density Residential (DRM) District is intended to provide residential zoning for medium density residential units and their accessory uses. Detached single - family dwellings, attached dwellings, co- housing and senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing may be allowed in the DRM District. 2. Amend Table 3, Chapter 3 of HMP, to permit "Senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing" as a Residential Use in the DRM zoning district, subject to a Use Permit (UP). 3. Modify the comprehensive historic interpretation program requirements of Chapter 6, Section B.2, of the HMP to apply to the first development project within the plan area that contains historic building resources. B. Rezone the subject parcel from DMP (Downtown Master Plan) to DRM (Downtown Medium Density Residential) in accordance with the adopted HMP. C. Use Permit for the construction and operation of a senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing project consisting of a 5- building, senior care lodging facility and 40 age restricted condominiums. D. Tentative Map to subdivide the lodge building(s) from the remainder of the property and to create the 40 age- restricted condominium units. E. Age- Restricted Senior Housing to be an Alternative Action Equivalent to the Inclusionary Housing requirement per Development Code Chapters 18.214.040.D, Workforce Housing and 18.216.040.E.. The detailed project description, along with supporting application documents are on file with the Town of Truckee Community Development Department. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The 8.02 -acre Project site is located south of downtown Truckee approximately 1,100 -feet south side of the Truckee River, approximately 700 -feet south of Brockway Road. The Project area slopes upward towards the south with slopes ranging from gentle (less than 15 percent) to isolated areas having greater than 20 percent (but less than 30 percent) slopes. Elevations on the Project site range from approximately 5,890 -feet to 5,960 -feet. The site has been disturbed as a result of previous timber harvesting activities. There are no buildings onsite or any other permanent structures. The majority of the site supports several subtypes of Jeffrey Pine Forest including montane chaparral (tobacco brush, manzanita). In some areas, moderate sized trees are present (someexceeding 24- inches in diameter); in others, nearly all of the trees are smaller than 12- Page 9 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood inches in diameter. Site soils generally consist of medium dense salty to clayey sand with gravel, cobbles and boulders. Long, cold winters and short, warm summers characterize the climate area. Mean annual precipitation is approximately 32- inches, most of which falls as snow. Drainage is primarily sheet flow to the north towards the Truckee River. The Project site is located within the central portion of Hilltop Master Plan Area along the eastern boundary. Lands to the east are developed with townhome dwellings along both sides of Pine Cone Road. The balance of the land areas are within the Hilltop Master Plan. None of the immediately adjoining lands within Hilltop are currently developed, although all are planned within the Master Plan for a variety of residential densities. The following table provides an overview of various land use planning parameters for the subject site and surrounding lands. ENTITLEMENTS AND REQUIRED APPROVALS The table below lists the required entitlements, permits and approvals required for the Project, as well as the responsible agency. Required Approvals /Permits for Project Entitlements General Plan Designation Zoning Land Use Base Overlay Subject Site Downtown Study Downtown Master HP Vacant land within Hilltop California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Area (DSA) Plan (DMP) Master Plan North Downtown Study Downtown Master HP Vacant land within Hilltop Area (DSA) Plan (DMP) Master Plan South Residential Cluster -5 RR -0.2 __ Vacant land within Hilltop Master Plan East HDR RM -15 -- Multi - Family Residential West Downtown Study Downtown Master HP Vacant land within Hilltop Area (DSA) Plan (DMP) Master Plan ENTITLEMENTS AND REQUIRED APPROVALS The table below lists the required entitlements, permits and approvals required for the Project, as well as the responsible agency. Required Approvals /Permits for Project Entitlements Responsible Agency Water connection and electric Truckee Donner Public Utility District (TDPUD) Sanitary sewer Truckee Sanitary District (TSD) Fire protection Truckee Fire Protection District (TFPD) Waste Discharge (CWA 401 Certification) California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region (LRWQCB) Timber harvest permit and timberland conversion permit California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Dust Control Plan Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) Page 10 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Initial Study Checklists and Supporting Documentation The resource - specific checklists and supporting discussion have been prepared based on the review of the Project area and existing site conditions, review of relevant literature (as cited herein), consideration of the design plans for the Project and discussions with Town staff and agencies. The following provides issue - specific checklists identifying the Project's potential to result in significant impacts. Each checklist is followed by a description of the environmental setting within the Project area relevant to the issues in each checklist and a discussion of each environmental issue /question in the checklist. Page 11 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AESTHETICS. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than an 'No Would the Project: Significant Impact p With Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and X historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site X and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the X area? Environmental Setting — The subject site occupies the lower portion of a prominent north facing slope. Substantial stands of on -site Jeffery Pines and other coniferous trees are visible to downtown Truckee and other vantage points to the north. Major light sources in the vicinity are lights from the commercial uses in the Downtown Commercial Row, Interstate 80 and the surrounding single family and multi - family residential homes. The subject site is part of the 37.8 acre HMP 'area. There are a variety of distinct view areas on the HMP site. They include the foreground brow that is comprised of a relative steep slope that is covered with coniferous trees; a mid - ground area that is relatively flat that previously was occupied by building and land uses some of which have been removed. This mid - ground area is characterized as being disturbed, is relatively devoid of significant tree stands and is generally bare. The background area is characterized with steeper north facing slopes that include the subject site, lands beyond and the historic ski slope on the westerly plan area. With exception of the ski slope, the background northerly slope areas contain pockets of dense coniferous tree stands. For the most part the plan area is within the viewshed of downtown Truckee and High Street. In addition to the specific site, the project also includes construction of and extension of various phase 1 infrastructure improvements including the following off -site features: • A 60' right of way from the westerly edge of the project site extending approximately 500' to the northerly lands within the HMP owned by Thomas Young Trustee and Foothill Air Conditioning and Heating Inc. lands; • A 60' right of way road proceeding approximately 550' east and then north to connect the new roundabout on Brockway Road; • Construct the new single lane roundabout on Brockway Road partially on lands within the HMP and partially on lands to the east known as the Reynolds Family Partners property; • Construction of the Truckee River Legacy Trail from the Truckee Donner Recreation and Park District (TDRPD) lands on the north side of Brockway Road south onto the HMP site following the southerly boundary of the Thomas Young Trustee and then following the HMP alignment; and • Construct an approximate 100 ' stairway down to Brockway Road from the Truckee River Legacy Trail Page 12 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Regulatory Setting — The HMP establishes the land use intensity /density and pattern and overall development design parameters for each project site. This subject 8.02 -acre site was established to accommodate single family, multiple family /or co- housing land uses. The introductory paragraphs of Section 3.G, DRM District states "... the final design for this area, including the potential for co- housing, shall be subject to all development and design standards as required by the HMP." This introduction also includes the concept of a residential streetscape as reflected in Street Section B -B, Figure 18. The HMP includes both specific /objective and subjective standards for compliance. The specific /objective standards are mandatory while adherence to the subjective standards is subject to the judgment by the Town's decision makers as part of formal development review. This analysis evaluates both to determine to what degree that aesthetic impacts would occur. This evaluation relies on the various site plans, grading, tree removal, architecture and building elevations, site cross sections and visual simulations prepared by the applicant's consultant team. This review is also is conducted in light of the HMP direction and the HMP Program MND both of which concluded that the buildout environment will result in a dramatic change over existing conditions that have largely existed for the last 50 years or more. It is also noted that prior buildings and uses (i.e. ski resort employee housing) that existed up until approximately 2006 have been removed. The following HMP site development standards and design preferences are of importance in determining whether the Project would impact the quality of the site and its surroundings and /or whether the existing visual character would be substantially degraded: 1. General Development Standards. a. Section 3.B.4, Site Design. The ultimate land use intensity and density could be adjusted based on design review, parking, snow storage and other standards in the HMP and Truckee Development Code. b. Section 3.B.6, Height Standards. The review authority shall consider the mass and scale of the building related to nearby buildings, especially historic resources and the visibility of the building(s) from downtown Truckee. 2. Architectural Design Considerations, Section 3.G.2.c. The scale of all buildings should be within a human scale so as not to overwhelm or dominate the natural surroundings. 3. Specific Design Guidelines. "Although flexibility in DRM residential site planning is desired, the aggregate effect of residential developments being unrelated to one another and the community as a whole often produces isolated `compounds' with little concern for the public environment." a. Section 3.G.3.a. Maximum attached units for condominiums and apartment buildings shall be limited to ten units. b. Section 3.G.3.b. "Building facades should be broken up to give the appearance of smaller masses reflecting different functions with the building. To the extent possible, each of the units should be individually recognizable." c. Section 3.G.3.c. "It is appropriate to provide each unit with its own identity and entry." Page 13 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Section 4 of the HMP sets design standards and guidelines for development projects to follow. These standards require design review of the site layout, buildings including height, bulk, articulation, signage, lighting and landscaping. 4. Overall Design Guidelines. "The organization and placement of buildings, access, parking areas, open space and the like should be based on an analysis of a site's characteristics, influences and impacts on views from the downtown area of Truckee ... Additionally, consideration should also be given to the needs and context of adjoining sites." a. Height and Scale Section 4.C.4.a. Building heights should relate to open spaces to allow maximum sun ventilation, protect from prevailing winds, enhance public views of surrounding ridgelines minimize obstruction of views from adjoining structures. ii. Section 4.C.4.b. "Height and scale of new development should be compatible with that of the surroundings development. New development height should `transition' from the height of adjacent development to the maximum height to the proposed building." iii. Section 4.C.4.c. "Scale, for purposes here, is the relationship between building size and the size of adjacent, permanent structures. It is also how the proposed building's size relates to the size of a human being." iv. Section 4.C.4.e. "The scale of buildings should be related to adjacent pedestrian area, streets and buildings (i.e., roof at 1 st story on multiple story buildings)." b. Multiple - Family Residential Garages Parking Section 4.C.7.b.i. "Parking beneath buildings, including subterranean parking, is encouraged and economizes the use of land and increases on -site recreation space." ii. Section 4.C.7.b.ii. "In cases where three (3) or more garage doors are adjacent to each other, the wall plane shall be varied by at least 5 -feet to depress certain garage doors further into the site, thus reducing the visual impact." Section 6 also includes a variety of "Environmental Polices" related to grading, drainage and tree removal, as follows: Section 65.1. Tree Protection requires that tentative maps and individual site development plans maintain mature tree clusters and preserve trees with diameters of 24- inches or greater. Such trees may be removed when necessary, or appropriate, due to project design and when there are no practical or reasonable methods to preserve such trees. 2. Section 6.F.2. Mass pad grading and wholesale vegetation removal is prohibited. Where possible, foundations shall be stepped to follow natural terrain. The HMP acknowledges that the existing conditions will be modified. The Plan, does, however, establish site planning and architectural standards to blend new development projects into the site while achieving a balance between the natural and built environment. Sections 3 and 4 of the HMP establish overall site development standards and design elements as tools that are intended to guide development to achieve an integrated blended neighborhood character, while minimizing visual impacts on the downtown. The primary goal for the major building forms is to Page 14 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood blend the colors and textures of the trees, soil and rocks of the native landscape. The design guidelines have been integrated to promote design themes, pedestrian orientation and buildings that incorporate "mountain architectural features and materials,- such as shingle, horizontal, vertical and board and baton siding, divided light windows, natural stone, composition shingle or metal roof material and wooden building doors. The HMP requires that individual projects be subject to design review pursuant to Title 18 of the Truckee Municipal Code, otherwise known as the Development Code. This review is intended to assure that each project will fully incorporate the design themes and standards contained in the master plan. Each project will be reviewed for compliance with the Town of Truckee Historic Design Guidelines and the design guidelines of the HMP. The design guidelines provide both objective and subjective criteria to determine conformity. The Aesthetic analysis contained herein reflects both. The conclusions of this section reflect the final review and recommendation conducted by the Truckee Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (HPAC) on July 9, 2014. In summary the HPAC found that the project was in conformance with the design standards of the HMP and the Town's historic review guidelines. It is not the purpose of this Initial Study to determine whether the project fully reflects the design parameters of the HMP. Ultimately, the Town's decision makers are tasked with determining whether the project conforms to the aesthetic values of the HMP. Development Code provisions for tree preservation and replacement Development Code Section 18.30.155 (Tree Preservation) states "The General Plan recognizes the importance of trees to the character and beauty of Truckee, as well as the role that trees have in advancing the public health, safety and welfare of its residents." One of the stated purposes of this section recognizes that "...trees can provide soil stability, noise buffering and wind protection benefits. The Town greatly values trees for their ecological importance, temperature mitigation, enhancement of wildlife habitat and aesthetics." Section 18.30.155.F. Mitigation. A property owner may be required to provide mitigation for any tree approved for removal. The mitigation requirement shall be satisfied by one or more of the following: a. Replanting on -site. The property owner shall plant either a minimum one and one half inch caliper healthy and well - branched deciduous tree or a five to six foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The replanted tree shall be a species that will eventually equal or exceed the removed tree in size if appropriate for the new location. � The tree shall be planted and maintained in accordance with Section 18.40.050 (Landscape Standards). b. Replanting off -site. If in the Town's determination there is insufficient available space on the property, the replanting required in Subsection 1 of this section shall occur on other property owned or controlled by the same owner within the town, in an open space area that is part of the same subdivision, or in a publicly -owned or dedicated open space or park. Such mitigation planting is subject to property owner approval. If planting on publicly - owned or dedicated property, the public owner may specify the species and size of the tree(s). Nothing in this section shall be construed as an obligation of the Town to allow trees to be planted on publicly owned or dedicated property. Impact Discussion Items 1.a. and 1.b. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or is within a state scenic highway? The Town's planning documents do not designate any portion of the site as a scenic vista nor is the site identified as having any prominent slope exposures and ridgelines or major streams. Page 15 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood The General Plan Community Character Element recognizes the importance of how the forested upland provides definition to the town's form. It also reflects that the steep slopes on Hilltop contribute to the backdrop of the Downtown area. Figure CC -1 specifically reflects that the westernmost portion of the Hilltop area is identified as having a "Prominent Slope, Ridge Line, Bluff Line or Hillside" that forms a scenic resource to the Town. The subject property in not included within the "Prominent Slope, Ridge Line, Bluff Line or Hillside" scenic resource area designated on Figure CC -1 of the Community Character Element. This Element goes onto establish the overall importance of open space within the Town landscape and community character. "For the Truckee community, open space provides a critical visual, physical and spiritual connection to the natural environment." Under "Scenic Resources" of the Element, it states "While the General Plan seeks to preserve the town's visual resources, it also recognizes that Truckee's scenic landscapes will not remain static. All development with the potential to affect scenic resources must be reviewed in the context of current conditions..." Figure CC -2 includes the Hilltop area within the Town Center area. As such, the area, including the subject parcel, is planned to accommodate development that meets the Town's design standards and a variety of other land use policy standards. The site is not within a state designated scenic highway. It does, however, overlook the Brockway Road Corridor that leads into downtown Truckee. The site has only limited visibility to the corridor. "The General Plan allows for a significant amount of development along Brockway Road, in recognition of its status as a key town arterial and its proximity to Downtown..." Impact Conclusion: Development of the site would not create unanticipated land use impacts on scenic resources as defined in the General Plan. Item 9.c. Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? As the first project and one located on the background northerly slope, Pollard Station may have a more dramatic visual effect than future projects in the mid - ground area. While the Project will alter the existing visual character of the site, development of the site has been anticipated by the General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan and HMP. Visual change was addressed as part of the HMP program MND. Even though the HMP would accommodate considerable development through building and site disturbance, that document found that the design guidelines and environmental policies that are to be applied to individual projects would be adequate to protect the visual character of the site and surroundings. The HMP requires a substantial amount of natural open space, much of which forms the backdrop for the downtown on the west side and on the slope above the subject project site. As noted above, the western area of the plan area is characterized as "Prominent Slope, Ridge Line, Bluff Line or Hillside." The slope area above the project site does not carry a scenic resource designation. Once built out, the HMP will result in a planned development that will contain a variety of different buildings in the foreground and mid - ground. The foreground and mid - ground areas of the plan area have been previously developed (now unimproved) and by comparison to the subject site and lands to the west and south, are relatively devoid of trees. The HMP permits future development within this previously disturbed area. This now unimproved, open area is relatively flat and is situated above the brow of the ridge overlooking the downtown. While there are fewer scattered trees in the relatively open area within the higher intensity areas within the DRH and DC designated areas of the HMP, it is expected that a number of these trees will be removed as development, including road building, occurs. Upon buildout, even with the Town's effort in reducing building intensity in this foreground and mid -range area of the HMP, views from downtown will be largely occupied by buildings. In the end, the character of the HMP will Page 16 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A senior Neighborhood have changed compared to existing conditions. This was recognized as part of the HMP program MND and anticipated by the tGeneral Plan as reflected in items 1a. and 1b., above. The Project site is intermittently visible to downtown Truckee (approximately 1,600 -feet away) and High Street (approximately 2,400 -feet away). The setting for the lodge and condominium buildings will include 1.9 -2cres of undisturbed open space. The majority of the undisturbed HMP ©pen space will be located on the lodge site south of Fine Cone Road. The proposed 1.9 acres of open space exceeds the 0.9 acre requirement for this parcel (see Figures 4 and 21 of the HMP) The permanent open space on the south side of the lodge complex combined with the off -site open space (to the south of the Project) will contribute to a backdrop of tree covered, undisturbed, slopes that will serge to reduce the visual impact. Planned open space to the rear of the Project site reflects the steeper slopes on the adjoining RS -5 zoned lands to the south. Collectively, these open space lands will provide a hillside backdrop amidst stands of coniferous tree cover. These open space lands will remain unaltered, The trees within the , .9 acre planned open space, are projected to remain largely undisturbed by the proposed project as well as the planned, low density, single- family residential development project to the south. The views of the lodge building and adjoining townhomelcondominium buildings from downtown Truckee will blend into and be incorporated into the natural setting. Building heights will all conform to the 35 foot height limit of theHMP, will not extend above the ridge line and will be considerably lower than the existing tree canopy. The background and foreground tree canopy will help frame the project with a natural buffer. The visual simulation below represents existing foreground trees, many of which could be removed with future commercial projects. BJILDING 4 STAIRWELL AND VISTA BALCONY EXTENTS OF POLLARD STATION BUILDINGS UNIT 5 -Q F_ E - a A' 3D BUILDING FROM GOOGLE EARTH SHOWING RELATIVE ACCURACY — RIDGELINE TREES BEHIND PROJECT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN ON -SITE EXISTING TREES OFF SITE IN F�iREGROUND FROM GOOGLE EARTH VISUAL IMPACT STUDY BEHIND FOREGROUND TREES There are a number of project features that will lead to visual changes over present conditions.. These features are associated with grading and tree removal and building mass /scale all of which are subject to the HMP to assure compatibility. Page 17 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Grading and Tree Removal - A preliminary grading plan (Sheet C3) and a Tree Removal plan (sheet C5) have been submitted with the Project. While the Project will result in the removal of all vegetation including trees within the graded footprint area, it does not employ cut and fill techniques that can result in unsightly fill slopes and greater site disturbance. Instead the project achieves the design standard of the HMP for "change in ground planes to break up mass and bulk of buildings," and "cutting into slopes and stepping down buildings at hillside edges to reduce visual impacts." Traditional pad grading typically achieves a balance between cut and fill slopes that are difficult to hide and or mitigate. The project includes graded cut areas through the use of foundation /building walls and engineered retaining walls, thereby eliminating the need for a fill slope. This method helps to achieve a smaller mass and scale while using the backdrop to further conceal buildings. The overall project incorporates a cascading terrace effect with buildings, grading and roads. As a result of the terraced placement of buildings and use of stepped wall construction, visual impacts are reduced while integrating the project into a more natural and undisturbed landform. The looped road for emergency vehicles required by the TFPD in the southern portion of the project results in a large cut into the hillside. This cut is retained by a 12 foot engineered wall. Two separate town home /condominium buildings are placed in front of the retaining wall, thereby providing a building to visually conceal the wall. This road location facilitates first floor level building access on the north side along with on- street parking and garage parking for these units. Similarly, the Pine Cone Road driveway extension (also required for emergency vehicle access) into the northerly condom inium /townhomes establishes an on -grade first floor entry. Tree removal within the lodge and condominium clusters will alter the existing view from downtown locations. The project design and in particularly the integration of the building form into the terrain will reduce the building mass and minimize tree removal thereby creating a filtered view from downtown and surrounding locations. While this filtered view will soften the appearance of the buildings, the size and mass will still be apparent. Even with variation in building forms that incorporate offsets in wall planes, materials and colors, including variable roof types, slopes and lines together with the retention of a number of large mature trees, building views from off -site vantage points will be softened, but not eliminated. The project design has attempted to harmonize the placement of buildings and other on -site amenities with the natural character of the site to accomplish the balance that is to be achieved in the HMP. There are 470 trees on site according to the tree count provided by the applicant's representatives. The tree survey found a mixture of coniferous trees (pines, fir and cedars). Table 1 is a summary of the number and size of trees that will be retained or removed as a result of the Project: Table 1 Tree Removal /Retention Diameter Trees to Remain Trees to be Removed Total Percentage to Remain 6" to 12" 57 120 177 32% 13" to 23" 63 73 136 46% 24" to 46" 65 92 157 41% Totals: 185 285 470 39% Page 18 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood The lodge complex occupies approximately 2.3 acres of the 8.02 acre site or about 29 percent of the site. This area is generally bounded by Pine Cone Road on the north and is encircled by the fire access road on the east, south and west. Within this area the greatest amount of ground disturbance will occur. Generally speaking the entire ground area will be cleared and grubbed with the exception of the trees to remain and land to the west of Building 3. Approximately 19 percent of all trees in this area are planned to remain with the project (Table 2). The modification of the 2.3 acre site is largely driven by the combined relatively large footprint (37,888 or approximately .87 acres) of the five lodge buildings. Table 2 Tree Removal /Retention within 2.3 acre Lodge Site Diameter Trees to Remain Trees to be Removed Total Percentage to Remain 6" to 12" 2 9 11 12% 13" to 23" 6 21 27 22% 24" to 46" 8 37 45 18% Totals: 16 83 19% As noted, the overall number of trees to be removed could be as many as 285, while 185 trees are proposed to remain. Approximately 125 trees (44 percent) of those being removed will accommodate access roads and parking. Of the 125 trees being removed, approximately 36 (29 percent) are 24" or larger in diameter. An additional 160 trees will be removed in order to accommodate actual building and other site disturbances. It is expected that any other multiple or co- housing project of similar density and intensity would result in a comparable amount of tree removal in order to accommodate access and surface parking. The design of the project has resulted in the retention of more medium to large trees (13" to 46 ") than smaller ones. Mitigation Measure la of the HMP program MND recognized that one of the design challenges would be to place buildings, driveways and parking areas such that mature trees would be retained. Mitigation measure 1 b precluded mass pad grading in order to minimize tree removal. There are a total of 157 mature trees on site, of which up to 92 (59 percent) will be removed. It is estimated that approximately 36 mature trees (13 percent) to be removed are within access routes and /or parking areas. This leaves an estimated 56 (36 percent) mature trees that will be removed as a result of building placement and other improvements. There are two conclusions that can be reached. First, the larger footprint of the buildings, especially the lodge, may result in a greater number of tree clusters to be removed and secondly, any residential project of similar density or intensity under the HMP would result in mature tree removal. The only clear way to significantly reduce the number of trees to be removed is from a reduced project size with smaller footprint buildings. Such a project would more than likely underachieve the HMP density allocation to the site and have a deleterious effect on the planned land use mix and shared costs for the common infrastructure. It is also noted that development within all of Hilltop will result in substantial tree removal. Reviewing the total number of trees to remain or be removed is only one measure of site impact associated with the Project. The site planning challenge is to strategically retain mature trees where possible to help soften the appearance of larger building both on site and from the downtown vantage point. In general, and to the degree possible with the project, the site plan layout intentionally retains trees in locations that will provide a visual buffer from downtown Truckee. Page 19 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Development Code Section 18.30.155.F (Mitigation) requires that trees removed be mitigated by either on -site or off -site planting preferably on land owned by the project developer. The tree replacement planting should include either a minimum one and one half inch caliper, well branched deciduous tree or a five to six foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The landscape plan provides 170 deciduous trees and no coniferous evergreen replacement trees. As noted above in Table 1, there are 285 trees to be removed from the project site. Development Code Section 18.30.155.F.b. requires that trees be re- planted off -site if there is inadequate room can the project site to replace the trees removed resulting from the project. The preferred off -site locations for replacement tree planting are other lands owned by the developer or publicly owned lands. One of the owners of the project site awned or has an interest in other lands within HMP. Currently those lands are located immediately to the north (3.67 acres, formerly Intrawest) and on the northerly border (1 acre, Silverwood) of the HMP area_ The majority of both sites are lightly covered with trees. Planting replacement coniferous trees on these two parcels would help re- establish the forested character and aid in softening the built environment associated with the full implementation of the HMP. Off -site Phase 1 infrastructure improvements' The extension of Brockway Road to the roundabout is largely barren with few trees or any other type of vegetation (see photo simulations below). The route of the improvement from the subject project site falls partially on the Old Brockway Road leading to Brockway Road_ Other human activities have also resulted in significant site alterations over the past 100 years or more. The construction of the Old Brockway Road extension to the north east leading to the roundabout on Brockway Road at the northeast or the plan area will result in the introduction ofnew hardscape and impervious surfaces. The actual paved /improved section will be approximately 40 feet wide to the shoulders on either side of the road. While the lands where the road extension will be placed and the roundabout do not have trees, the introduction of additional impervious surfaces should be softened with tree planting and other landscaping. Page 20 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood { 111111 ��:� 4 A 111 11 1 Building Mass and Visibility - Ah �Y 7 4 !Jv �i Y' I• ^f �Jq- depending on the planned use, residential buildings on the subject site could be of smaller scale or could have relatively large building foot prints. The only physical (measureable) restriction on building mass in the HMP is the 35 foot height limitation. All other design building design features of the HMP require a subjective determination to measure compliance. All buildings within the project are in conformity with the height limits. All buildings also conform to the equivalent size of a 10 unit or smaller multiple family building- While there are more than 10 "residential units" within lodge buildings 4 and 5 the actual equivalent size (18,575 sq- ft. and 21,436 sq, ft. respectively) is within a reasonable larger range for a 10 unit multiple family building. Height limits were strategically established to limit the height of buildings and to provide compatible heights for all building within the HMP area. The subject site and lands to the west and south are planned to accept the greater height limits, which are established at 35 -feet (See Section 3, Figure 14, page 3 -3 HMP)_ The maximum height limit for all other buildings in the plan area is 25 -feet. Section 3_A -6 requires that the mass and scale of the buildings is to be reviewed for its effect on nearby buildings and downtown Truckee. The collective size of the five buildings comprising the lodge facility is 76,458 sq_ ft- The five buildings range in size between 7,740 sq. ft. (Building 2) and 21,438 sq. ft. (Building 4). Taken individually, they achieve a reduction in mass through smaller buildings, staggered placements and building articulation elements. They are also designed with a variety of architectural features that help integrate the lodge onto the site, provide a pedestrian orientation for the independent living units while preserving open space and retaining mature trees. The staggered placement of buildings 1 through 5 can result in the appearance of a single building perspective_ A shared enclosed lobby connects the two Independent Living apartment Page 21 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood buildings (Buildings 1 and 2). In addition, the Assisted Living building (Building 4) and the Memory Care building (Building 5) both have enclosed corridor connections with the main lodge (Building 3), primarily to provide access to the kitchen and common dining areas. These connections are not visible from Pine Cone Road or any other off -site locations. The main lodge building (Building 3) is approximately 32 feet in height and is setback approximately 75 feet from Pine Cone Road. The large setback area is occupied by a porte cochere entrance and considerable landscaping. The closest building (combined buildings 1 and 2 connected with a common lobby) parallels Pine Cone Road and is approximately 190 -feet in length. It is a two -story building, approximately 32 -feet in height that has a variable setback between 25- and 55 -feet from the edge of the Pine Cone Road travel way. The building mass of the five - building lodge is broken up and offset using a variety of wall, face and roof heights, along with a variety of other architectural elements to achieve a mountain architectural theme The layout, greater setback, architectural style and mature tree retention will intermittently soften building massing from most vantage points. In addition, all residential units are intended to have individual access along Pine Cone Road in order to distinguish individual units. The two Independent Living buildings (Buildings 1 and 2) both have separate and individual access entry ways along the street side. However, the HMP, did anticipate a potential larger building size for this site in its consideration of a co- housing project that could have a central community building(s). The Common House in a co- housing project provides a place for community events such as common dinners and other member activities. The Main Lobby and Common Area building (Building 3) shares common elements of a Common House within a co- housing project. Since it is setback and does not contain individual living units, it is not required to achieve the pedestrian orientation similar to Buildings 1 and 2. HMP Section 3.G, DRM District states "... the final design for this area, including the potential for co- housing, shall be subject to all development and design standards as required by the HMP." While the HMP recognized that a dense co- housing development would be appropriate in the DRM zone, it also required adherence to the design standards of the HMP. The five buildings that comprise the lodge range in height between 24 and 32 feet. All of the townhome buildings are considerably less than 35 feet. The building heights within the Project are in conformity to the HMP and the Project provides more open space (1.9 acres) than required (0.9 acres) and thereby accommodates potentially greater tree retention. The project satisfies the residential clustering requirements of the General Plan Land Use Element, while increasing the required open space allocation of the HMP. The Project is designed with a strong mountain architectural aesthetic and it adheres to the overall materials and color design guidelines of the HMP. The architectural character of the lodge and condominiums embraces classic mountain requirements of building in snow country. The aesthetics of the architecture incorporate "funky" mountain character elements consistent with the Truckee territorial style. This character style incorporates gable and shed additive elements intended to break down the overall mass of the structure to be more responsive to the surrounding context. The condominium units provide various building projections and covered, private, decks for each unit to further break up the elevations. The senior lodge facility has been broken up into five semi - connected buildings to reduce the mass and scale of the lodge complex. The combined footprint for the five lodge buildings is approximately 37,888 sq. ft. and the 13 condominium buildings collectively include approximately 42,819 sq. ff. The overall site plan (Map Exhibit C2) represents that overall building coverage is 80,777 sq. ft. (1.85 -acres or 23 percent of the site). In addition, site grading required to accommodate improvements including roads and other circulation features, parking, drop -off areas, outdoor patio and memory care courtyard include approximately 86,112 sq. ft. Page 22 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood (1.98- acres). Buildings 4 and 5 of the lodge complex are three stories. Building 4 also includes subterranean parking for 15 vehicles that further reduces on -site disturbance. Overall, the various project components, subterranean parking and building /retaining walls that are utilized to reduce tree removal, provide open space /landscape area and reduce site grading. As a result, open space and landscape areas constitute approximately 52 percent of the entire site. Mitigation Measures MM -1.a A one and one -half for one tree replanting ratio shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. To the extent that the landscape plan cannot accommodate the additional trees, the balance should be planted on other lands owned or controlled through a fee interest on other lands within the HMP. The additional trees beyond the 170 deciduous trees proposed within the landscape plan shall be coniferous trees common to those found on the HMP site. All replacement trees shall meet the size requirements of Section 18.30.155.FF.a of the Development Code. If trees are to be planted off -site, the applicant may enter into an agreement with the Town to plant those trees as part of future development plans or within five years, whichever occurs first. Timing: Prior to building permit issuance Responsible Agency: Planning Division MM -1.b A landscape plan shall accompany the construction of the Old Brockway Road connection and the Roundabout. That plan shall include coniferous trees common to those found on the HMP site. Said trees shall be planted in random, clustered groupings fashion to reflect a more natural feeling within the right of way. Any trees planted within the right of way of the roundabout shall be placed to not interfere with the safe operations of the roundabout. All trees shall meet the size requirements of Section 18.30.155.FF.a of the Development Code. Timing: Street tree and landscape plan included within the improvement plans Responsible Agency: Town Engineer and Planning Divisionlmpact Conclusion: With the inclusion MM's 1.a and 1.b, the visibility impacts would be less than significant. Item 1.d. Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The HMP design standards require that exterior lighting, including street lighting, be directed downward and shielded to prevent light spill and illumination of the night sky. The Development Code allows up to 800,000 lumens of light for this project site. The project proposes 400,000 lumens. The lower light levels should reduce overall lighting and glare generated from the project site. The proposed lighting standards also implement the lighting standards and design criteria of Development Code Section 18.30.060 and will ensure that the exterior lighting will be architecturally integrated with the character of the Master Plan while reducing the potential lighting impacts. The Project complies with the lighting standards, as required by the Master Plan. Impact Conclusion: Development of the site would not create unanticipated lighting or glare impacts. The impact is less than significant. Page 23 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood On July 9, 2014, the HPAC supported the project and found the proposed buildings design /material /colors, site design, parking, landscaping and lighting design to be consistent with the HMP including design guidelines. The commission also recognized that a senior living project shares many is similar features with a co- housing project. This distant location minimizes the impacts to the historic district and historic buildings within Hilltop. HPAC also considered aesthetics from key locations throughout downtown. They acknowledged that there will be intervening land uses in the form of commercial in the foreground, residential condominiums in the middle ground and the lodge buildings in the background all framed with existing trees and the significant slope in the background. HPAC also recognized the enhanced walkability and pedestrian street experience, the greater distance achieved between the various lodge buildings. Finally, building mass and scale have been reduced with details and refined materials on the north side of the condominiums. It finally recognized that much of the on -site grading is a result of emergency access requirements administered by the TFPD. Such emergency road connections would be required for any project on the site. In addition to various site and architectural plans, HPAC reviewed visual simulation exhibits which took into consideration building placement and tree retention from two different downtown locations (Commercial Row and High Street). There is a filtered view of the future lodge building and condominium buildings from the two downtown view points at Commercial Row and High Street. In addition, the visual simulations assess views from three different spots along Brockway Road, south and slightly southeast of the Project site. While the visual simulation exhibits represent existing conditions, the future could result in additional off -site tree removal as intervening lands are developed within the HMP. New buildings will be constructed in places where mature trees currently stand on adjoining lands. Even though the Hilltop Master Plan establishes considerable open space, most of these lands are located to the south and west within the plan area. These are lands that are not as visible to the Downtown. Overall Aesthetics Impact Conclusion: The project layout and placement of buildings, access, parking areas, open space, strategic tree retention along with other project elements are balanced and harmonized with the site's natural characteristics, influences and visual impacts on the downtown area. Buildings are placed such that they take advantage of the natural topography, existing vegetation and related natural features. The impact to the historic district and historical resources on the balance of Hilltop is minimized due to the relative distance from such features. The mountain architecture reflects the aesthetic elements of Truckee and will help the Project blend in with the site and HMP architectural design features. The site and layout design of the project fits into the natural environment of the site. Together with the proposed project features and MM -1a and 1b there will be a less than significant impact on aesthetics. 2. AIR QUALITY. `Potentially Less Than Significant Less No Would the Project: Significant Impact with Mitigation fiThan.' Significant Impact Impact Incorporated,. a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Truckee Particulate Matter Air Quality X Management Plan or other applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing X or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant X for which the Project region is non- Page 24 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X Environmental Setting — Existing Climate and Air Quality. The following overview is an excerpt summary from the Truckee Railyard Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (November 2008) and provides a summary of regional air quality, local climate and air quality conditions in the Truckee area. Climate and Air Quality. Mountainous terrain surrounds the Truckee area and is most pronounced in the west and the south. This area surrounded by mountainous terrain can be described as an air basin for the Truckee region in which air freely circulates within the basin but can be prevented or curtailed from leaving the basin by the higher elevations. The air pollution potential is lowest for the parts of the sub - region that are highly elevated, due largely to good ventilation and less influx of pollutants from upwind sources. Pollutants can rise above these higher elevations, but they can be prevented from escaping the basin by temperature inversions. The occurrence of light winds in the evenings and early mornings occasionally causes elevated pollutant levels. The air pollution potential is greater at the lower elevated parts of this sub - region because of the lower frequency of strong winds. Air quality is a function of both local climate and local sources of air pollution. The amount of a given air pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the amount of pollutant released and the atmosphere's ability to transport /or dilute that pollutant. The major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain and for photochemical pollutants, sunshine. Temperatures in Truckee range widely through the course of a day and through the year. In summer, typical ranges are from 35 to 40 degrees Fahrenheit (F) in the morning to above 80 degrees (F) in the afternoons. Temperatures in winter can range from nearly zero degrees (F) in the mornings to above 40 degrees (F) during the afternoon. Annually, mean temperatures (as measured at Truckee USFS Ranger Station) range from an average minimum of 15 degrees (F) in January to an average maximum of 82 degrees (F) in August. The frost -free season in Truckee averages only 30 days. Although summer thunderstorms are common, most precipitation falls from late October through early May with winter precipitation usually taking the form of snow. The cold temperatures and snow cover on the ground are conducive to the creation of temperature inversion layers. A temperature inversion is created when a stable mass of warmer air lies or sits atop a mass of colder air. This prevents the cold air from rising and mixing with the warmer air. Mountains surrounding a valley or basin act as a rim, much like the sides of a cup or bowl and prevent the cold air from moving laterally. The lack of air movement and turbulence resulting from the inversion layer (acting as a lid) and the mountains (acting as the bowl) curbs the dispersal of pollutants. Particulates cannot rise above the inversion layer and instead of dispersing and thinning out in a larger air volume, the particulates are trapped within a smaller, confined air space. This increases particulate matter concentrations because more and more particulate matter is concentrated in a smaller volume of air that cannot exp to accommodate the increased particulate matter emissions. This sub - region contains a variety of industrial air pollution Page 25 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood sources. The sub - region is also traversed by frequently congested freeways such as 1 -80 and Highway 89. Traffic and congestion and the motor vehicle emissions they generate, are increasing. The Town is within the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD, which regulates air quality for Nevada, Plumas and Sierra Counties. Air quality conditions in the Northern Sierra area have improved significantly since the NSAQMD was created in 1986. Ambient concentrations of air pollutants and the number of days during which the region exceeds air quality standards have fallen dramatically. Exceedances of air quality standards occur primarily during meteorological conditions conducive to high pollution levels, such as cold, windless winter nights or hot, sunny summer afternoons. Pollutant monitoring results for the years 2005 through 2007 were evaluated in the Railyard Master Plan EIR. The closest monitoring station to the Master Plan Area for 03, PM10 and PM2.5 is the TFPD Station in downtown Truckee. There is no available monitoring data from monitoring stations within the three - county air basin for CO, NO2 and SO2 concentrations for the past three years (2005 through 2007). The available air quality monitoring results indicate that air quality in the downtown Truckee area has generally been good during the 2005 -2007 period. As indicated in the monitoring results, the State 03 standard was exceeded seven times in the year 2006 and five times in 2007; while the federal 8 -hour 03 standard was exceeded four times in 2006. Federal PM10 standards were exceeded once in this area during the 3 -year period. No violations of the State or federal standards for PM2.5 were recorded at this station for the years 2005 to 2007. Federal standards, have however been exceeded in 2013 (see below). Based on information in the Truckee Particulate Air Quality Management Plan, the Truckee air basin routinely exceeds State PM10 24 -hour standards and is close to exceeding the State PMIo annual standards (and has exceeded this standard in past years). The Truckee air basin is designated a non - attainment area under State ambient air quality standards. Although the Truckee area basin complies with Federal ambient air quality standards and is designated an attainment area, monitoring stations have recorded several 24 -hour exceedances of the Federal standard within the past five (5) years. The three primary sources of PM10 are woodstove smoke, re- entrained road dust and construction and demolition activities. According to the 2009 Annual Report of Particulate Matter Air Quality completed for the Town in 2008, the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) currently has only one monitor sampling particulate matter in the Truckee air basin. It samples PM2.5 air quality for a 24 -hour period on a continuous basis. That report provides the following conclusions regarding PM2.5 fine particulate levels: Sampling Days 362 days Annual Average Concentration (Arithmetic Mean) 15.81 ug /m3 Highest 24 -hour Concentration 127.29 ug /m3 Jan - March Average Concentration 17.84 ug /m3 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards for PM2.5 is 35 ug /m3 per 24 hours and 12.0 ug /m3 for annual average. The EPA website reports the following PM 2 -5 values for 2013 as follows *: Weighted Annual mean 8.3 ug /m3 Highest 24 -hour concentration 42.9 ug /m3 *This report does not provide information regarding monthly average concentrations Page 26 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Particulate matter consists of solid and liquid particles of dust, soot, aerosols, and other matter, which are small enough to remain suspended in the air for a long period of time. Particulate matter can be divided into several size fractions. Coarse particles (PM10) are between 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter and arise primarily from natural processes, such as wind -blown dust or soil. Fine particles (PWA are less than 2.5 microns in diameter and are produced mostly from combustion or burning activities. Fuel burned in cars and trucks, power plants, factories, fireplaces, and wood stoves produces fine particles. The level of PM2.5 in the air is a public health concern because it can bypass the body's natural filtration system more easily than larger particles and can lodge deep in the lungs. A portion of the particulate matter in the air is due to natural sources such as wind -blown dust and pollen, which are associated with the aggravation of respiratory conditions. Man -made sources include combustion, automobiles, field burning, factories, and road dust. Primary sources of PM10 emissions are road traffic, construction, open burning, and wildfires. The amount of particulate matter and PM10 generated is dependent on the soil type and the soil moisture content. Traffic also generates particulate matter emissions through entrainment of dust and dirt particles that settle onto roadways and parking lots. Air Quality Issues. The section describes the key air quality issues in the Truckee area. Local Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots. Local air quality is most affected by CO emissions from motor vehicles. CO is typically the pollutant of greatest concern because it is created in abundance by motor vehicles and it does not readily disperse into the air. Idling freight trains are also a source of CO emissions. Because CO does not readily disperse, areas of vehicle congestion can create "pockets" of high CO concentration called "hot spots." These pockets have the potential to exceed the State 1 -hour standard of 20.0 ppm /or the 8 -hour standard of 9.0 ppm. While CO transport is limited, it disperses with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near congested roadways or intersections may reach unhealthful levels that adversely affect local sensitive receptors (e.g., residents, schoolchildren, the elderly, hospital patients, etc.). Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentration, modeling is recommended to determine a project's effect on local CO levels. 2. Vehicle Emissions. Long -term air emission impacts are those associated with changes in automobile travel within the Town. Mobile source emissions would result from vehicle trips associated with increased vehicular travel. As is true throughout much of the U.S., motor vehicle use is projected to increase substantially in the region. The NSAQMD, local jurisdictions and other parties responsible for protecting public health and welfare will continue to seek ways of minimizing the air quality impacts of growth and development in order to avoid further exceedances of the standards. 3. Fugitive Dust. Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with demolition, land clearing, exposure of soils to the air and cut and fill operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project -by- project basis, depending on the level of activity, specific construction operations and weather conditions. The U.S. EPA has developed an approximate emission factor for construction - related emissions of total suspended particulate of 1.2 tons per acre per month of activity. This factor assumes a moderate activity level, moderate silt content in soils being disturbed and a semi -arid climate. The California Air Resources Board estimates that 64 percent of construction - related, total suspended particulate emissions is PM10. Therefore, the emission factors for uncontrolled construction - related PM10 emissions are: Page 27 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood f 0.77 tons per acre per month of PMio; or f 51.0 pounds per acre per day of PMio. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. There are a number of feasible control measures that can be reasonably implemented to significantly reduce PM10 emissions from construction. Fugitive dust sources also include emissions from re- entrained road dust. This emission source is of particular air quality concern in the Truckee area. Substantial amounts of road sand and salt are applied to Town roads and State highways for traction control during winter storm periods. The sand and salt are "kicked -up" into the air by vehicles when the storm period ends and the roads (and the sand and salt) begin to dry out. The amount of dust and dirt on the roads during the non - winter months is substantially less than the winter months and generally is comprised of fugitive dust blown onto the road and dirt and mud tracked onto the road by vehicles coming from construction sites unpaved roads. 4. Odors. Odors are also an important element of local air quality conditions. Major sources of odors include restaurants, manufacturing plants and agricultural operations. Other odor producers include the industrial facilities within the region. While sources that generate objectionable odors must comply with air quality regulations, the public's sensitivity to locally produced odors often exceeds regulatory thresholds. 5. Construction Equipment Exhaust. Construction activities cause combustion emissions from utility engines, heavy -duty construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from construction sites and motor vehicles transporting construction crews. Exhaust emissions from construction activities vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment results in localized exhaust emissions. 6. Solid Fuel Burning Emissions. Particulate emissions from residential solid -fuel burning devices are primarily a seasonal concern in the Nevada County region. Residential solid - fuel burning devices are mostly used for heating purposes during the colder temperatures of late fall, winter and early spring. Also, emissions from wood heaters and fireplaces will be augmented by increased occupancy of second or vacation homes on weekends and holiday periods. According to the Town's Particulate Matter Air Quality Concern Management Plan document, it' is estimated that nearly 90 percent of all single - family homes in the Truckee air basin have at least one solid fuel burning device (excluding pellet stoves). Although data on particle size of wood smoke is scarce, 80 percent to 95 percent of wood smoke particulate matter is less than 2.5 microns in size. Regulatory Setting Federal Regulations The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) governs air quality in the United States. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( USEPA) administers the CAA. The USEPA has established ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for common pollutants. The ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants that represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called "criteria" pollutants because the USEPA regulates them by developing human health -based and /or environmentally based criteria (science -based guidelines) for setting permissible levels. The set of limits based on human health is called primary standards. Another set of limits intended to prevent environmental and property damage is called secondary standards. Page 28 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood As required by the federal Clean Air Act, standards have been established for the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone (03), respirable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2_5), sulfur oxides and lead. State Regulations The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) governs air quality in California. The CCAA is administered by the California Air Resources Board (GARB) at the state level and by air quality management districts' at the regional and local levels. Pursuant to the CCAA, the State of California has also established ambient air quality standards. California standards are generally considered more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. CARB classifies the Truckee area as a non - attainment area for PM10. For all other state criteria pollutants, Truckee is designated as attainment or unclassified. Local Standards NSAQMD monitoring data shows no violations or exceedances of State or Federal ozone or carbon standards and the Truckee air basin is designated as an attainment for these pollutants. The three - county Northern Sierra area is considered, in air quality terms, an air basin. The NSAQMD is primarily responsible for assuring that the National and State ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the counties of Nevada, Plumas and Sierra. The NSAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other activities. The NSAQMD has jurisdiction over the three - county Northern Sierra area. The NSAQMD has rules and regulations to protect regional air quality. District Rule 226 would be applicable to the proposed project. The rule requires the submittal of a Dust Control Plan to the District for approval prior to any surface disturbance, including clearing of vegetation. The NSAQMD would prefer to have the conditions of the Dust Control Plan included in the General Notes and /or the Grading Plan for the Project. Local Policies. The Town addresses air quality issues in four different programs. The General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element includes a variety of policies related to air quality. Section 6.E. of the HMP requires a particulate matter emissions study meeting the requirements of the Town of Truckee Particulate Matte Air Quality Management Plan. Finally, Development Code Section 18.30.020 establishes procedures for minimizing dust and emissions with construction projects. The Particulate Air Quality Management Plan includes nine objectives, the first of which states that new development will mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible, its particulate matter emissions from solid fuel burning devices and re- entrained road dust. In addition, the plan contains several Control Strategies that are applicable to the Project, including Construction /Grading Regulations, Large Project Emissions Offset and Road Surfacing. The subject project does not by itself quality as a Larger Project Emissions Offset, but cumulatively it does as part of the HMP. The following implementation guidelines for each of these strategies are applicable to the Project: Page 29 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Construction /Grading Regulations. 1. Best Available Control Measures (BACM) will be used in implementing development regulations. Because broom or mechanical sweeping does not control particulate matter emissions but rather entrains dust into the air, broom or mechanical sweeping is not considered a BACM without other measures to control dust during sweeping. 2. Paved access points or aprons onto Town streets should be installed at the beginning of construction of large projects. The aprons should be flushed and swept at least once daily. 3. Grading Ordinance provisions should be adopted to identify temporary and permanent erosion control measures and require on -going monitoring of project grading. Plan Area inspections should be required before grading is initiated to ensure all necessary control measures, including proper staking and tree protection measures, are in place. 4. A dust suppression plan should be required with grading plans for larger projects. Regular watering and other dust - preventive measures (e.g., hydroseeding, revegetation) should occur on a frequent basis during project construction. 5. For larger projects, securities or bonds may be required to ensure that dust control measures are properly implemented during grading. Large Project Emissions Offset. 1. A large development project will be considered a project that results in 100 or more single - family residential lots, 200 or more multi - family residential units, 40,000 sq. ft. or more of office, commercial /or industrial floor space, or any equivalent combination thereof. 2. Guidelines and methodologies will be developed by Town staff with the assistance of the NSAQMD to calculate particulate matter emissions and identify feasible mitigation measures. The guidelines will identify those emission sources for which emissions must be estimated (e.g., wood combustion devices, vehicle emissions, re- entrained road dust both on- and off -site) and list feasible mitigation measures that may be implemented to offset emissions. 3. Emissions generated by the Project shall be offset by 100 percent upon implementation of the mitigation measures. The offset should be proportional to fine and coarse particulate matter emissions generated by the Project. For example, if 40 percent of the Project's particulate matter emissions are fine, then 40 percent of the offset should be directed to reducing fine particulate matter emissions. 4. If there are not sufficient measures that can be implemented to offset project emissions, a mitigation fee ($ per annual ton) may be paid in -lieu of other mitigation measures. The amount of the mitigation fee will be determined as part of the guidelines and methodology to be developed as part of this control strategy. The mitigation fees will be used as part of the Town's air quality mitigation funds to study and reduce particulate matter pollution and to implement other control strategies. Road Surfacing. Projects and subdivisions will be required to offset (by paving of roadways) 100 percent of their emissions generated by new traffic on non -paved roadways. Exemptions will be provided for single - family residences, duplexes and secondary residential units constructed on existing lots and for subdivision roads that provide access to four or less parcels. Page 30 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Thresholds of significance are based on a source's projected impacts and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. The NSAQMD has developed a tiered approach to significance levels, as follows: 1. A project with emissions meeting Level A thresholds will require the most basic mitigations; 2. Projects with projected emissions in the Level B range will require more extensive mitigations; 3. Those projects which exceed Level C thresholds will require the most extensive mitigations. The tiered thresholds for Level A, B and C are given below for a project's estimated emissions of criteria pollutants in Ibs /day. Level A Thresholds NOX ROG PM10 <24 lbs/day <24 lbs/day <79 Ibs /da Level B Thresholds NOX ROG PM10 24 -136 Ibs /da 24 -136 ibs /da 79 -136 Ibs /da "Level C Thresholds NOX ROG PM10 >136 lbs/day 1 >136 lbs/day >136 Ibs /da NOx, ROG PM10 emissions must be mitigated to a level below significant. If emissions for NOx, ROG PM10 exceed 136 pounds per day (Level C), then there is a significant impact; below Level C is potentially significant. Impact Discussion Items 2.a through 2.d. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Truckee Particulate Matter Air Qualify Management Plan, violate any air quality standard /contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which Truckee is non - attainment or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The HMP program MND determined that anticipated development meets the threshold for the "Large Project Emission Offset" control strategy in the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan because, cumulatively, the buildout would consist of over 100 dwelling units and over 40,000 sq. ft. of floor space. Based on the HMP each project cumulatively meets the threshold for a large development per the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan. Particulate matter emissions generated by each individual project may be cumulatively significant. The large emissions offset is targeted towards all particulate matter sources for the Project that can be measured in order to achieve "no net increase" in emissions so the Project will not contribute to annual and 24 -hour particulate matter concentrations. As summarized in the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan, the three primary sources of particulate air matter are wood combustion, road re- entrained dust and particulate matter from demolition and construction activities. The following discussion summarizes the Project's contribution to each emission source: Page 31 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Wood combustion. The use of woodstoves will also generate significant amounts of fine particulate matter. Woodstoves are the second major source of PM10 during poor air quality periods and the number one annual source of PM2.5. Because of the severity of the existing particulate matter air quality problem, additional PM10 emissions will contribute to the existing violations of the State 24 -hour standards and add to emission concentrations that may lead to violations of the Federal 24 -hour standards. Therefore, the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan prohibits a net increase in PM10 emissions from residential projects. None of the residences within the Project or the lodge will include wood stoves. Heating devices will be limited to natural gas fireplaces /or central heating. As a result, there will be no increase in PM10 or PM2.5 particulate matter associated with wood burning devices. Road re- entrained dust. Particulate matter emissions are generated by vehicles traveling on paved roads. Vehicles disturb particulate matter sources on the road (e.g. and winter road sand) by breaking down the matter into smaller fractions and propelling the particulate matter into the air. There are more factors involved in determining the annual particulate matter generated by road re- entrained dust vehicle emissions, such as climatic events throughout the seasons (i.e., more sing of roads during heavier snow fall abnormal or above average temperatures during the summer time). The Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan references a formula in Appendix 4 relating to paved road silt loading emissions, which is based on the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) generated by the Project. The silt loading factor is an average figure for the entire year based on EPA Guidelines, AP -42, fifth edition; Highway Statistics, FHWA). A specific analysis of re- entrained dust was prepared by the applicant based on the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan (See Appendix Q of the Pollard Station Supplemental Information Appendices). The following is a summary of the conclusions: Total weekly project' trips (based on ITE L Use Code 255) 2,969.0 Vehicle miles traveled per trip 4.3 Project weekly vehicle miles traveled 12,767.0 Vehicle miles traveled per year 666,125.0 Grams dust/mile 2.0 Re- entering dust - tons /yr 1.47 Since the Project will exceed the "no net increase" in emission, it is required to mitigate that impact. The Town allows a fee to offset this cumulative impact. Once paid that impact would be considered less than significant. Particulate matter. The applicant prepared a separate air quality impact model using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), a statewide land use emissions computer model provided by the California Air Resources Control Board and accepted by the air districts of California to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction (short term) and operations ((long term), as well as indirect emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and /or removal, and water use. The mobile source emission factors used in the model (EMFAC2099) includes the Pavley standards and Low Carbon Fuel standards. The model also identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions along with calculating the benefits achieved from measures chosen by the ' At buildout Page 32 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood user. The GHG mitigation measures were developed and adopted by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). For purposes of this assessment, CalEEMod 2013.2.2 (attached herein) was used to quantify emissions and identify mitigation measures to reduce pollutants. Assumptions used in the assessment that deviated from the standard defaults provided by CalEEMod included the following: • SMUD was used as the default "Utility Provider" - CalEEMod uses a default list of various public utility providers to estimate "intensity factors" for CO2, CH4 and N2O. TDPUD will be serving this project and is not listed as one of the default utility providers. The Electrical System Engineer for TDPUD indicated that Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) likely has similar intensity factors as TDPUD. • Lodge Facility = 2.3 acres & 76,458 sq. ft. - Land area for certain uses are estimated by CalEEMod based on density. The default in this case for a lodge facility of "86 units" was inaccurate. The land area was corrected to reflect the actual land area that encompasses the lodge facility which is approximately 2.3 acres and the total area of the five buildings are approximately 76,458 sq. ft. • Population — The default population estimates an average household size of 2.86 people per household, even for the lodge facility. A more accurate estimate of population within a "senior" lodge facility is 2 persons per household (172 persons total). Although overly conservative for a senior housing project, the population for 40 condos was left as a default of 2.86 people per household. • No Demolition - CalEEMod uses default construction phases, including "Demolition" of existing buildings. Since there are no existing buildings, the "demolition" phase was assumed not to be required. • Phasing — A conservative ( "worst case ") approach was used which assumed the entire project will be built out over a 2 -year period. In actuality, full build -out is anticipated over years involving multiple phases. • Wood Fireplaces & woodstoves — The project assumes that wood fireplaces and woodstoves will be prohibited. • Snow Days — Weather.com indicates that the number of snow days in Truckee is 42. CalEEMod Results The Project is proposed to be developed in five separate phases over a six year period. A more conservative ( "worst case ") approach was used to describe the phasing of the project by assuming full build -out of the project over a two year period (2015- 2016). For purposes of the CalEEMod model run, the "worst case" assumed that construction emissions will occur over two different construction seasons. In 2015 activities such as site preparation, grading and some construction would occur. The balance of the construction would include building construction, paving and architectural coating, (painting). The 2015 estimate is the much larger, and therefore, more impactful of the two construction seasons. While both winter and summer estimates were determined, the following tables reflect the worst case, winter conditions. This approach assumes simultaneous emissions from multiple, overlapping phases and adds them together. Based on the results of the Air Quality & GHG Assessment using the CalEEMod computer model (shown below), the unmitigated projected daily emissions for NOX, ROG, and PMio, are shown below. There are two categories of emissions calculated by CalEEMod: (1) Construction and (2) Operational. Construction emissions are considered "short- term" air quality impacts associated with construction activities. Operational emissions are considered "long- term" emissions from operations as well as mobile sources (vehicles). Results of each category are calculated in Page 33 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior. Neighborhood Ibs /day and tons /year. The estimated maximum unmitigated daily emissions for Pollard Station are as follows: NO. ROG PM10 Overall Construction (Ibs /day) 57.0 28.3 21.3 Overall Operational (Ibs /day) 13.9 12.8 8.2 As discussed in Section 5 (Geology and Soils), grading for the Project will disturb soil on the site, generating airborne dust that may affect air quality in the area. The following is a summary of the total of all emissions generated by the Project along with the NSAQMD threshold of significance rating. These emissions include construction related (particulate matter and vehicle exhaust), operational emissions (normally vehicle emissions) and area source emissions: Construction Emission Estimates (Ibs /day) 2015 Construction Emission Estimates (Ibs /day) 2016 ROG NOx CO SOz PM10 PM10 ; PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 PMzs CO2 1 39.10 1 0.09 1 4.83 4.83 1 2,821.12 Dust Exhaust A Dust Exhaust A , 2015 2.8 53.5 46.1 .06 1.1 3.3 4.3 .3 3.0 3.3 6,270.25 TOTALS (Ibs /day 5.4 57 44 .04 18.2 3.09 21.3 10 2.8 12.8 4.254.9 unmitigated) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.45 73.63 0.00 65.05 0.00 2015 TOTALS (Ibs /day 5.4 57 44 .04 8.3 3.09 11.4 4.5 2.8 7.4 4,254.9 mitigated) Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.4 0.00 46 55 0.00 42.2 0.00 NSAQMD Significance A B - - A A A -- 7-- Threshold Construction Emission Estimates (Ibs /day) 2016 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 PM2.5 CO2 1 39.10 1 0.09 1 4.83 4.83 1 2,821.12 Dust Exhaust A Dust Exhaust A 2016 Totals unmitigated 2.8 53.5 46.1 .06 1.1 3.3 4.3 .3 3.0 3.3 6,270.25 2016 Totals mitigated 2.8 53.5 46.1 .06 1.1 3.3 4.3 .3 3.0 3.3 6,270.25 Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.45 73.63 0.00 65.05 0.00 NSAQMD Significance A B -- -- A A A -- -- -- -- Threshold AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG N0 CO SOz I PM,o PMzs CO2 TOTALS (Ibs /day, unmitigated) 7.80 1 0.59 1 39.10 1 0.09 1 4.83 4.83 1 2,821.12 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM,o PM2.5 COz TOTALS (Ibs /day, unmitigated) 5.04 13.17 53.04 0.05 3.32 1.02 .4.621.32 SUM OF AREA SOURCE OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM,o PM2.5 CO2 TOTALS (Ibs /day, unmitigated) 12.84 13.76 92.14 0.14 8.15 5.85 7,442.44 NSAQMD Significance Threshold A A A For purposes of the above tables, Operation Source Emissions are "mobile" sources that include vehicle mix, trip characteristics (typical commute lengths) and typical road types (paved Page 34 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood or unpaved). Area Source Emissions are "stationary" or "non- mobile" sources that include the following: 1. Amount of natural gas usage (per person) 2. Number of woodstoves used in a certain area. 3. Length of summer days. 4. Amount of ROG per person (Ibs) 5. Average number of persons per unit 6. Coatings of paint within a development With respect to particulate matter generated from construction (based on worst case winter operations), there will be 18.2 Ibs /day of PM10 dust and 9.97 Ibs /day of PM2.5 dust generated from project grading and construction activities without any best management practices during the first and most "impactful" year of construction activities. This first phase project includes the grading and construction of all of the on and off -site infrastructure and building pads for the 37,888 square foot footprint for the five lodge buildings. The Project proposes to utilize water trucks and soil stabilizers to minimize dust during on -site construction and grading activities. Other best management practices will be imposed by NSAQMD and the Town. The model projects that in the first year of construction dust generation will be reduced to 8.28 Ibs /day for PM10 dust and 4.51 Ibs /day for PM2.5 dust. Both the mitigated and unmitigated PM10 levels fall within the A threshold. NSAQMD does not have significance thresholds for PM2.5. NSAQMD requires that a Dust Control Plan be submitted and approved by the District prior to any surface disturbance, including clearing of vegetation. PM10 and PM2.5 construction exhaust will not be reduced even with the use of aqueous diesel fuel, diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation catalyst for on -site construction equipment. The above tables reflect that, with mitigation, most NSAQMD emissions fall within significance threshold A. During construction activities, NOx (Nitrous Oxides) emissions attributed to construction equipment will fall into significance threshold B. The NSAQMD requires the following types of mitigations for the two classes of significance thresholds: Mitigations for "Use During Design and Construction Phases" For all Significance Level Thresholds (A, B C) 1. Alternatives to open burning of vegetative material will be used unless otherwise deemed infeasible by the District. Among suitable alternatives is chipping, mulching, or conversion to biomass fuel. 2. Grid power shall be used (as opposed to diesel generators) for job site power needs where feasible during construction. For Classifications as Level B Threshold 1. Controls specified above shall be implemented. 2. Temporary traffic control shall be provided during all phases of the construction to improve traffic flow as deemed appropriate by local transportation agencies /or Caltrans. Page 35 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood 3. Construction activities shall be scheduled to direct traffic flow to off -peak hours as much as practicable. 4. There shall be a limit of one wood - burning appliance per residence and it shall be an EPA Phase II certified appliance. Also, each residence shall be equipped with a non - wood- burning source of heat. Grading will result in substantial amounts of vegetation that will need to be removed from the site. Burning of vegetation on the site could generate significant amounts of particulate matter that will adversely affect air quality and may expose surrounding residents to smoke pollutants and exacerbate the existing PMio air quality problem in the Truckee area. However, Development Code Section 18.30.030(Air Emissions) requires the Project to comply with standards to ensure that the Project will limit the amount of short-term, dust emission impacts generated from the development, such as open burning, fugitive dust, speed restrictions and dust control measures. Vehicle emissions. The Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan requires a "no net increase" in vehicle emissions. According to the Air Quality Mitigation Calculations analysis submitted as supplemental information for the land use application, the Project will generate .07 tons per year tailpipe emissions. While the vehicle miles traveled (1,770 /day) and the related tail pipe emissions are relatively low compared to other comparable non -age restricted residential developments at the same unit density, there will be a net increase in emissions. As noted above, the Project will be required to pay an air quality impact fee to off -set the "remaining" cumulative air quality impacts. Impact Conclusion: With incorporation of the Development Code requirements and Mitigation Measures 2a through 2d, the Project will be consistent with the Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan and particulate matter emissions will be reduced or mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures MM -2.a The Project will incorporate the following mitigation measures during the construction phase, as recommended by NSAQMD for emissions within the Level B Threshold range, as well as additional mitigation measures to further reduce emission levels during construction and long -term operation: a) Alternatives to open burning of vegetative material will be used unless otherwise deemed infeasible by the District. Suitable alternatives include chipping, mulching, or conversion to biomass fuel. b) Grid power shall be used (as opposed to diesel generators) for job site power needs where feasible during construction. C) Temporary traffic control shall be provided during all phases of the construction to improve traffic flow as deemed appropriate by local transportation agencies. d) Construction activities shall be scheduled to direct traffic flow to off -peak hours as much as practicable. e) Wood- burning appliances are prohibited. Each residence shall be equipped with a non - wood - burning source of heat. f) Streets shall be designed to maximize pedestrian access to transit stops. g) The project shall provide for pedestrian access between bus service and major transportation points within the project, and between separate sections of the project, where feasible. Page 36 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood h) The project shall provide for recreational options such as trails to minimize vehicle travel to off -site recreational uses and /or commercial areas. Timing: Prior to grading and improvement permit issuance Responsible Agency: NSAQMD and Planning Division MM -2.b The following additional measures from NSAQMD shall be met by the project applicant: 1. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall re- establish ground cover on the site through seeding and watering in accordance with the local grading ordinance. 2. All architectural coating activities associated with construction of the proposed project shall be required to use interior and exterior coatings that contain less than 250 grams of volatile organic compounds (VOC/ROG) per liter of coating. 3. All cleaning supplies used within the new facility shall be low VOC. 4. Faucets, toilets and showers shall be "low- flow ". Timing: Prior to grading and improvement permit issuance Responsible Agency: NSAQMD and Planning Division MM -2.c To offset PM10 emissions from vehicle tail pipes and re- entrained road dust to a level of zero from these sources, the applicant shall pay an air quality mitigation fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance (currently $7,366 per ton of particulate matter). Timing: Prior to building permit issuance Responsible Agency: NSAQMD and Planning Division MM -2.d Woodstoves shall be prohibited within the Project site by placing a deed restriction on the title of the property for each condominium unit and for the lodge parcel. Timing: Prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificates of occupancy or prior to recordation of the final map. Responsible Agency: Planning Division MM -2.e In addition to complying with the provisions of Development Code Section 18.30.030 (Air Emissions) and other applicable provisions of the Development Code, grading and development on the site shall comply with a Dust Control Plan in compliance with District / State rules & regulations as follows: a> All materials excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered, treated, or covered to prevent fugitive dust from leaving the property boundaries and causing a public nuisance or violation of ambient air standard. Watering, or other Town - approved application, shall occur at least three times daily: early morning, mid -day and after work is done for the day. Materials excavated or graded and stored on the site (i.e., they are not being worked -on) shall be Page 37 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood securely covered and protected at the end of each day to prevent dust from becoming airborne /or being eroded by water. b) All areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered or have dust palliative applied as determined in the NSAQMD permit to operate. c) All land clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall be suspended as necessary to prevent excessive windblown dust when winds are expected to exceed 20 mph. d) All materials transported off -site shall be either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent public nuisance. Maintain a minimum of six inches of freeboard in the bed of the transport vehicle. e) Paved streets adjacent to the Project shall be swept or washed at the end of each day to remove accumulations of silt and /or mud which may have resulted from construction activities at the Project site. On -site burning of vegetative material shall be prohibited. All vegetation removed from the site shall be either chipped or disposed at an approved off - site location (landfill). g) The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that all adequate dust control measures are implemented in a timely manner during all phases of project development and construction. Timing: Reflected in improvement plans and Authority to Construct air quality control permit. Responsible Agency: Planning Division, Town Engineer and NSAQMD MM -2.f All excavated material stockpiles shall be provided on -site. Off -site stockpile locations are not permitted. Prior to authorizing a phased grading permit that requires on -site storage of stockpile material in another construction phase, the location of the stockpile locations shall be identified for Town Engineer approval. The locations shall be subject to the following criteria: a) Stockpiling of any dirt, rock, construction material, etc., within 50 -feet of any residentially developed property line shall be prohibited. b) Stockpiling of material within the Town right -of -way shall require a separate encroachment permit from the Town Engineering Division. Timing: Included with construction improvement plans. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer Impact Conclusion After Mitigation: Mitigation Measures 2a through 2f will reduce the air quality impacts to less than significant levels. Item 2.e. Create objectionable odors affecting substantial numbers of people. As a primarily residential project, it will not generate odors that are uncommon or offensive to adjoining or planned residential developments. Additionally, the Development Code Section 18.30.030(Air Emissions) requires that all odors, which create a nuisance shall be abated. Page 38 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Impact Conclusion: Based on these facts, the Project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. 3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project: : Significant Impact With Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or X regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or X regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited X to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or X migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological X resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Environmental Setting — The Project site consists of an undeveloped 8.02 -acre site of dense to scattered conifer forest with slopes varying from moderate (10 percent to 15 percent) to steep (20 percent to 30 percent). The Project also includes the following off -site infrastructure Page 39 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood features: • A 60' right of way from the westerly edge of the project site extending approximately 500' to the northerly lands within the HMP owned by Thomas Young Trustee and Foothill Air Conditioning and Heating Inc. lands; • A 60' right of way road proceeding approximately 550' east and then north to connect the new roundabout on Brockway Road; • Construct the new single lane roundabout on Brockway Road partially on lands within the HMP and partially on lands to the east known as the Reynolds Family Partners property; • Construction of the Legacy Trail from the Truckee Donner Recreation and Park District lands on the north side of Brockway Road south onto the HMP site following the southerly boundary of the Thomas Young Trustee and then following the HMP alignment; and • Construct an approximate 100 ` stairway down to Brockway Road from the Legacy Trail The subject site occupies the lower portion of a prominent north facing slope with substantial stands of Jeffery Pines. The site also includes montane chaparral (tobacco brush, manzanita). The site consists of a mixed size of conifer trees including moderate sized trees (many exceeding 24 inches in diameter) (34 percent); and smaller trees of less than 12 inches in diameter (24 percent). There are no wetlands, special status species and other wildlife resource constraints on the subject parcel. A wetland meadow of approximately .7 to .96 -acre exists on the adjoining property to the north. This is the headwater to the larger wetland on the south side of Brockway Road. The wetland area is subject to jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers regulations. Erigonum and Scutellaria are two special status plant species that are associated with the wetland to the north. Regulatory Setting — General Plan Conservation and Open Space (COS) Policy 3.1 states that sensitive wildlife habitat should be preserved. Additionally, COS Policy 1.4 further states that sensitive wildlife habitat should be protected from the destruction and intrusion by incompatible land uses, impacts must be identified through the development review process and must be mitigated through such measures as project redesign to eliminate impacts, non - disturbance easements and /or off -site habitat restoration. The "Environmental Policies" section contained in Section 6.A of the Hilltop Master Plan recognizes that due to the abundance of Jeffery Pine trees located on the site, there is a high probability of raptors and other migrating birds that utilize the site. As a result, pre- construction raptor and owl surveys are required should construction occur during the nesting season (April - September). Section 6.G also requires that a wetland impact report be prepared to assess impacts of development on the established wetland. Impact Discussion Items 3.a. and 3.d. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species. A detailed biological and wetland assessment was prepared by EcoSynthesis as part of the HMP program MND. There are no species of any kind identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species or habitats on site or in the immediate vicinity that are established in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish Wildlife Services. No threatened and /or endangered species considered significant Page 40 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood under CEQA were either found on the Project site. Furthermore, the site was not found to be suitable for any of the listed species found to occur in Nevada County. Appendix A includes the listed special plant species potentially occurring on the Hilltop site (Table 1), Special status species no longer recognized, or having no potential for occurrence on Hilltop (Table 2) and plant species observed on Hilltop in September- October 2003 (Table 3). Although no raptors or nests were observed during the biological site reconnaissance for the Master Plan environmental review, the coniferous forest on the property is considered potential nesting and foraging habitat for common raptor species. The Bald Eagle, Hermit Warbler, Lewis's Wood pecker, Willow Flycatcher and Yellow Warbler were evaluated for possible presence on the Hilltop site. Active raptor nests are protected by the California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5 and the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Thus, if construction activities are expected to occur during the nesting season (April- September), the Project may have a significant impact on the habitat and breeding of the raptor. As required in the HMP program MND, a mitigation measure is included to require raptor nest surveys prior to construction activities and to protect raptors during the breeding cycle. This will ensure that raptor habitat is protected and the breeding cycle is not disturbed. Essentially, this mitigation will ensure that any young raptors have fledged if nests are found and the breeding cycle completed. This measure will in turn reduce the potential significant impacts associated with the raptor to a less than significant impact. According to the Hilltop Master Plan biological assessment, the California Natural Native Data Base (CNNDB) records were consulted to determine the likely presence of special status wildlife species. The Mountain Beaver, Sierra Nevada Red Fox, Sierra Nevada Snowshoe Hare and Myotis bats were evaluated in the HMP program MND. None of these species were observed on site and Hilltop was not determined to have suitable habitat for these species. The Project site is situated amongst a more urbanized and built -out portion of the community, where, according to the Master Plan biological assessment, minimal wildlife exists. As such, it was determined that the master plan and therefore individual projects within the HMP will not negatively impact wildlife habitat. The following mitigation measure from the HMP program MND is applicable to this project Mitigation Measures MM -3.a If construction activities are expected to occur during the nesting season (April - September) within 100 -feet of Jeffrey Pine trees, a pre- construction raptor and owl survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the activity status of any nests found on the Project site. The Town Planner shall approve the selection of the qualified biologist. The survey shall be conducted no more than 30 days from the onset of construction. If active raptor nests are found, construction activities shall not occur within 100 -feet of the nest(s) until the young have fledged. The biologist may evaluate the active raptor nests and proposed project activities and identify alternative mitigation measures that will reduce impacts on birds to a less than significant impact. Timing: Reflected in the Project and all off -site infrastructure improvement plans. Responsible Agency: Planning Division Page 41 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Impact Conclusion after Mitigation: Less than significant. If construction activities occur during the non - breeding season (October — March) a survey is not required and no further studies shall be conducted. Item 3.b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. The detailed biological and wetland assessment prepared as part of the HMP program MND did not identify any riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities on the 8.02 -acre subject site. The conclusions of that study reflected regulations of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Item 3.c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. As noted above, there are no jurisdictional wetlands on the Project site, but there is one immediately on the northerly parcel approximately 40 -feet to the north of the subject project site. The extension of Old Brockway Road will, however, traverse the north side site of the wetland. There are no naturally defined drainage courses that supply the wetland or that traverse the subject development site. The wet meadow is a part of a series of meadows along the south side of Brockway Road from the Project site to the Truckee -Tahoe Airport. According to the drainage report submitted by the applicant, the contributing upslope watershed to the wetland is approximately 90 acres in size and this water shed contributes both surface and groundwater to the wetland area. The wetland site is now owned by one of the project proponents. This wetland was addressed in the HMP program MND. Mitigation measures 3.e and 3.f included the following requirements: 3.e. Surface runoff into the delineated wetland shall not be increased above or decreased below pre - project levels unless the Planning Commission finds that the increase or decrease of runoff will not adversely affect the health, function and values of the wetland. 3.f. Prior to grading in areas upland of or adjacent to the delineated wetland, a geotechnical report and wetland impact report prepared by qualified individuals shall be submitted to the Town identifying groundwater levels in areas to be graded and analyzing the effects of grading on groundwater flows into the wetlands and any impacts on the delineated wetland. The Planning Commission shall find that grading will not adversely affect the health, function and values of the wetland. A number of studies have been conducted on this wetland. The first determination was prepared by North Fork Associates (February 19, 2003). EcoSynthesis prepared the "Wetland Delineation and Biological Resources Study for Hilltop Master Plan Site" in October 2003. The EcoSynthesis report indicated that, over the years, fill material has been placed into the wetland, as a result its natural properties were ecologically compromised. The EcoSynthesis study observed that "the meadow appears to be largely supported by groundwater which daylights near the toe of the slope, therefore it is hydrologically largely autonomous. However, a portion of the wetland is supported by runoff from the nearly flat topography to the north." The extent of the wetland boundary in the HMP Area is determined to Page 42 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood be approximately 1 -acre. The HMP land uses and related infrastructure have been designed to avoid the designated wetland. The EcoSynthesis analysis included a variety of recommendations that apply to relevant development projects that will implement the HMP's wetland protections. A number of the wetland restoration and protection measures will be the responsibility of the on -site wetland owner (now owned by one of the partners in the Pollard Station project) and lands to the north. These measures would also protect any special status plant species associated with the wetland and are as follows: 1. Remove the fill materials placed in the wetland meadow and require restoration. 2. Provide a narrow upland buffer zone. 3. Contain and treat runoff from impervious surfaces in detention basins prior to discharge into the wetlands. 4. Provide sufficient snow storage areas outside of the wetland. Holdredge and Kull, Consulting Engineers and Geologists (H and K) prepared two separate geotechnical reports for the Project. In addition, H and K prepared a geotechnical report for the HMP (January 15, 2004). The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated on October 29, 2009, by excavating 12 test pits to depths ranging from 9 -feet to 18 -feet. Groundwater was not observed during subsurface exploration. However, they did observe in their report, that seasonal soil saturation would be expected during and immediately after snowmelt. This is borne out by a peer review study completed by Dr. Michael Josselyn, Ph. D with WRA Environmental Consultants. The findings of his study are included below. On July 9, 2010, H and K provided an opinion letter regarding the Project's potential impact to the off -site wetland. The letter states that near surface water flow associated with stormwater runoff could be intercepted by site grading. However, this concern is mitigated with the installation of a storm water drainage system that will collect surface runoff and groundwater and re- filtrate it into surface soil near the wetland area. A Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater management plan is proposed for the storm water drainage system. The letter goes onto state, "LID is a storm water management and land development strategy that emphasizes conservation and use of on -site natural features integrated with engineered, small hydrologic controls to more closely mimic natural hydrologic functions. The relatively small amount of surface water runoff resulting from interception of near - surface groundwater by site grading will be carried through vegetated swales and infiltration trenches to a system of subsurface infiltrators where it will be reintroduced into the near - surface soil to help maintain the wetland." In response to the H and K report, the applicant's consultant, SCO, prepared a Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan. This plan was based on the three H and K geotechnical studies the Wetland Delineation and Biological resources study by EcoSynthesis in October2003, and the peer review recommendations provided by WRA. The SCO drainage analysis focused on surface flows from the natural slope to the south. There are no naturally defined drainage courses that supply the wetland or that traverse the subject development site. The wet meadow is a part of a series of meadows along the south side of Brockway Road from the Project site to the Truckee -Tahoe Airport. A portion of the wet meadow is jurisdictional wetland as shown on Exhibit 1. The off -site wetland is down slope of the Project approximately 40 -feet to the north. Various geotechnical and wetland reports have addressed potential alteration of or interruption of groundwater and near surface water flows that could impact the wetland. The overall wetland Protection Plan is included as Exhibit 2. The Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan include the following Best Page 43 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Management Practices (BMPs) to mitigate effects on the wetland (see Exhibit 3, Groundwater Interception and Infiltration System): Water Quality Treatment Storm drainage from impervious areas will be collected and routed through water quality treatment facilities for removal of potential pollutants. This consists of a Multiple Treatment System which includes two or more of the following BMPs in series prior to discharge of flow to existing drainage facilities. RMP if TC -10 Infiltration Trenches will be installed at roof downspouts for both retention of storm water runoff and for capturing pollutants prior to discharge. Runoff is stored in the void space between the stones and infiltrates into surrounding soil. TC -50 Water uality Inlets are used to collect runoff from pavement areas. Each Storm Drain Inlet includes a 1' sump. The sump, located below the storm drain outlet, captures sand and sediment and includes weep holes for infiltration. TC -30 Earthen Swales and Rock Lined Swales are utilized to collect and slowly convey runoff to downstream discharge points. They are designed to treat runoff through filtering and trapping sediment with angular rock lining /or vegetation in the channel, filtering through a subsoil matrix and infiltration into the underlying soils. TC -31 Vegetated Buffer Strips are used in lieu of curb /gutter or asphalt dike and accept storm water sheet flow from adjacent pavement. This consists of a 2' wide gravel shoulder and an adjacent vegetated area that provides filtration of pollutants and provides infiltration to underlying soils. TC -11 Retention Basins provide the final stage of water quality measure by allowing settling of suspended solids and additional filtration through vegetation. This facility stores runoff until it gradually infiltrates through the amended topsoil and underlying soil and rock. The attenuation of peak flows reduces runoff volume and rate of discharge and recharges natural groundwater. During construction, additional BMPs including temporary erosion control facilities shall be implemented to control pollutants that have a potential to affect the quality of storm water discharges from the construction site. Implementation of BMPs for Construction Activities will be in accordance with California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements. Page 44 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Exhibit 1 Hilltop Senior Living — Existing Wetland 1 - ; � �; `fit _ . ,.. • 4u LS�}} t: Fa.. I ,►� �� 4r r 18 " R 'W • F i F ti f t i y s • w t — . Page 45 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Exhibit 2 Overall Wetland Protection Plan .... .. ..... .......... ...... FQUIW MT" SEWR WWOM J ,NIUMT1 ■ g4 y Page 46 of 1 03 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station -- A Senior Neighborhood Exhibit 3 Groundwater Interception and Infiltration System GROUNDWATER INTERCEPTION AND INFILTRATION SYSTEM WAY MI. (UPDATED JULY 2014) REOO SCALE: 1'4 ' LEGEND soma. TO AnaRn cwarwuwerLAl u PROPOSED RQCKERY WALL ..f �+ SU150RAIN V%4TN PERFORATED PIPE (TYP) VEGETATED SURFACE SWALE STORMWATER RETENTION POND f , VEGETATEQ01O.RETENTICN+SWALE - -- STORMDRAIN PIPE •i "[ Ra - -- INTERCEPT MDRAIN I .. t` I I i + I WJOMP AND I 9JRf a `. swu ' - -r JF 1 .i3 f J - � ^ err - euLOiHC wAU �§6k1A1 !479CL7T IECRkH tldi[ wr =1 Page 47 of 103 ANNIE( E NG INF }'RINt; &SURVEYING �+0 41�bx 6.M. bn tE Yid. ��is yusv: cn yy wvw onwr�w vn:s nay, suer[ aoa, cwt. rc- cn at•a� Isso7 x.• —sari !479CL7T IECRkH tldi[ wr =1 Page 47 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Wetland Protection Plan A wetland protection plan applicable to the entire HMP was recommended by EcoSynthesis. This plan includes measures to be implemented during construction and permanent protective measures to be implemented and maintained upon project completion. The following is a list of proposed protective measures: 1. Prior to Grading - Stake property lines on south and west side of wetland; Place orange fence to delineate limit of work and no disturbance area. 2. Place BMP's for erosion control, sediment control, tracking control, wind erosion control waste management/materials control in accordance with the Project Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Place erosion control fence along north property line. 3. Place Split Rail Fence along south and west side of wetland. Fence shall be placed at the property line and shall include native plantings with soil amendments at various locations ( +/ -20' spacing) along the fence line. 4. Install Interpretive Signage at a minimum of four locations along property line. Signage shall explain the function of the wetlands and their water quality benefit. 5. Construct linear Bio- Retention Swale adjacent to the split rail fence at north property line. Bio- Retention Swale shall be relatively flat (gradient of 1 percent or less) and shall convey runoff from the onsite water quality treatment facilities. 6. Construct Onsite Water Quality Treatment Facilities including Water Quality Inlets, Buffer Strips, Earthen /Rock Lined Swales, Retention Basins Roof Line Infiltration Trenches. 7. Prepare a BMP Maintenance Plan to be implemented by the property owner /or homeowners association upon completion of the Project. The BMP Maintenance Plan shall provide a descriptive overview of the functionality and required maintenance of the LID water quality features drainage systems. This document shall be prepared in compliance with NPDES /LRWQCB requirements and Town of Truckee Stormwater Management Plan. 8. Future development of adjacent parcels may necessitate changes to fence alignment, however no portion of the development shall encroach into the wetland buffer zone as described in the HMP. 9. Snow Storage Areas shall be located outside of the identified wetland protection area. Runoff from snow storage areas shall be routed through water quality treatment facilities. 10. As a part of the future development of the parcel which includes the jurisdictional wetland, the existing fill materials previously placed in the wetland meadow shall be removed. The wetland shall be restored pursuant to the Corps of Engineers /or LRWQCB requirements or guidelines." An independent wetland specialist was retained by the Town to conduct a peer review of the applicant's proposal regarding wetland protection, with a particular focus on maintenance of the existing hydrology features sufficient to support the off -site wetland. The review was prepared by Michael Josselyn, PhD, a certified Professional Wetland Scientist with WRA Environmental Consultants. In his April 6, 2011, Technical Memorandum, Dr. Josselyn recommended, that a pre - project monitoring program be implemented to evaluate ground water discharge associated with the annual snowmelt. His final recommendations for a wetland monitoring strategy were Page 48 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station – A Senior Neighborhood contained in his May 19, 2011 memorandum. His findings indicated that the soils are particularly shallow with bedrock depths being approximately 10 inches deep. There is also a "cemented clay loam" layer at a depth of 3 -13 inches in certain portion of the wetland. He also noted, based on another wetland just south of Sierra Meadows on Old Brockway Road "that ground water levels peaked in the month of March through early May and then decline rapidly such that wetland meadow soils were completely dry during summer and fall months." He concludes that "The two to three months early spring period of high ground water supply are, therefore, most critical to the structure of the wetland community." In addition, Dr. Josselyn recommended that the applicant provide additional design detail on methods to ensure groundwater flows continue to the off -site wetland after site development. This includes the following features: 1. A minimum of two transects of sealed piezometers (north and south) with at least three wells in the upland area on the project site a. One near the lower edge, one in the middle and one on the upper edge of the project site. b. He also recommends the placement of two wells within the downstream wetland (note, at the time of the recommendation the applicant did not have control over that property). c. The ground water wells should be installed before the on -set of winter too insure that the full end of winter early spring ground water flows are captured to establish the background conditions. 2. Ground water monitoring should be provided within the downstream wetland before and after project construction to provide confirmation that the groundwater interception and infiltration system is operating as expected. In response to Dr. Josselyn's findings, recommendations and wetland monitoring strategy, a Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan (SCO, June 1, 2011, revised and updated January 27, 2012) was prepared to implement the groundwater collection and surface water discharge features of the project. The plan also provides a detailed wetland monitoring program strategy (Wetland Monitoring Plan) that includes the following components: 1. Wetland monitoring locations to include the wetland, the points of discharge of project surface runoff at the north property line of the project site and five on -site monitoring wells. 2. Monitoring methods to specify the depth (4- to 5 -feet) and location of the groundwater monitoring wells and wetland vegetation monitoring specified to be undertaken each year depending on snow melt factors. 3. Baseline monitoring wells shall be installed prior to on -site construction, during construction and after completion of construction. 4. Remedial actions should the on -site surface and subsurface interception and reintroduction system not be effective. Remedial actions could include: a. Redirecting surface flows to the on -site retention basins directly to the bio -swale on the north boundary of the project if such flows are by- passing the wetland. The goal would be to ensure that surface flows are reaching the wetland via sheet flow vs. channel flows. b. Should groundwater flow levels change significantly (more than 25 percent) this shall be corrected by redirecting one or more of the sub -drain interception pipes and back -of -wall sub -drain pipes away from the infiltration basins dispersed throughout the project site Page 49 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood and connect them directly to the easterly storm drain which discharges to the bio -swale immediately above the wetland. c. If wetland vegetation fails to meet success criteria, supplemental planting of species with stronger wetland affinity. 5. Timing and reporting would require monitoring to occur through the duration of construction and five years after completion of site development. The annual monitoring report shall be submitted to the Town and the LRWQCB by September 1 of each monitoring year. This plan has been included as part of the project description and has been approved as acceptable by Dr. Josselyn. The plan, however, does not include the two monitoring wells within the wetland (Exhibit 4). Now that it is controlled by one of the applicants and the Phase 1 improvement plan contains a substantial road improvement extension in close proximity to the wetland, these two wells should be included and made part of the monitoring plan, as well. In addition to these features, the project will also have to meet the requirements contained in the State of California's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Order No. 2009 - 2009 -DWQ during construction. The details of the construction site monitoring program are contained in the Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan. Construction of the Old Brockway Road extension is in close proximity of the wetland and may intercept or otherwise block ground water and surface water flows that naturally flow toward the wetland. As noted above, the northerly lands within the plan area flow toward the wetland. The final improvement plans must account for these natural flows to ensure they still enter the wetland in a way that mimics pre -road construction (sheet flow) conditions. Page 50 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Exhibit 4 Groundwater Monitoring Well Locations GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS POLLARD STATION ., n, MAY 2Q11 SCALE: , 4ei 111M C2 Wm 71 4s r ,JL jl LEGEND: PROPOSED MONITORING WELL PLANNING I " a 111114 1 N F-1 OPEN SPACE .... V.VINO 0 Page 51 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Mitigation Measures MM -3.b The final improvement plans shall include the applicable performance measures recommended by Dr. Michael Josselyn, Ph.D in his April 6, 2011 and May 19, 2011, memorandums. All of the ground water monitoring wells (including the two wells within the wetland area) shall be installed prior to the winter before any construction begins. All provisions of the December 2010, Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan and the June .1, 2011, Wetland Mitigation Plan shall be included in the improvement plans and reflect any modifications required by the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board. Timing: Install the sealed groundwater monitoring wells prior to the onset of winter prior to any site work and construction. All monitoring wells locations shall be included on the improvement plans. Responsible Agency: Planning Division and Engineering Division MM -3.c Surface runoff into the delineated wetland shall not be increased above or decreased below pre - project levels unless the Planning Commission finds that the increase or decrease of runoff will not adversely affect the health, function and values of the wetland. Timing: Reflected in the final grading and drainage plan. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -3.d The final improvement plans must account for the natural flows along Old Brockway Road to ensure they still enter the wetland in a way that mimics pre -road construction, sheet flow conditions. Timing: Included in final grading and drainage plan. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer Item 3.e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element does not contain any policies and programs that protect trees or other biological resources that would apply to the subject project. The Downtown Specific Plan identifies that the important biological resources within the DSA area are located primarily along the Truckee River, Trout Creek and Donner Creek. Trees and other biological resources affecting the Hilltop area are not included as important biological resources. The HMP includes a strong statement of intent to protect trees. Section 6.F.1 requires that 24 inch diameter and greater trees be preserved. It also provides that these larger more mature trees "...may be removed when necessary or appropriate due to the design of the project and when there are no practical or reasonable methods to preserve such trees." This section further establishes "The Planning Commission, as part of the land development permit application process for individual projects, must approve the removal of any trees exceeding 24 inches or greater..." As noted in Item 1.a, there are a total of 157 mature trees on site, of which up to 92 (59 percent) will be removed and 65 (41 percent) will remain with the project. It is estimated that approximately 36 mature trees (39 percent) to be removed are within on -site access routes /or Page 52 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood parking areas. This leaves an estimated 56 mature trees that will be removed as a result of building placement and other improvements. As noted in Item 1.a., there are two conclusions that can be reached. First, the larger footprint of the buildings, especially the lodge, may result in larger tree clusters to be removed and secondly, any residential project of similar density or intensity under the HMP would result in mature tree removal. The only clear way to reduce the number of trees to be removed is from a reduced size project with smaller foot print buildings. Such a project would more than likely under - achieve the master plan density allocation to the site and have a deleterious effect on the planned land use mix and shared costs for the common infrastructure. It is also noted that on -site road and parking area construction with any type of project, including a smaller one, will more than likely result in the removal of mature trees. A more complete discussion of tree removal and impacts are contained under Aesthetics, Item 1.a. According to Google Earth maps (August 28, 2012) minimal, if any tree removal will occur within the right of way to accommodate the construction of the Phase 1 infrastructure off -site road to connect to the planned roundabout on Brockway Road. In addition, the route of the Legacy Trail would result in little to no tree removal. These two physical improvements will occur mostly on the mildly sloping land in the mid - ground view area above the brow of the ridge facing downtown Truckee. As a result, these improvements should not be visible from downtown Truckee. While there are a substantial number of trees being removed to accommodate the project, the HMP recognized that development would result in tree removal. Figures 1, 3 and 18 of the HMP contemplate that tree removal will occur with future development. Section 6.F, Tree Protection, of the HMP states that the first priority for trees of 24" or larger must be preserved. If further states and recognizes that should mature trees be removed, they may only do with Planning Commission approval if it is determined that, based on the project design, there are no practical or reasonable methods to preserve such trees. The project has undergone numerous design changes many of which were aimed at saving as many mature trees as possible. As noted in section 1.c of the Aesthetics Section, 44 percent of all medium to large trees are being retained on site. Mature trees are being saved in locations that will help soften the views of various project buildings. The HMP program MND did not separately consider the impact of tree removal or add any mitigation measures relative to tree removal. Trees designated to be retained have not been evaluated as to their survivability based on the final grading, drainage and improvement plans. A licensed arborist or Registered Professional Forester shall be retained to review the grading and drainage plans before any on -site disturbance occur to ensure that trees designated for retention will be saved and properly protected from the impacts of on -site construction. MM -3.e A licensed arborist or Registered Professional Forester shall be retained to review the health and safety of all mature trees to be retained prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall identify protection measure including the placement of protective netting, construction setbacks, etc. Timing: Prior to on -site grading and tree removal Responsible Agency: Planning Division Impact Conclusion: While it is Town policy to preserve mature trees it does not preclude their removal. Clustering the more intensive development components results in greater open space and tree retention overall. Strategically saved trees contribute to a sense of retention Page 53 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood that helps soften the effects of the buildings. The impact of tree removal is less than significant in light of the realization that the HMP plans for a range of residential development densities and building types. Item 3.f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? There is no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan applicable to the property. Impact Conclusion: No impact. Biological Resources Impact Conclusions After Mitigation: With the inclusion of MM -3.a through 3.e the project will have a less than significant impact on biological recourses. 4. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project' Significant Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in X Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to X Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of X formal cemeteries? Environmental Setting — According to the Archaeological Inventory Survey Report prepared by Peter M. Jensen, Ph.D. in October 2003, for the Hilltop Master Plan area, the environmental conditions have remained stable throughout the past 8 to 10,000 years. The Project area is located within the nuclear territory of the Washoe. The Washoe maintained a mobile lifestyle that was driven by seasonality, variability and periodic abundance encountered in the food quest. Historic evidence exists to document that some Spanish and Mexican expeditions and early fur trapping ventures may have come through and made brief stays along several major Sierra Nevada rivers. Expeditions by Jediah Strong Smith, Joseph Reddeford Walker and Stephens - Murphy- Townsend are well documented historic events that led to future settlements. Access routes were developed, logging was undertaken on large scale after the discovery of gold and rail road lines were constructed. Within the specific project area and Hilltop, logging occurred, followed by ranching and recreational activities. The most notable recreational activity on Hilltop was the Ice Place Complex and two ski -jumps at the base of the Hilltop lodge. Page 54 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station – A Senior Neighborhood A cultural resources evaluation report was completed as part of the HMP program MND. Prior to fieldwork, the site file and records search was conducted by the North Central Information Center (NCIC) at California State University, Sacramento to identify previous projects that may have occurred within or adjacent to the Project area, as well as any known heritage resources within or adjacent to the proposed development. The records search at the NCIC identified four isolated historic "isolates" and four historic sites within the HMP area. None of the sites are deemed to be significant based on CEQA criteria. The fieldwork associated with the study consisted of a pedestrian survey of the HMP area, followed by completion of the site file search and literature review. General level coverage was performed a maximum of 25 meters apart and were oriented along non - systematic transects. Evidence of prehistoric presence was identified at six locations within the northern portion of the HMP area. All six observations consist of single- occurrence tabular site flakes or cores of basalt located along sections of bluff overlooking Brockway Road (4) or away from this feature in undeveloped terrain. All finds are considered "isolates" and by themselves not significant. An additional three "isolates" likely historic in age were also observed on the surface during the 2003 pedestrian survey. As is the case with the other "isolates ", these finds are not considered significant. An historic building inventory was performed by Kautz Environmental Consultants, Inc. in March 1999. This study identified seven buildings on the HMP site that met the National Register Criteria found in the Code of Federal Regulations. None of these historical resources occur within the project site. There are five different historic buildings that were reviewed for their local importance in the vicinity of the extension of Old Brockway Road on the north side of the wetland. Four of those buildings are still standing. One (shed) was removed some time ago. The remaining buildings include: Building No. Size (sq. ft. ) Approx year Use Status —Local Rating ZZ -13 -D 2,746 1910 - -1930 Cabinet Shop Non - essential ZZ -14 -C 644 1900 Cabin Supporting ZZ -15 -B 586 1900 Cabin Contributor ZZ -16 -C 1,090 1920 Cabin Supporting Of the remaining four buildings, one (the cabinet shop) is earmarked for removal. The remaining three cabins are candidates for restoration and /or relocation within the subject site. Each would be evaluated with a future development plan on the subject site. The Project site consists of an undeveloped 8.02 -acre site of dense to scattered conifer forest with slopes varying from moderate (10 percent to 15 percent) to steep (20 percent to 30 percent). There project also includes the following off -site infrastructure features: • A 60' right of way from the westerly edge of the project site extending approximately 500' to the northerly lands within the HMP owned by Thomas Young Trustee and Foothill Air Conditioning and Heating Inc. lands; • A 60' right of way road proceeding approximately 550' east and then north to connect the new roundabout on Brockway Road; • Construct the new roundabout on Brockway Road partially on lands within the HMP and partially on lands to the east known as the Reynolds Family Partners property; • Construction of the Legacy Trail from the Truckee Donner Recreation and Park District lands on the north side of Brockway Road south onto the HMP site following the southerly boundary of the Thomas Young Trustee and then following the HMP Page 55 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood alignment; and Construct an approximate 100` stairway down to Brockway Road from the Legacy Trail Impact Discussion Item 4.a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource. The Kautz survey resulted in the identification of 13 isolated historic building sites. Based on the findings of the reporting archaeologist, none of the sites were deemed to have significant archaeological value and none are located on the subject site. Mitigation Measure 4c of the HMP program MND required that the first development project within the HMP area prepare a comprehensive historic interpretation program. The applicant is requesting that the comprehensive historic interpretation program requirements of Chapter 6, Section 2, be modified to apply to those properties within the HMP that contain historic building resources. This modification is requested because the applicant's site does not contain historic resources and access to the lands of others to prepare the required program may not be available. The HMP's focus for the historic interpretation program is primarily associated with the historic ski hill and building in close proximity to that historic land use. The request to delay the preparation of this Master Plan feature to a landowner that has on -site historic resources would not create a significant impact. The Old Brockway Road extension traverses the area between these four buildings, but will not directly impact them. The three cabins north of the road extension are recommended to be restored and /or relocated as part of the future development on that site. The historic character of the cabinet shop south side of the road extension has been compromised through additions and modification such that it has lost any historic importance. It is recommended to be removed. Impact Conclusion: There will be no Impact from the project itself or the extension of Old Brockway Road on any historical resources.. Item 4.b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. A pedestrian survey was conducted as part of the archaeological inventory for the Hilltop Master Plan. No resources were identified. To the extent that the pedestrian survey overlooked archaeological resources or was unable to recognize them due to their depth, it is possible that future construction may impact such resources. To ensure that discovered cultural resources are not impacted by project construction, mitigation is proposed to protect discovered resources until their significance can be determined and appropriate mitigation is implemented. Mitigation Measures MM -4.a If artifacts, paleontological or cultural, or unusual amounts of stone, bone, or shells are uncovered during construction activity, all construction activities shall cease within a 200 -foot radius of the find. The Town planner shall be notified of the find and an archaeologist shall investigate the find and determine the extent and significance of the discovered materials. The archaeologist shall identify measures to eliminate or reduce any significant effects and those measures shall be satisfied before construction continues. Planning Division staff shall require the mitigation measures to be incorporated into the Project and to be implemented prior to Page 56 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood recommencement of construction activity. Construction shall not recommence until authorized by the Town Planner. Timing: A note to appear on the final construction plans. Responsible Agency: Planning Division Impact Conclusion After Mitigation: With the addition of MM -4.a, the Project will not have a significant impact on Cultural Resources. 5. FOREST RESOURCES. Potentially Less Than Significant Less. Than No Would the Project: Significant Impact with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact P Incorporated a. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code X Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104[g])? b. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- X forest use? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in X conversion of forest land to non - forest use? Environmental Setting — The Project site is an undeveloped 8.02 -acre site that consists of dense to scattered conifer forest with slopes varying from moderate (10 percent to 15 percent) to steep (20 percent to 30 percent). The site is within the 57 -acre HMP area, of which 28 acres will remain as permanent open space. The subject site occupies the lower portion of a prominent north facing slope with substantial stands of Jeffery Pines. The site also includes montane chaparral (tobacco brush, manzanita). The site consists of a mixed size of conifer trees including moderate sized trees (many exceeding 24 inches in diameter) are present (34 percent); and smaller trees of less than 12 inches in diameter (24 percent). Regulatory Setting — The California Forest Practice Act was enacted in 1973 to ensure that logging is done in a manner that will preserve and protect fish, wildlife, forests and streams. The Act and Rules are codified in the Public Resources Code. A timberland conversion permit is required when lands are being converted to a non - forest use. Impact Discussion Items 5.a. through 5.c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, result in loss of forest land or involve other changes that could result in conversion. Page 57 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood The site is not designated or zoned to reflect forest or timberland uses of the site. The HMP designates the site to accommodate multiple family dwelling and proposes that the Project site be zoned Downtown Medium Density Residential (DMR), while maintaining the forest environment.. Maintaining the forested character is primarily for aesthetic reasons and not for long term timberland management. Since the Project will impact more than 3- acres, a timberland conversion permit is required from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Mitigation Measures MM -5.a Apply for and obtain a timberland conversion permit pursuant to the California Forest Practice Act. Timing: Prior to any site disturbance, excepting the installation of monitoring wells. Responsible Agency: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and Town Planning Division Impact Conclusion: With the inclusion of MM -5.a, the Project will not impact Forest Resources. 6. GEOLOGY and SOILS. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project: Significant Impact with Mitigation Significant impact Impact Incorporated a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the X State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii. Seismic - related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the X Project potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Page 58 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or propert ? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems X where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Environmental Setting - Two separate preliminary geotechnical engineering reports for the lodge and condominium buildings were prepared H and K and are both dated December 8, 2009. While these two studies were prepared for earlier versions of the site plan, the analysis and recommendations are valid for the current project. H and K also prepared the geotechnical report for the HMP (January 15, 2004). The geotechnical studies indicate that the Project site is located on gentle to moderate slopes with surface elevations that range from approximately 5,887 -feet in the northern portion of the Project site to approximately 5,960 -feet the northwest corner of the site. The site generally slopes gently to moderately down from south to north. Surface water drainage consists of overland flow in a general south to north direction. The Project site is located in a potentially active seismic area. There are no mapped faults or other evidence to indicate a fault on the site or in the surrounding area. The nearest faults are located approximately 0.5 to 1.5 miles southeast, 5 miles to the northwest (Dog Valley Fault), 16 miles to the south - southeast (West Lake Tahoe Fault), 12 miles to the southeast (North Tahoe Fault). The Genoa Fault trends in a north -south direction approximately 20 miles east of the site and is capable of very large earthquakes. Impact Discussion Items 6.a.i through 6.a.iv, 6.c and 6.d: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction, landslides or be located on a geologic unit that is unstable. According to the December 8, 2009 geotechnical report, the potential hazards associated with earthquake faults involves surface rupture and strong ground motion. No faults are mapped as crossing or trending towards the site, therefore, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. Earthquakes centered on regional faults in the area, such as the Genoa Fault, would likely result in higher ground motion at the site than earthquakes centered on smaller faults that are mapped closer to the site. Secondary seismic hazards include liquefaction, lateral spreading and seismically induced slope instability and rock fall. Based on the soil profile, the site has a very low potential for liquefaction and lateral spreading. No landslides, debris flows or rock fall hazards were observed in the site area. Due to the granular and rocky nature of the site and surrounding area, the potential for slope instability is low. Based on literature review, the site reconnaissance and experience in the area, H and K recommends using Site Class C, of Table 1613.5.2 of the 2007 Building Code to evaluate seismic load for all buildings constructed on site. Page 59 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Mitigation Measures MM -6.a All future improvement plans and building permits shall adhere to the geotechnical and engineering recommendations contained in the two separate geotechnical engineering reports for the lodge building and condominiums submitted by H and K dated December 8, 2009. The Town Engineer may require that supplemental more detailed geotechnical reports be prepared for improvement plans and building permits. Timing: All geotechnical engineering requirements along with applicable best management practices as recommended in the geotechnical reports will be included with infrastructure improvement plans. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -6.b A geotechnical engineer shall be on -site when fill materials are being placed and compacted to confirm that procedural specifications have been met, to observe keyways and benches prior to fill placement, to test and determine that moisture content, density and relative compaction of fill at time of placement, observe footing excavations prior to reinforcing steel and concrete placement, evaluate sub -grade and aggregate base before placement of base rock and at other time periods required by the Town Engineer. Timing: Throughout construction periods as required by the Geotechnical Engineering Report and Town Engineer. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer Impact Conclusion: With the inclusion of MM -6.a and MM -6.b, requiring that the recommendations associated with the H and K geotechnical reports be followed, there will be no significant impacts. Item 6.b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of top soil. The preliminary grading plan proposes cuts up to 14 -feet high and fills up to 6 -feet for the lodge building complex. While site grading is anticipated for the condominium buildings, most such changes are accommodated through stepped building foundation systems, thereby minimizing the amount of cutting and filling required. Rock retaining walls up to approximately 5 -feet in height are expected along the fire access road /walking loop. Other lower retaining wall systems are provided throughout the Project area. Permanent cut and fill slopes would be stable at ratios of 2H and 1V or better. Individual specific projects will be subject to meeting the Town's improvement standards and those of LRWQCB's Truckee River Hydrologic Unit Guidelines for Erosion Control and Best Management Practices and State of California Best Management Practices Handbook. Erosion control and slope stabilization details will be part of the grading and improvement plans for the Project, incorporating vegetative treatments complementary to the existing natural landscape and consistent with the Town Engineer's requirements and those established by LRWQCB. The geotechnical engineering report provided typical site grading recommendations that would be applicable to the Project. These recommendations address grading, site clearing and grubbing, preparation for fill placement, fill placement, cut /fill slope grading, erosion control, Page 60 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood underground utility trenches, construction dewatering, surface water drainage, plan review and construction monitoring; and structural improvement design criteria, including foundations, seismic design criteria, slab -on -grade floor systems, retaining wall design criteria, pavement design and infiltration basins /chambers. The report concludes that there would be no potential significant impacts if on -site construction were done in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report. The report recommends incorporating both temporary and permanent erosion control measures in order to stabilize disturbed soils and to mitigate the potential impact upon water quality during construction activity and to ensure the long -term protection of water quality and erosion control. This requirement is further supported by General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.2, requiring discretionary projects to minimize erosion and sedimentation. Furthermore, the temporary and permanent erosion control measures will be required pursuant to Development Code Section 18.30.050 (Drainage and Storm water Runoff) . Erosion control details consistent with LRWQCB's Project Guidelines for Erosion Control in the Truckee River Hydrologic Unit will be required to be detailed within the required drainage and grading plan. Mitigation Measures MM -6.c The upper 2 -feet to 5 -feet of cut slopes should be rounded into the existing terrain above the slope to remove loose material and produce a contoured transition form cut face to natural ground. Timing: Included with infrastructure improvement plans and verified through on -site inspections. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer Item 6.e. Soils inadequate for septic systems or other on -site waste disposal systems. The Project will not utilize on site waste water treatment systems. All waste water will be collected by the TSD and treated at the T- TSAtertiary sewer treatment plant in Martis Valley. Impact Conclusion: No impact. Impact Conclusions After Mitigation: With the inclusion of MM -6.a, MM -6.b and MM -6.c, the aforementioned measures will reduce project impacts to Geology and Soils to a less than significant level. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the Project: Potentially .Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may X have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency X adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Page 61 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Environmental Setting — Greenhouse gases (GHG) are those gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. GHG are emitted by both natural processes and human activities and the accumulation of GHG in the atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. It is widely supported that GHG contributes to global climate change, however, the extent of the change or the exact contribution of GHG, including emissions from development and operation of facilities is unknown. Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate (such as temperature, precipitation or wind) lasting for an extended period (decades or longer). Over the past 200 years, anthropogenic sources, including the burning of fossil fuels (such as coal and oil) and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat - trapping "greenhouse gases" to increase significantly in our atmosphere (U.S. EPA 2007a). In the U.S., our energy - related activities account for three - quarters of our human - generated greenhouse gas emissions, mostly in the form of carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. More than half the energy - related emissions come from large stationary sources such as power plants, while about a third comes from transportation. Industrial processes (such as the production of cement, steel and aluminum), agriculture, forestry, other land use and waste management are also important sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States (U.S. EPA 2007b). If greenhouse gases continue to increase, climate models predict that the average temperature at the Earth's surface could increase from 2.5 to 10.4 °F above 1990 levels by the end of this century. Scientists are certain that human activities are changing the composition of the atmosphere and that increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will change the planet's climate (U.S. EPA 2007b). The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. These various gases in the earth's atmosphere, classified as atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical role in determining the earth's surface temperature. For most nonindustrial development projects, motor vehicles make up the bulk of GHG emissions. The primary greenhouse gases emitted by motor vehicles include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons (CARB 2004). Each is described in more detail below. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of ways, both naturally and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial facilities, and other sources. A number of specialized industrial production processes and product uses such as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum -based products can also lead to CO2 emissions. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily exchanged in the atmosphere (USEPA 2011a). Methane (CH4) is a colorless, odorless gas that is not flammable under most circumstances. CH4 is the major component of natural gas, about 87 percent by volume. It is also formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic environments. Methane is emitted from a variety of both human - related and natural sources. Human - related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry (intestinal fermentation in livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass burning, and waste management. These activities release significant quantities of methane to the atmosphere. Natural sources of methane include wetlands, gas Page 62 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, on wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. Methane's atmospheric lifetime is about 12 years (USEPA 2011 b). Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. N2O is produced by both natural and human - related sources. Primary human - related sources of N2O are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuels, and nitric acid production. N2O is also produced naturally from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years (USEPA 2010a). Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are man -made chemicals, many of which have been developed as alternatives to ozone - depleting substances for industrial, commercial, and consumer products. The only significant emissions of HFCs before 1990 were of the chemical HFC -23, which is generated as a byproduct of the production of HCFC -22 (or Freon 22, used in air conditioning applications). The atmospheric lifetime for HFCs varies from just over a year for HFC -152a to 260 years for HFC -23. Most of the commercially used HFCs have atmospheric lifetimes less than 15 years (e.g., HFC - 134a, which is used in automobile air conditioning and refrigeration, has an atmospheric life of 14 years) (USEPA 2010b). Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are colorless, highly dense, chemically inert, and nontoxic. Natural geological emissions have been responsible for the PFCs that have accumulated in the atmosphere in the past; however, the largest current source is aluminum production, which releases CF4 and C2F6 as byproducts. The estimated atmospheric lifetimes for CF4 and C2F6 are 50,000 and 10,000 years, respectively (EFCTC 2003; USEPA 2010b). Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic compound that is colorless, odorless, nontoxic, and generally nonflammable. SF6 is primarily used as an electrical insulator in high voltage equipment. The electric power industry uses roughly 80 percent of all SF6 produced worldwide. SF6 has an atmospheric life of 3,200 years (USEPA 2010b). Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Gases with high global warming potential, such as HFCs, PFCs, and SF6, are the most heat - absorbent. Methane traps over 21 times more heat per molecule than CO2i and N2O absorbs 310 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weight each gas by its global warming potential. Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted. Regulatory Setting - On September 27, 2006, the State of California adopted Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006). The bill requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in 1990 to be achieved by 2020. The State of California Air Resources Board approved 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2e) as the statewide greenhouse gas emission limit, which is equivalent to the 1990 emissions level. Carbon dioxide equivalent means the amount of carbon dioxide by weight that would produce the same climate change impact as a given weight of another greenhouse gas. Page 63 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, known as the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, was established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. On January 1, 2010, the California Building Standards Commission adopted CALGreen and became the first state in the United States to adopt a statewide green building standards code. CALGreen requires new buildings to reduce water consumption by 20 percent, divert 50 percent of construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant- emitting materials. The 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are now in effect which focuses on further improving the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings. The 2013 Standards also include updates to the energy efficiency divisions of the California Green Building Code Standards (Title 24, Part 11). Energy Commission staff estimates that the implementation of the 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will reduce electricity consumption and natural gas consumption, resulting in improved air quality and reduction in nitric oxide, sulfur oxide, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide equivalents. As noted above, to meet GHG emission targets of AB 32, California would need to generate less GHG emissions in the future than current levels. It is recognized, however, that for most projects there is no simple metric available to determine if a single project would substantially increase or decrease overall GHG emission levels or conflict with the goals of AB 32. Thresholds of significance illustrate the extent of an impact and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. Significance thresholds for greenhouse gas emissions resulting from land use development projects have not been established in Nevada County (as previously mentioned, the NSAQMD has not yet established significance thresholds for greenhouse gas emissions from project operations). However, since this Project will be required to meet current Building Energy Efficiency Standards, the Operational GHG emissions over the long term is expected to be significantly less than anticipated when the Hilltop Master Plan was approved. Calculations of GHG emissions typically focus on CO2 because it is the most commonly produced GHG in terms of number of sources and volume generated, and because it is among the easiest GHGs to measure. This analysis also assesses N2O and CH4 emissions for other primary source categories of emissions (e.g., motor vehicles and energy use associated with long -term operation of the project). It is important to note that while other GHGs, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), have a higher global warming potential than CO2, emissions from land use developments like the proposed project are negligible under typical operations. GHG Emissions CalEEMod 2013.2.2 was utilized to estimate the proposed project's CO2, N2O and CH4 annual emissions (unmitigated) from construction and operational operations. As described above, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e): 9O2e Overall Construction (MT /yr) 438 (Temporary - Short term) Overall Operational (MT /yr) 1,078 (Long term) As shown above, the proposed project would result in direct emissions of GHGs during construction. These emissions would be temporary and are anticipated to be spread out over Page 64 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood time due to phasing of the project, resulting in a much lower quantity of carbon dioxide equivalents per year. In response to AB 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006), changes to State regulations will take effect in the near future (year 2020 and beyond) that will substantially reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles. For instance, implementation of AB 1493 (Pavley) will significantly reduce the amount of GHGs emitted from passenger vehicles. CARB's Post - Processor tool estimates an 18 percent reduction in GHGs in these vehicle classes by 2020. Mobile sources (passenger vehicles) are the largest contributor by far to the total carbon dioxide equivalents. These reductions of GHG's from passenger vehicles over time will significantly reduce the overall operations of carbon dioxide equivalents. In terms of energy, the new building will be constructed to meet or exceed the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which went into effect in 2014. These standards reduce electricity and natural gas below baseline emissions. Additionally, implementation of the proposed Mitigation Measures through project design and construction will further reduce GHG emissions. On April 13, 2009, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research submitted to the Secretary for Natural Resources its proposed greenhouse gas emission amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines, as required by SB 97 (Chapter 185, 2007). Those amendments were adopted on December 30, 2009. The amendments set target greenhouse gas emission reductions for all metropolitan planning organizations (MPO). Local agencies not included within an MPO are exempt from the greenhouse gas emission targets, but they must address the CEQA Guidelines requirement contained in the Initial Study checklist for projects that they are considering. While the California Environmental Quality Act requires lead agencies to address greenhouse gas emissions in environmental documents, CARB, the Attorney General and other regulatory agencies have not issued any definitive guidance that agencies can follow in evaluating how land use developments contribute to climate change, specifically in regards to establishing thresholds of significance and identifying appropriate mitigation for such emissions. Lacking definitive guidance from the State, local jurisdictions on an individual basis must determine the significance of greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation measures for projects within that jurisdiction. Neither NSAQMD nor the Town has adopted local implementing procedures and guidelines for how GHG emissions should be analyzed in environmental documents, how thresholds of significance should be determined and reasonable mitigation measures to be applied in Truckee. Impact Discussion Item 7.a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment The two main generators of GHG emissions from land use development are vehicle emissions and building operations. Generally, projects may reduce GHG emissions by decreasing the miles traveled by vehicles generated by the Project and by improving the energy efficiency of buildings within the Project. In looking at the density, diversity (in regards to mixture of land uses), design and destination (its location relative to accessibility to other places) of a development, a project can be evaluated to determine whether the Project will generate less vehicle miles traveled compared to "development as usual ". More important to the design, a major contributor to the reduction of vehicle miles traveled is directly related to the nature of the occupants of proposed neighborhood. The Project is a Page 65 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood senior living community catering to individuals who are generally 70 years of age and older, although residents 55 years of age or older are allowed to reside in the project. Senior restricted projects have a much lower traffic generation factor than traditional residential development projects. The International Traffic Engineers (ITE) manual reflects a daily trip reduction from approximately 6.65 trips per day if the site were developed with multiple family dwelling units (apartments (ITE Land Use Code 220)) to 2.81 trips per day for the senior living Units (ITE Land Use Code 255). The proposed project will result in lower traffic counts, lower vehicle miles traveled and, therefore, lower levels of CO2 generation over a typical, non -age restricted multi - family residential development pattern. With a senior citizen residency requirement, there are not expected to be any residents who will be commuting to jobs or dropping off or picking children up from school and thereby adding to the morning and afternoon /evening commute traffic. In addition, the lodge will have a dial -a -ride shuttle bus service that will transport residents to a variety of off -site appointments, social engagements and other activities. In addition, the off -site shuttle vehicle trips will be of limited miles travelled /per passenger especially when considering that multiple residents are expected to share a trip into town. The following other land use factors will also contribute to reductions in GHG generation: Diversity — Pollard Station is the first development to proceed in the larger community defined by the HMP. At full buildout, the HMP will include a mixture of commercial, residential and open space uses. The plan will accommodate a variety of residential uses ranging from medium -size single family residential lots to high density condominiums. Design — While the Project serves an aging population, it will be designed to encourage alternative transportation through the installation of pedestrian facilities within the HMP area that will connect to off -site pedestrian and bicycle paths. In addition, the senior neighborhood project will have its own dial -a -ride shuttle service intended to reduce vehicle miles traveled and assist in providing residents with social access to entertainment venues in town. Each commercial building and residential building in the HMP will have access to an inter - connected pedestrian pathway system to provide a walkable village. The HMP also provides for off -site connections to public paths including the Truckee River Legacy Trail and on Palisades Drive and on Brockway Road with a stairway providing more direct access to Brockway Road. Destinations — The HMP is an infill development first envisioned by the Downtown Specific Plan. It provides for dense, mixed use development in the Downtown core of the community with pedestrian and bicycle connections for HMP residents and visitors to Downtown businesses and residences (1/4 mile to 1/2 mile to Donner Pass Road /Bridge Street), recreational facilities at the Truckee River Regional Park (1/3 mile) and neighborhood services at the Martis Valley Center (1/4 mile). It is also located near the major transit route on Brockway Road and less than 1/2 mile from the transit center in the Downtown area. Although the HMP includes "green design" guidelines and topics to be considered in project design, the HMP does not include definitive policies or standards requiring building features to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption. HMP program MND mitigation measures 2.c, 2.e and 2.f require new buildings to improve energy efficiency above Title 24 building standards and to incorporate other reasonable measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from building construction and operation, if there is not a Town Climate Action Plan or Page 66 of 103 miiiHLsiuur Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood similar policies and standards in effect. Item 7.b, below, discusses the applicable Pollard Station project features in more detail. Impact Conclusion: With the character, design and reduced trip generation factor, the Project will not significantly contribute greenhouse gas emissions and no further mitigation measures are required beyond those identified in Section 2, Air Quality. Additionally, the 2014 building code regulations requires greater efficiency, resulting in a project that will generate significantly less greenhouse gas emissions over the long term operation. Item 7.b. Conflict with any applicable greenhouse gases plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted. The United States EPA estimates that nearly 85 percent of GHG emissions are comprised of carbon dioxide (CO2). For most non - industrial developments, the largest mobile source of GHG emissions is motor vehicles. The largest stationary source of GHG emissions is day to day building operations. Neither the Town nor NSAQMD, has a quantitative plan, requirements or significance thresholds established for greenhouse gases emissions. At the time of individual project submittals, the following applicable HMP mitigation measures apply: 2.c Pedestrian paths shall be provided from each residential building, commercial building and common recreational and public facilities to a public pedestrian path within the Project site. 2.e If the Town Council has not adopted a Town Climate Action Plan or similar policies and standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the time of approval of a project land use application, the Project shall incorporate measures and modifications into all buildings, including single family residences and multi - family residences, to increase the energy efficiency of buildings by a minimum of 20 percent above and beyond Title 24 building standards in effect at the time of building construction. 2.f If the Town Council has not adopted a Town Climate Action Plan or similar policies and standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the time of approval of a project land use application, the Project shall incorporate all appropriate and feasible measures, as determined by the Planning Commission, listed in the Office of the California Attorney General Fact Sheet on Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level dated March 8, 2008. The applicant has provided a climate action program to reduce project greenhouse gas emissions. The Project's CO2 emissions were projected using the CaIEEMod computer model. The model assumed a worst case scenario where all construction is to occur in two construction seasons. Based on the results of the CaIEEMod computer model, the following estimates of CO2 would be emitted: Source Summer Ibs /da Winter (lbs /day) Construction 6,348.6 6,270.2 Energy natural as 209.4 209.4 Mobile 4,861.6 4,615.6 Total After 5,071.0 4,825.0 Page 67 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Construction Based on the above, the daily CO2 emissions, after construction, are estimated to be 5,071 lbs. day. Due to the nature of senior living center characteristics, GHG emissions are decreased due to the reduced reliance and need for motor vehicles. The aging population characteristics of the occupants and the assisted nature of the residents (50 percent) reflect a very low level of automobile usage. In addition, a dial -a -ride service is provided for all residents. This service will further combine trips to and from the neighborhood. The building design will also incorporate energy efficient features in accordance with Master Plan Mitigation Measure 2.e. In addition to the standard mitigation measures to reduce erosion and control dust during construction and restrictions on burning and wood stove use (which will reduce Stationary Source Emissions by a projected 20 percent or more), the Pollard Station Action Plan includes the following design components that will reduce the amount of GHGs: 1. MINIMIZE SITE DISTURBANCE The clustered design ensures that site disturbance will be minimized and approximately 40 percent of the existing trees will be preserved. This design also preserves the areas of steeper slopes and allows approximately 52 percent of the site to remain in a pervious, vegetated state. The amount of landscaping and water usage will be reduced with the retention of native vegetation, thereby reducing the demand for gas powered landscape maintenance equipment. 2. SOLAR ORIENTATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY The Project design includes proper placement of windows and adequate insulation, which reduces energy use by 30 to 40 percent. The Project will comply with both the 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2010 CALGreen Building Code, which raised energy efficiency by 30 percent more than the 2005 standards that were in effect when the HMP was approved. These standards exceed the 20 percent increase beyond Title 24 building standards recommended by HMP MM -2e. CALGreen amended Title 24 of the California Uniform Building Code and became effective into January, 2011. According to the Center for Sustainable Energy, these new California building standards for energy efficiency are 15 percent to 20 percent more strict than previous codes (2008 CA Energy Standards) moving that will save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF DESIGN GUIDELINES In addition to the Town's design standards which ensure high - quality building standards and reduce energy consumption, the following summary considerations are represented by the applicant to be incorporated into site, landscaping and architecture, sustainable design concepts and green building practices: • Outdoor areas designed to take advantage of natural sunlight. • Native plant species incorporated into landscaping. Natural and indigenous stone and wood building materials used for landscape structures, site walls and outdoor areas. Page 68 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood • Size and orientation of windows and doors will be designed to take advantage of sun, shade and wind conditions to minimize used of mechanical heating and cooling systems. Most buildings are sited to take advantage of solar orientation and natural daylight. • Space to accommodate recycling facilities. • Renewable energy concepts incorporated into building designs to reduce energy consumption and costs while increasing personal comfort. • Building orientation and landscaping to facilitate shade during the summer months and sun exposure during the winter months. • Energy Star certified appliances and windows. • Building insulation to exceed California Title 24 requirements. • Formaldehyde -free, loose and spray cellulose insulation products that are made out of 100 percent recycled newspaper and that are treated with borates for fire and insect resistance while preserving air quality. 4. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY Pollard Station proposes a "walkable development" with interconnecting bicycle and pedestrian trails throughout the HMP, ultimately connecting beyond the immediate vicinity. 5. REDUCE VEHICLE TRIPS AND MILES The shuttle and nature of the age- restricted residents will result in less vehicle trips than a typical multi - family residential development. The project also incorporates a mailbox cluster and a "dial -a- ride" shuttle service. 6. FUEL MODIFICATION PLAN The Fuel Modification Plan will require proper maintenance of "low ladder fuels" "fuel breaks," and require removal of vegetation necessary for proper forest management. Upon implementation, the Fuel Modification Plan will greatly reduce the wildfire danger within the Project area and adjacent area(s). Impact Conclusion: By incorporating the proposed mitigation measures included in Section 2, Air Quality, along with the incorporation of the above climate action features, the Project will not significantly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and no further mitigation measures are required. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Sig with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or X disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the X release of hazardous materials into the environment? Page 69 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste X within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 X and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Plan, result in a safety hazard for X people residing or working in the Project area? f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or X emergency evacuation Ian? g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Environmental Setting - The Project site is not listed as a hazardous materials site. The site is located within Zone D, "Primary Traffic Patterns" designation safety and noise impact area established by the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Airport Plan). Impact Discussion Items 8.a through 8.d. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or handle hazardous materials within one - quarter mile from a school or is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The Project will not result in the use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials other than those typically associated with residential uses. The Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The NCDEH was consulted during the review of the HMP program MND and this project. They did not report of any hazardous materials or wastes stored or disposed on the site. While the Geotechnical Engineering report prepared for the Project did not include an evaluation of the presence of hazardous materials or petroleum products, no such materials were observed during the field investigation. Should any potential hazardous materials or contaminated soils be discovered during construction, the materials or soils will be required to be investigated, tested and cleaned up in accordance with LRWQCB and NCDEH requirements. Page 70 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Mitigation Measures MM -8.a If any potential hazardous materials or contaminated soils are discovered during construction, the materials or soils will be required to be investigated, tested and cleaned up in accordance with LRWQCB and NCDEH requirements. Timing: Note to appear on the final improvement and grading plans. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer, Environmental Health Department Impact Conclusion After Mitigation: With the incorporation of MM -8.a, the Project will not have an effect on or otherwise be effected by contaminated soils and /or other hazardous materials. Item 8.e. Result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area within the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Plan. The HMP area and subject site are located in Safety Zone D of the Airport Plan. Safety Zone D is considered a "Primary Traffic Pattern" area. For purposes of the Airport Plan, the Project consists of two different land use components. There are 40 single - family condominium units and 86 residential /group care units. The Airport Plan establishes three primary compatibility categories: Permitted, prohibited and discouraged. Table 2A of the Airport Plan establishes the compatibility criteria for various land uses applicable to each safety zone. Within Safety Zone D, residential uses are permitted subject to restrictions and group homes are "discouraged." Policy 4.2.3 addresses "Land Uses of Special Concern." These are uses that represent special safety concerns irrespective of the number of people associated with those uses. These uses or concerns include vulnerable occupants, multi -story buildings, hazardous materials storage, critical community infrastructure and discouraged uses. The lodge facility raises potential hazard concerns regarding Policy 4.2.3(a) Uses Having Vulnerable Occupants and Policy 4.2.3(e) Discouraged Uses. Section 3.1.3(b) of the Airport Plan establishes compatibility criteria for residential uses within Safety Zone D. Higher density residential developments are permitted provided that they are at least five (5) units per acre within any single acre. There are eleven (11) separate multiple - family "residential' condominium parcels in the Project. Each parcel contains between two and eight individual condominium units. The overall density of the condominium portion of the project is 7 units per acre. There are three separate condominium parcels that range in density between 6.8 to 13.8 units per acre. Therefore, each parcel exceeds the five units per acre standards such that these units qualify as a higher density residential development pursuant to the Airport Plan. In addition, there are four separate single - family condominium units on site. The density criteria are based purely on noise exposure and not hazards; as a result, the residential project component will not expose such residents to hazardous conditions due to location within Safety Zone D. Pollard Station is not considered a nursing home and therefore would not fall under a prohibited use within Safety Zone D. As noted earlier, Pollard Station is classified as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE). Sometimes called "assisted living" or "board and care" facilities, RCFEs are non - medical facilities that provide a level of care that includes assistance with activities of daily living. Because many residents could have mobility restrictions, the occupants would be considered vulnerable. Page 71 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Policy 4.2.3 (Uses Having Vulnerable Occupants) addresses "Uses in which the occupants have reduced effective mobility or are unable to respond to emergency situations shall be prohibited within Compatibility Zones A, 81, 82 and C and are discouraged in Zone D. These uses include children's schools and day care centers (with 7 or more children), hospitals, nursing homes and other uses in which the maiority of occupants are children, elderly and /or handicapped (emphasis added)." While the lodge is not considered a hospital or nursing home, both of which are considered prohibited uses in Safety Zone D, the occupants are elderly with or without mobility impairments and considered vulnerable due to reduced effective mobility. The concern would be with evacuating residents quickly should an airplane have to abort its flight due to an emergency. Section 3.3.6 of the Airport Plan allows for special conditions applicable to an individual project site should a use be considered "normally incompatible." The residential /group care use is not a use that is considered "normally incompatible," but as a "discouraged" use in Safety Zone D. While evaluating whether this site is an appropriate use, factors such as terrain, specific location or other circumstances could determine this site to be appropriate such that an environmental impact would not occur. The following specific factors concerning this site could warrant an exception to the basic compatibility criteria including the following: At a distance of +7,000 -feet from the runway end, the site is in an area of low risk exposure to aircraft accidents. • Even though 23 percent of the site will be built upon, much of the existing heavy forest on the site is planned to remain and would help protect the facility from a potential aircraft accident. • There are at least two "open lands" areas suitable for a distressed pilot to abort a flight in the immediate vicinity of the Project. According to Policy 4.24(a) of the Airport Plan, "open land" is largely devoid of large trees, is free of structures and has minimum dimensions of 75 -feet by 300 -feet. The two areas in the immediate vicinity include: ✓ The lands planned and zoned OS -SKI, open space -ski slope within HMP plan on the west side of the plan area. ✓ The land zoned RC, Resource Conservation defining the large (550 -feet by 1,600- . feet) meadow and wetland along Brockway Road. The ultimate determination of whether the Project should proceed, as presented, rests with the Tahoe - Truckee Airport Land Use Commission. On July 20, 2011, the Commission adopted Resolution 11 -02 which included findings determining the project consistent with the Airport Plan. Due to concerns with airplane noise associated with overflight, the Commission required that an overflight easement be recorded over the project area. Mitigation Measures While there are no direct impacts requiring mitigation, the following measure should be added to protect noise operations associated with on -going airport operations: MM -8.b Record an overflight easement over the project area in accordance with the requirements of the Tahoe - Truckee Airport. Page 72 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Timing: Prior to recordation of the first final map. Responsible Agency: Tahoe - Truckee Airport and Planning Division Impact Conclusion. With adoption of MM 8.b, the project will have a less than significant impact related to airport safety hazards. Item 81. Interfere with an adopted emergency response plan. The Project design will not significantly impair emergency access to and evacuation from the site and surrounding areas, as there are two routes designed to provide both project level and emergency access to the development site. Both such access routes will be developed in advance of on -site construction. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not have an effect on an adopted emergency response plan. Item 8.g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. TheTFPD will review the Project for compliance with their requirements for fuel clearance, materials, infrastructure, emergency access and evacuation. Fuel clearance around structures and along driveways is required by TFPD ordinances and regulations. These standards will be applied at time of land use development application approval. In addition, TFPD ordinances and regulation will require fuel clearance around structures, fire retardant construction materials, sufficient water, fire hydrants and sprinkler improvements. Those ordinances and regulations will ensure that people and structures of the Project and the surrounding area will not be exposed to significant risks involving wildland fires. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not have a significant effect on wildland fire as State law requirements administered by TFPD will be required. Beyond standard conditions of approval applicable to the circumstances of the Project no further mitigation measure will be required. Overall Impact Conclusion: With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, the Project will not have a significant impact on hazards and hazardous materials. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact p Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact p No Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table 'level (e.g., the X production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned use for which permits have been ranted)? Page 73 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project: Significant Impact with Mitigation "Incorporated. Significant Impact Impact c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a X manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or X substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater X drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or X Floor Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede X or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding X as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche or mudflow? X Environmental Setting — Existing surface drainage conditions are primarily sheet flow toward the north within the immediate watershed of the Truckee River. Localized drainage is conveyed towards the wetland meadow area to the north of the Project area. There are no FEMA mapped 100 -year flood hazard areas on the site (Panel Number 060210 508B). Regulatory Setting — The Project site is subject to the LRWQCB water quality regulations for the Truckee River Hydrologic Unit. Because the Project will disturb over 5- acres, the Project will be subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act and a NPDES Construction General Permit. Page 74 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood The Project must comply with the Town's drainage /storm water runoff regulations as specified in Development Code Section 18.30.50 . It must also conform to storm water runoff treatment and erosion control measures required by the LRWQCB's guidelines including the Truckee River Hydrologic Unit Project Guidelines for Erosion Control and the "State of California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks ". In addition, the Project must comply with the water quality and waste discharge requirements of the LRWQCB and the NPDES Permit. Impact Discussion Items 9.a, 9.c, 9.e and 9.f. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or create%ontribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater systems or otherwise degrade water quality. When complete, the Project will alter the existing pervious site conditions through the introduction of 3.83 -acres of impervious surfaces or 47.8 percent of the Project site. Surface runoff from the site will increase substantially upon completion of the Project as a result of a decrease in surface absorption rates from the Project's impervious surfaces. Such runoff may be contaminated with soil and other earthen materials and urban runoff from vehicles and structures, which may further degrade water quality of surface waters in the area. Runoff generated from the Project roadways, private driveways, buildings and other impervious surfaces will be captured and conveyed by a comprehensive system of curbing, culverts, drop inlets, discharge aprons, sand /oil separators and infiltration basins to ensure that no -net increase in runoff will occur. Infiltration basins are proposed to provide on -site treatment of project - generated runoff. Infiltration basins must be designed to exceed the 20 -year 1 -hour storm event capacity and to treat runoff prior to introduction with ground or neighboring surface waters. In addition to the standard storm drainage system, the Project will incorporate LID methods of storm water management. LID is a storm water management strategy that emphasizes conservation and use of on -site natural features integrated with engineered, small scale hydrologic controls to more closely mimic natural hydrologic functions. Using LID, both groundwater and surface waters will be intercepted and re- infiltrated into near surface soils to replenish waters that naturally (pre project conditions) are flowing toward the wetland. The drainage plan, including LID, will minimize on -site and off -site erosion, siltation and sources of pollution. It is required to be designed to not exceed the capacity of the planned storm water management system for teh HMP. In addition a detailed wetland management plan is included as part of the Project. It is fully addressed in the Biological Resources Section. Common road and utility improvement plans and individual project drainage along with related grading improvements will be required to be detailed on a comprehensive drainage and grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director, Town Engineer and LRWCQB prior to disturbance of the site. The various drainage and grading plans will be required to address changes in drainage patterns which may impact the site, adjacent properties and demonstrate no net increase in off -site runoff consistent with the Town's General Plan policies. Since there will be a discharge of surface waters resulting from the Project, a NPDES Construction General Permit is required. LRWCQB water quality standards are quantitative, qualitative and performance based and will be administered through the NPDES Permit. Page 75 of 103 INI I IAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Mitigation Measures MM -9.a The applicant shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan as part of the required NPDES permit. Timing: Prior to issuance of any building permits for the project. Responsible Agency: Planning Division Impact Conclusion: With compliance to the Town's drainage /storm water runoff regulations in Development Code Section 18.30.50, Mitigation Measure -9.a and requirements from the LRWQCB, the Project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements as a NPDES Construction General Permit is required. Conformance with these water quality standards will reduce water quality impacts to a less than significant level and ensure that the Project will not generate substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Item 9.b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. While groundwater was not encountered or observed by the geotechnical engineering report, seasonal saturation of near - surface soil is anticipated across a majority of the site. These waters will be intercepted and re- introduced through the LID method of storm water management, described above. The ultimate goal of the LID system is to avoid impacting the wetland located on the parcel immediately north of the Project site. A detailed wetland management and monitoring plan is included as part of the Biological Resources section. The impacts to ground water recharge will be minimized through the LID method of storm water management and the wetland management plan program. Impact Conclusion: With compliance with Town's drainage /storm water runoff regulations, the LID method of storm water management and requirements from the LRWQCB, the Project will not create a significant impact on ground water resources. Item 9.d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. The existing natural on -site drainage pattern is largely made up of sheet flow. There are no defined drainage ways that will be changed. New construction will change the existing sheet flow drainage system due to the introduction of 3.83 -acres of new impervious surfaces. A detailed drainage plan has been prepared that will intercept both surface and ground water to defined channels. Water conveyed will then be directed to storm water retention ponds which will then be directed to a "bio- retention" swale at the northern property line. Waters conveyed to the swale will be allowed to infiltrate into the ground to minimize off -site contribution of storm water and provide re- charge waters for the wetland on the property immediately to the north. The details of the Stormwater Management Plan shall be reflected in the grading and drainage plan, as outlined in MM -9.a. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures from the HMP program MND shall be applied to individual development projects and to the common road and utility improvement plans: Page 76 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood MM -9.b A comprehensive grading and drainage study shall be prepared by a licensed engineer for the common infrastructure improvement plans in accordance with the requirements of the Town Engineer. The study shall include the following features: Analyze the existing and projected storm water runoff from the Project site to Town facilities along Brockway Road and Palisades Drive to determine if the existing drainage facilities have sufficient capacity to accommodate the increased storm water runoff from the Project site. If the drainage facilities do not have sufficient capacity, the drainage study shall identify drainage improvements (both on and off -site) to decrease the amount of storm water runoff from the site and /or increase the capacity of the Town drainage facilities to accommodate the Project's storm water runoff. The study shall conclude that the Project's storm water runoff will not result in flooding impacts within Brockway Road and Palisades Drive. 2. Temporary and permanent erosion control methods consistent with the requirements of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board Truckee River Hydrologic Unit Guidelines for Erosion Control and Best Management Practices and State of California Best Management Practices Handbook prepared by the American Public Works Association Storm Water Task Force. 3. A dewatering plan. The plan shall specify how all dewatered ground water will be discharged. If the plan indicates that surface dewatering will drain into the wetland and jurisdictional waters, then the developer shall secure the appropriate permits and /or approvals from LRWQCB, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Timing: As time of common infrastructure improvement plan and future project submittal Responsible Agency: Planning Division and Town Engineer Impact Conclusion: With compliance with MM -9a, the Town's drainage /storm water runoff regulations and requirements from the LRWQCB, the Project will not significantly impact the existing drainage pattern or result in flooding. Items 9.g, 9.h, 9.i and 9J. Place structures which would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100 -year flood hazard, expose people to flood hazards or inundation by seiche or mudflow. The Project is not located within or in proximity to a 100 -year flood plain or hazard area. The closest mapped 100 -year flood plain is contained within the Truckee River which is located down slope approximately 1,000 -feet to the north. There are no flood hazards or flood plains in the immediate vicinity of the Project that will be impacted or otherwise have an impact on residents living within the Project area. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not create flooding or expose residents to flooding. Overall Impact Conclusion: With the addition of MM -9.b and compliance with requirements of the LRWQCB, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Project will not have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality. Page 77 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood 10. LAND USE PLANNING, POPULATION Potentially Less Than Less Than AND HOUSING. Significant t nifican Sig with Mitigation Significant No Impact Would the Project: Impact Incorporated Impact a. Conflict with the Truckee General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan and /or Development Code or any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the X Project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b. Physically divide an established community? X c. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes X and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? d. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? e. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? Environmental Settinq - The 8.02 -acre project site is currently undeveloped and remains in a forested condition. The Project area General Plan designation is Downtown Specific Plan (DSA). The Project site is zoned Downtown Master Plan (DMP) with an Historic Preservation (HP) overlay zone. This zoning district requires a master plan before development occurs. the HMP was developed for the entire 37.8 -acre Hilltop area and adopted on August 7, 2008. Specific zoning on lands within the HMP cannot occur until such time that offers of dedication for common infrastructure have been submitted and accepted by the Town or as part of a formal application submittal. Development Code Section 18.220.020 defines "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing" as: Multi- family residential projects where occupancy is limited to people of 55 years or older and /or people with physical or mental disabilities and no persons under 18 years of age are permitted as residents. These facilities may include individual apartment units, community dining centers, common recreation areas and medical facilities. The DRM zone applicable to the subject property was intended to provide a transition from the existing multi - family development east of the Hilltop property. The general plan designations, zoning districts and land use for surrounding properties are as follows: Page 78 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Direction 'General Plan Zoning L Use Base Overlay North DSA DMP HP Vacant land within Hilltop Master Plan South RES (1 unit /acre) RR -0.2 -- Vacant land within Hilltop Master Plan East RH RM -15 -- Multi - Family Residential West DSA DMP HP Vacant land within Hilltop Master Plan Impact Discussion Item 90.a. Conflict with the Truckee General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan and /or Development Code or any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The 2025 Truckee General Plan was adopted on November 16, 2006. It was subsequently amended on October 30, 2009, to incorporate the State mandated update to the Housing Element. The Downtown Specific Plan was adopted in November 1997. The HMPwas adopted on August 7, 2008. It also included amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan to primarily reflect Hilltop plan boundary and access changes. The HMP was adopted with findings of consistency with the General Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan. As proposed, the Project requires an amendment to the HMP in order for it to be approved. That amendment would be the addition of "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing" as a conditional use within the DRM Zoning District Chapter 3, Section G and Table 3. In addition, the applicant proposes to amend the historical interpretation program to defer its preparation until such time that project occurs on lands that contain existing historical structures. The General Plan establishes a full range of appropriate land uses. The "Residential Land Use Designations" sub - heading in the Land Use Element established that Development within all residential land use designations is required to be clustered and clustering shall be a high priority in all projects... Clustering shall be planned so as to protect areas of significant resources, to avoid areas of significant hazards and to maximize preservation of open space areas." The General Plan also reflects the adoption of the 1997 Downtown Specific Plan. Additional discussion of applicable General Plan policy direction is contained in Section 1, Aesthetics. Based on Development Code Section 18.08.020.E and by extension the Downtown Specific Plan, the DRM district is appropriate for new medium density infill and clustered development in the form of single family, duplexes, triplexes and multiple family dwellings. This zone also permits "senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing" as a use subject to a conditional use permit. While Table 3 of the HMP, "Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements" did not include "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing ", it is a use that is consistent with the DRM zoned and compatible in the Downtown Specific Plan area. However, the HMP, , states in Section 1.d. "If there are any conflicts or differences with the Development Code or Downtown Specific Plan, the special provisions of the HMP and Design Guidelines document shall govern." As such, the only way for the project to proceed is through an amendment to the HMP such that this use can proceed. The amendments to permit a "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing" in the DRM zone by itself does not appear to be in conflict with General Plan, Downtown Specific Page 79 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Plan or Development Code provisions. The ultimate decision is a policy one that can be made without apparent conflict with these other superior planning documents. A variety of factors could contribute to making this policy decision. It is also noted that Section 1.0 establishes that "If the Town does not approve any development in the HMP areas within three years of adoption, the Community Development Director will confer with the property owners to identify possible obstructions to the implementation of the HMP." The three year anniversary of the adoption of the HMP occurred in August 2011. A meeting was held on April 18, 2011, to formally introduce the Pollard Station project to the rest of the Hilltop property owners. It was disclosed and recognized at that meeting that development has not proceeded due to economic factors and the unavailability of off -site access easements and /or rights within the HMP area. The applicants have also indicted that the changing market factors and the Truckee demographics that demonstrates the need for senior housing is another reason to change the HMP. As demonstrated above, consistency is based on the reliance on the DRM zone as an implementing zoning district in the Downtown Specific Plan. While the Specific Plan is silent on "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing," it does reflect that multiple family residential units are appropriate in the Hilltop planning area. Within "The Hilltop Area," Section 2.H of the Downtown Specific Plan establishes, "Primary land uses are high density residential, single - family residential, open space and commercial." Hilltop Policy 2 established "general guidelines for development density ... as contained in Table 2.1..." Aside from this table establishing general guidelines for potential uses within Hilltop, it did not establish specific land use designations on the Hilltop master planning area. It deferred the development of specific land use recommendations to the future development of a master plan. The Specific Plan did however establish a variety of policies including but not limited to affordable housing; cluster development to protect sensitive resources, ridge lines, scenic views and open space; design standards in keeping with the historic character of Truckee; improved pedestrian trail access; appropriately scaled and designed development along the lower ridge line of Hilltop. Relying on the Town land use policy planning framework and the HMP, Town staff reviewed a pre - application request for a similar, more intensive project on June 5, 2009. The Town Planner determined that the use "appears consistent with the purpose and intent of the HMP and the DRM designation." The Project was found to be "... similar in nature to residential townhomes and co- housing uses which are permitted in the DRM zoning designation. We also feel that the proposed use can fulfill many housing needs identified in the Housing Element of the Town of Truckee General Plan and would promote many of the specific polices set forth in the General Plan as a whole." The letter also stated that "... staff believes that the concept proposed is a needed housing type in Truckee and would help to offset the current demand for senior housing." The letter goes onto state that an amendment is needed to the HMP in order for the Project to proceed. It also stated that the development permit must meet the provision's set forth in the Truckee Development Code and the design and land use criteria contained in the HMP. The letter also went on to state, "As designed, the Project does not adhere to some of the development and design standards established in the HMP. It is Staff's opinion that the necessary findings needed to support approval of a master plan amendment and the development permit could be made." The applicant has proposed an amendment to the HMP to enable "Senior Citizen /Disabled Congregate Care Housing" as a use subject to a Use Permit. On the face of the proposal, the project would appear to exceed the maximum 94 residential units assigned to the site. Based on Section 18.08.020.B.2, the equivalent "residential units" of Page 80 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood the proposed project is 79, or approximately 9.9 units per acre which is less than the 11.7 units per acre maximum density designated to the site. Equivalent "residential units" are reflected in Table 5, per the Town's Development Code: Table 5 Type Units Dwelling Unit Equivalent/bedrooms Equivalent unit Lodge Studio 68 0.50 34.0 1- Bedroom 14 0.67 9.4 2- Bedrooms 4 0.80 3.2 Sub -Total 86 -- 46.6 Condominiums 2- Bedrooms 40 0.80 32 Total 126 78.6 In addition to the congregate care units, the inclusion of 40 condominium units and 18 independent living units within the lodge will provide a permanent active group of senior residents within Hilltop to support and complement the rest of the planned uses in the HMP area. The key compatibility feature rests more with the design of the project, which is addressed in the Aesthetics section. Impact Conclusion: The amendment to the HMP to permit "senior citizen /disabled congregate care housing" is not in conflict with the General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan and Development Code. Item 10.b. Physically divide an established community. The HMP is a planned infill development just south of downtown Truckee. Pollard Station is proposed on land that could have a greater density without using the equivalent density factor in Table 2 -5 of Section 18.08.020.B.2. The lower density and nature of the senior occupancy will have less off site impacts (i.e. traffic, schools recreational demand, etc.). The Project does not contain elements that would divide an established community (i.e., major roads, railroad tracks, major transportation facilities, or uses that would be incompatible (such as heavy commercial, airports, industrial), etc.). The Project will in fact provide road connectivity that will help connect and integrate this land designated for development into the fabric of the Town. It will also result in the construction of the Phase 1 infrastructure that will provide the back bone road system that will provide the basis for implementing the HMP and provide a connection to the town of Truckee's transportation system (roads, pedestrian, trails, etc.). In addition, the project will extend all wet and dry utilities and make it available to the rest of Hilltop. The size, height and bulk of the lodge may be an incompatible land use with the adjacent Stonewood Townhomes to the east. The mitigating design features contained within the project include a building setback of 125 -feet and two -story height for Building 1 (independent living units) fronting on Pine Cone Road. A smaller, single story two -unit condominium is positioned on the south side of Pine Cone Road east of Building 1 and provides a lower profile and compatible transition to the adjoining Stonewood Townhomes. Building 4 is located Page 81 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood approximately 205 feet west of the common Stonewood Townhomes property line or 220 feet from the closest townhome. A variable natural open space buffer of approximately 70 -feet to 100 -feet between the Stonewood Townhomes property line and interior access road will help to provide a transition to the more southerly existing townhomes in the adjacent development. This open space area includes a bocce ball court and a trail that extends to the west along the rear /southerly property line of the project. Twelve existing, large, conifer trees ranging between 18- inches and 40- inches (dbh) in diameter will also enhance the buffer area. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not physically divide an established community or create an incompatible land use arrangement. Item 10.c. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). The Project is consistent with the policies and Land Use Diagrams of the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. The Project will not induce population growth that was otherwise not envisioned by the HMP for the Project site. While the Project will require the extension of water, sewer, roads and other services, it is consistent with the HMP and therefore encouraged by the Town. The Project will be required to undergo Design Review pursuant to Development Code to ensure that the applicable provisions of the Development Code and HMP may be applied. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not induce substantial population growth. Items 10.d, 10.e. and 10.f. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere or displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The site is undeveloped. No existing residences or residents will be relocated as a result of the Project. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not displace or force relocation of existing residences or residents. Mitigation Measures - There are no potential significant impacts to land use, planning, population and housing and no mitigation measures are required. Overall Land Use, Planning, Population and Housing Impact Conclusion: While the size, scale and bulk of the lodge buildings have a larger mass than the townhomes to the east, the two closest buildings are setback by 125 feet and in excess of 200 feet and buffered by a single - story two unit townhome (units 20 and 21) and an open space low intensity recreational area. With the many site planning and design features to the project there will not be a significant impact on land use planning, population and housing. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Potentially , Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project: ;Significant. Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would X be of value to the region and the Page 82 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood residents of the State? Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No b. Result in the loss of availability of a Significant Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact locally- important mineral resource Incorporated recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Environmental Setting — The site is not identified as an area of significant mineral resources by the State or the Town and there is no evidence of previous aggregate mining on the site. Impact Discussion Items 11.a and 11.b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally known mineral resource or one of importance to the region. The H and K engineering report did not reveal any significant mineral resources. Due to the lack of on -site mineral resources and the area not being designated as a significant mineral resources area, conversion of the site to residential uses in accordance with the HMP will not result in the loss of significant mineral resources. Mitigation Measures - No mitigation measures are required. Overall Impact Conclusion: The project will not have a significant impact on mineral resources. 12. NOISE. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project. Significant Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the Truckee General Plan or Development Code, or X applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration X or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project X vicinity above levels existing without the Project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in X the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? e. For a project located within the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Plan, expose people residing or X working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? Page 83 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Environmental Setting - An ambient noise study has not been conducted for the Project site. The General Plan undertook a comprehensive noise monitoring survey to document noise generated by predominate transportation sources that affect Truckee. These noise sources include highways, local arterials, collector roadways, the Union Pacific Railroad and the Truckee -Tahoe Airport. Table N -3 (Standards for Land Use Compatibility with Noise) of the General Plan's Noise Element has established compatible exterior noise levels for various land use types. Table 6 includes the Town's noise compatibility standards as reflected in Table N -3 of the Noise Element: Table 6 Land Use Exterior Noise Levels (dBA) Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Normally Unacceptable Clearly Acceptable Residential Up to 60 60 -65 65 -75 Above 75 Office Up to 70 70 -75 -- Above 75 Hotel, Commercial Up to 70 70 -75 -- Above 75 Neighborhood Park Up to 65 65 -75 -- Above 75 Other Recreation Up to 70 70 -75 75 -80 Above 85 According to the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Project lies outside of the future 55 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)2 noise contour. The 55 CNEL contour of the Airport will not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. _Impact Discussion Items 12.a and 12.b. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards or exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. The major noise sources within the Town are related to transportation. The transportation related noise sources that could affect the site include vehicular traffic, trains and airplanes. The closest road noise source is Brockway Road. Figure N -1, Future Noise Contours, and Table N -2, Future Noise Contour Distances, of the General Plan Noise Element projects that the 2025 noise levels within 100 -feet of Brockway Road would have a 70.1 decibels (dBA) CNEL noise contour level. The Noise Element also projects that the 60 CNEL noise contour would be 510 -feet from the roadway in 2025. The Project's closest building will be setback approximately 660 -feet from Brockway Road. Another mitigating factor is that Brockway Road in the project vicinity is contained within a relatively steep earthen slope. As such, the slope would absorb much of the roadway noise. Development Code Section 18.44.050 establishes that the interior noise standards of California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2 will require that these building be constructed to achieve an interior noise level of 45 CNEL if the exterior ambient noise level exceeds 60 dBA CNEL. 2 CNEL is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community with a 5 dB penalty added to evenings (7:OOp.m. to 10 p.m.) and a 10dB penalty added to nocturnal (10 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise levels. Page 84 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood According the to the Downtown Specific Plan EIR, Downtown Truckee is noisier than most downtowns because of regular freight and passenger train activity that occurs in the heart of the downtown at all hours of the day and night. The noise of a freight train at a distance of 50 -feet can be more than 80 dBA. Except for limited mixed use residential dwellings within the DMU zoned lands, the closest planned residential use within the Master Plan area is approximately 1,200 -feet from the rail line. These planned residential uses are all multiple family units and as noted above, Development Code Section 18.44.050 establish that the interior noise standards will require that these building be constructed to achieve an interior noise level of 45 CNEL if the exterior ambient noise level exceeds 60 dB(A) CNEL. The closest single - family dwellings to the rail line would be in excess of 1,400 -feet away. Avoiding train noise is virtually impossible within the downtown core are of Truckee. In addition to distance, the HMP also takes advantage of topography to minimize train and road noise from unnecessarily impacting residential uses. The Downtown Specific Plan EIR goes on to further state that train activity is often perceived as a benefit to the historical atmosphere of the Town. The speed of trains through the downtown is generally slow and therefore not as loud as it otherwise might be. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not result in or expose people to transportation related noise levels in excess of Town standards. There are no fixed noise sources in the area that would contribute to excessive noise levels. Item 12.c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. As a residential development restricted to senior citizens, project noise will largely be associated with automobile usage and some limited supply truck traffic. The General Plan largely attributes noise in Truckee to transportation uses. The future projected noise contours along Brockway Road reflect a 60 CNEL dBA noise level that would extend to approximately the northerly edge of the subject project site. As noted in Table N -3 of the Noise Element, a 60 dBA noise level is normally acceptable for residential uses. From the standpoint of noise generation, the nature of the occupancy would not constitute an incompatible use in this setting. Human activity due to the senior age population would be much less than a conventional non -age restricted residential development that could occupy the neighborhood. There would be reduced activity and generally very little outdoor noise generating uses. Being a use that will entail groundskeepers, there may be routine maintenance that will utilize power equipment (i.e., leaf blowers, power washers, hedge cutters, trimmers and the like). These landscape maintenance activities would be common to the area. There are project features, however, that may create potential noise sources that could impact the Stonewood Townhomes located immediately east of the lodge facility. These project features include the common service entry for delivery trucks accessing the parking garage, the generator, HVAC system and general vehicular traffic using the southerly access /fire access roadway /walking loop. All the HVAC units are mounted in the roof wells. Noise should go upward and not impact neighbors. The generator will be placed in an enclosure next to the dumpster or, if space allows in the subterranean parking garage. The generator would only be used during power outages. While not specified in the project, the generator and HVAC system will be required to meet the 60 dBA CNEL noise standard of the Noise Element. Since the emergency generator and HVAC system will be used at night, the CNEL standard imposes a 5 dBA penalty from 7:00 p.m. to 10 p.m. and a 10 dBA penalty from 10 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Therefore, both project features will need to be able to meet a 50 dBA noise level at the common property line. Page 85 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Service trucks would be bringing in a variety of supplies on a weekly basis that include food, linens and other supplies. All such trips would typically be scheduled to avoid the evening (after 7:00 p.m.) and early morning (prior to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The access roadway to the rear of the lodge is required in order to meet fire protection emergency access requirements. Service delivery trucks will need to back up into the service entrance /garage. Back -up maneuvers will make more noise than traveling vehicles that are passing by. It is not expected that such noise activities will exceed the Town of Truckee's noise standards. These activities would be more noticeable during summer months when residents of the Stonewood Townhomes are leaving their doors and windows open and are using their outdoor patios /decks. The easterly access roadway is located ±85 -feet and ±105 -feet from the common easterly property line. The front of the below structure garage opening is approximately 135 -feet from the common property line. The opening to the garage is more easterly facing and noises generated from inside the garage would tend to be directed toward the east. Mitigation Measures MM -12.a The emergency generator and the HVAC system shall be designed to meet 50 dBA noise standards at the project property lines. Timing: Demonstrate as part of building permit application. Responsible Agency: Planning Division Impact Conclusion After Mitigation: With the addition of MM -12.a the Project will not exceed noise levels for residential uses in excess of the Noise Element standard in the Project vicinity. Item 12.d. Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Due to the age restricted occupancy, the Project will generate less noise than typical multi- family residential uses. The Project should not result in a substantial permanent or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity. The Project could be built through five separate phases over a period of six years, with construction activities normally limited to a single phase of construction. Infrastructure and building construction noise along with truck traffic associated with the Project may result in substantial temporary noise that may significantly impact surrounding residences and uses during early morning and weekend hours. Construction related noise has been common place through Truckee. All areas of the central part of town and beyond can be exposed to a variety of construction related noise. Construction related noise activities will be relatively short term in nature, but this noise can be disturbing to adjoining residents. As a result, daily construction activities that result in audible noise beyond the property line should be limited. The Development Code standard precludes construction (including material delivery) before 7:00 a.m. and all construction shall end no later than 7:00 p.m. or dusk, whichever occurs first Monday through Saturday. No audible noise operations shall take place on Sundays and Federal holidays. Page 86 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Mitigation Measures MM -12.b Hours of operation of construction activities related to development of the infrastructure, site preparation and building construction shall be limited from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. or dusk, whichever occurs first, Monday through Saturday. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and Federal holidays. Interior construction activities may occur after these hours if such activities will not result in exterior noise being audible at property lines. Improvements, grading and building plans shall note these limited hours of construction. Timing: Standards included to the final improvement construction/ grading plans Responsible Agencv: Planning Division Impact Conclusion After Mitigation: With the inclusion of Mitigation Measure 12.b the short term construction noise impacts will be less than significant. Item 12.e. For a project located within the Truckee -Tahoe Airport Land Use Plan, expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. The Airport Plan indicates the Project is located outside of the 55 CNEL dBA noise contour. Therefore, it is not anticipated that airport noise will negatively impact the Project. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from the Truckee -Tahoe Airport. Overall Impact Conclusion: The project will not create any long term significant impacts. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Potentially Less Than Significant Sig Less Than No Would the Project: Significant Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause X significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i. Fire protection? X ii. Police protection? X iii. Schools? X iv. Other public facilities? X i FPD, Town of Truckee Police Department and Tahoe Truckee Unified School District provide public services to the HMP Area. Impact Discussion Page 87 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Item 11.a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities. Fire protection. TFPD has a fire station on Truckee Airport Road north of Highway 267. As a result, emergency response services have improved dramatically on the south side of the railroad tracks. TFPD provided comments that established their overall development requirements on May 26, 2011. These standards include provision for hydrants and fire flow, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm system, roads and driveways, wildland fire protection, fire extinguishers, fire department access and safety, mitigation fees to be paid at applicable adopted district rates, construction and receipt of a will serve letter ensuring an on -going funding source. Said standards will apply according to District ordinances. Other more specific standards will apply with the review of specific improvement plans and building permits. Additional standards could be required associated with off -site fire flow within the common infrastructure plan. The District will impose specific improvements for fire flow, installation of fire hydrants and emergency access when they review the improvement plans. 2. Police protection. The HMP program MND indicated that the Town of Truckee Police Department can also serve the Project and its residents with existing facilities, equipment and staffing. New or altered police facilities are not expected to be necessary. 3. Schools. Pollard Station is an age restricted community that is limited to senior citizens. As a result, student age residents are not expected. There will be no impact on local schools as a result of the Project. Should age restrictions be removed from the Project in the future, State mandated mitigation fees will be required in accordance with Government Code Section 65995. 4. Other public facilities. The cumulative impact on the Town's maintained road system will be less than significant through payment of a road mitigation fee and roadway improvements as discussed in the Transportation/Traffic discussion contained within this Initial Study. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not result in impacts of governmental services beyond those projected in the HMP. No mitigation measures beyond adopted programs are required. 14. RECREATION. Would the Project. Potentially Significant Impact p Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant. Impact p No Impact a. Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial X physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, X which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Environmental Setting — Recreational services are provided by the Truckee Donner Recreation and Park District. The District operates a variety of facilities and offers a wide range of recreation programs for the Truckee community. Facilities include the Community Art Center, Page 88 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Community Swimming Pool, Recreation Center, West end Beach, Regional Park, Riverview Sports Park, Ice Rink, Bill Rose Park, Meadow Park, Veterans' Building, Shoreline Park, Donner Lake Public Piers and the Donner Lake Boat Launch. The District offers a variety of classes to residents that include but are not limited to swimming, adult athletic leagues, youth athletic leagues, senior activities and much more. Impact Discussion Item 94.a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The HMP, including this project will generate additional recreational users, creating an additional demand for recreational facilities. Individual projects within the HMP will be required to pay recreational facilities impact fees to offset the additional demand. The District uses these funds to construct specific facilities to serve the needs of the community. Recreational facilities to serve additional users from the Project and future development will be accommodated under the District's facilities plan. The HMP includes a variety of recreational amenities. Bike and pedestrian lanes are provided for recreational use and as an alternative means of transportation. Specifically, the HMP requires a Class I bike lane along the primary access road that will create a loop connection from Brockway Road to Palisades Drive. In addition, the Truckee River Legacy Trail will be extended along the northerly project boundary. As the first development to proceed, Pollard Station is responsible to construct the on -site trail facilities as required in the HMP. Item 94.b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. All recreational facilities to be constructed within the HMP were subject to environmental review in the HMP Program MND. No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures were included. Pollard Station will include on -site recreation amenities to serve the needs of its residents. These facilities include a community /game room, outdoor amphitheater, roof top patio, bocce ball court and on -site walking /nature trails, fitness and exercise room, outdoor patios and sitting areas and a community garden. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not create unanticipated impacts on the recreational facilities and programs offered by the Truckee - Donner Recreation and Park District. All cumulative impacts will be off -set by the payment of recreation fees in accordance with District standards. Overall Impact Conclusion: The project will not have a significant impact on recreational facilities or programs. 15. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project. Significant Impact p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation X system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non - motorized Page 89 of 103 INI I IAL S I UDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program or similar program, including, but not limited to level of service (LOS) standards and travel demand measures, or other standards X established by the Truckee General Plan, Development Code and /or Public Improvement and Engineering Standards? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in X location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or X incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency X access? f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or X otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Environmental Setting — The 8.02 -acre project site is an undeveloped woodland area located in the southwest quadrant of Brockway Road and Palisades Drive. Old Brockway Road, a substandard road, currently provides access to the Master Plan project site. Old Brockway Road (unsignalized) intersects Brockway Road (formerly State Highway 267) approximately 800 -feet west of Palisades Drive. Pine Cone Road is stubbed out at the easterly boundary of the Master Plan at the proposed Pollard Station site and provides a connection to Palisades Drive (unsignalized). Further to the south (approximately 920 - feet), Palisades Drive connects with Ponderosa Drive (unsignalized) at the southeasterly border of the HMP site. The HMP includes three different access points including one primary access and two secondary access points. The existing Old Brockway Road will be removed and replaced with a roundabout connection to Brockway Road at the northeasterly HMP boundary, approximately 550 -feet west of Palisades Drive. A second access point will connect to existing Pine Cone Road and a third access is proposed to connect to Palisades Drive north of its intersection with Ponderosa Drive. The HMP requires that all Phase 1 road access improvements be constructed with the first project. This will include the roundabout on Brockway Road and the connecting extension of Old Brockway Road, as well as internal roads to support the current project while providing stub - access to adjoining lands. Page 90 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood According to a July 1, 2013, Hilltop /Pollard /Reynolds Traffic Impact Analysis completed by LSC, Transportation Consultants, Inc., for the 2013 PM peak hour traffic on Brockway Road are as follows: Brockway Road fronting Hilltop Master plan area 1,157 trips Brockway Road at Palisades Drive 1,074 trips Old Brockway Road at Brockway Road 20 trips Palisades Drive at Brockway Road 299 trips Regulatory Setting Thresholds of Significance The General Plan Circulation Element establishes acceptable levels of service for road segments and intersections for the PM peak hour consistent with the General Plan traffic model. Generally, the acceptable level of service (LOS) for roads and intersections in the Downtown Study Area is E or better and for roads and intersections outside the DSA is D or better. Also, the acceptable LOS for individual turning movements and roundabout approaches for all intersections is F with a cumulative vehicle delay of less than four hours. The acceptable levels of service at the four analyzed intersections are: Brockway Road /Main Access Road Brockway Road /Palisades Drive Palisades Drive /Pine Cone Road Palisades Drive /Ponderosa Drive Individual Turning Intersection LOS Movement /Approach3 E F < 4 hrs delay D F < 4 hrs delay D F < 4 hrs delay D F < 4 hrs delay Although the Town has not adopted thresholds of significance or standards for acceptable vehicle queuing lengths, the HMP and therefore each project will have a significant traffic impact if the length of vehicle queues for the 95th percentile queue length extends into an adjacent intersection or blocks the southern driveway into the Martis Valley commercial center. The approximate acceptable queue lengths for the two main intersections are: Intersection /Approach Queue Length Brockway Road /Main Access Road Eastbound Approach 880' Westbound Approach 550' Intersection /Approach Queue Length Brockway Road /Palisades Drive Eastbound Approach 550' Westbound Approach 290' Northbound Approach 370' In regards to traffic hazards or safety, the Project will have a significant impact if it creates or increases substantial hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous 3 Cumulative Vehicle hour delay Page 91 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood intersections) or substantially increases traffic volumes on roads and intersections with existing hazard. Policy P2.1 (Table CIR -6) of the 2025 General Plan Circulation Element sets standards for residential project impacts on local roads. This policy provides that a residential project that creates more than 11 units may be allowed if it does not increase traffic on a local road by more than 1,000 ADT or if a project increases traffic on a local road by more than 1,000 ADT, but the increase in ADT is less than 50 percent. Impact Discussion Item 15.a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Upon buildout, the HMP is projected to generate approximately 5,069 average daily trips and 441 PM peak hour trips (LSC, Hilltop /Pollard /Reynolds, July 1, 2013). These projections for the HMP assume full build -out and development of the entire road system. Over 90 percent of these trips will travel on Brockway Road with less than 10 percent of the trips utilizing Palisades Drive. Brockway Road to Pine Cone Road to Palisades Drive is not expected to generate "short-cut" traffic flow as that route would experience more delay than using the Brockway Road to Palisades Drive. The project will construct the Phase 1 road Infrastructure improvement required by the HMP. These improvements include: 1. The extension of Old Brockway Road to the northeast to Brockway Road 2. Construction of a single lane roundabout at Brockway Road 3. Removal of the existing Old Brockway Road intersection at Brockway Road. According to the HMP program MND, HMP buildout and the Hilltop /Pollard /Reynolds study, project peak hour traffic will not significantly impact existing traffic levels of service; the four analyzed intersections will have levels of service of C or better at and 2013 + Project traffic volumes. In addition, the HMP will not contribute to significant 2033 cumulative traffic impacts to the Brockway Road /Palisades Drive, Palisades Drive /Pine Cone Road and Palisades Drive /Ponderosa Drive intersections; these intersections will have levels of service of D or better at 2033 + Project traffic volumes. However, the intersection of Brockway Road and the main access road will have a failing LOS F at 2025 + Project traffic volumes. As noted in the HMP program MND, this impact is considered a significant cumulative impact. Intersection Level of Service (LOS) 2007 + Proiect 2025 + Proiect Brockway Road /Main Access Road C F Brockway Road /Palisades Drive B -D Palisades Drive /Pine Cone Road C C Palisades Drive /Ponderosa Drive B B HMP program MND, Mitigation Measure 13.a. requires improvements to the Brockway Road roundabout to increase capacity and improve LOS. The mitigation measure will ensure that such improvements can be constructed in the future and that sufficient right -of -way is acquired to encompass these improvements. The funding and construction agreement will ensure that future owners of the HMP parcels will construct these improvements before the roundabout reaches a failing LOS. Based on these commitments, the Master Plan will not result in Page 92 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood significant impacts at the Brockway Road /Old Brockway Road (re- located) intersection at 2025 + Project traffic volumes. Pollard Station Specific Considerations A number of traffic studies (February 17, 2010) was prepared under contract with the Town by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (LSC) for Pollard Station. The most recent study, Hilltop /Pollard /Reynolds was prepared on July 1, 2013. That study addressed traffic generation from Pollard Station, Hilltop and a proposed grocery store, commercial center and employee housing apartments. While that study did not evaluate the current Pollard Station proposal to construct the roundabout, it did update some of the Truckee wide and regional traffic assumptions. In general it concluded that regional traffic is less than previously projected. In addition it recognized that number of projects in Martis Valley were approved and /or built at lower levels than previously projected. The 2013 study projects that there will be approximately 287 average daily trips. The study analyzed both existing plus project conditions (2013 base year) without any surrounding development, as well as 2033 cumulative traffic impacts with the Project, the projected trips from the adjoining land to the east (Reynolds) and the buildout of Hilltop. Four intersections (Old Brockway Road, Palisades Drive, Pine Cone Drive and Ponderosa Drive) were evaluated in the study, but since the study focused on a shared "T" intersection and continued use of Old Brockway Road, it's recommendations for future (2033) improvements may not apply to the current project. As a result the 2009 traffic study for the HMP is assumed to be still applicable even with lower regional background traffic. There have been multiple traffic studies completed for the subject project over the last several years to evaluate other access options. All of these studies relied upon a combine traffic generation factor for the Project. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis study, the ITE Trip Generation Manual lists several types of senior or retirement homes, including ITE Land Use Code 225: Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). "Continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) are land uses that provide multiple elements of senior adult living." LSC indicates that the CCRCs description best fits the Project description. Rather than combining several land use trip rates to represent various aspects of the proposed project, the traffic study used the all- inclusive CCRC rate, which is viewed to be a more conservative category. Future (2033) Conditions Future volumes for Pollard Station were based on 2033 volumes. In 2009, the Hilltop Master Plan Updated Traffic Impact Analysis evaluated the impact that the proposed Pollard Station project would have on future volumes using findings from the Railyard Master Plan. This finding indicated that on busy summer days, long delays in traffic would result in downtown Truckee due to the limited number of vehicles that can flow through the intersections. It is presumed that because of these delays, a large number of drivers will bypass the constraint via the SR 267 bypass. This diversion was analyzed in detail for the Truckee Railyard project. Because of the effects of the downtown constraint and the SR 267 diversion, a calculated maximum number of vehicles were established for travel through downtown in the future. Since the Pollard Station study intersections lay close to the intersections of downtown, the effects of the downtown bottleneck analyzed in the Railyard project would be relevant for Pollard Station. Project Impact on Local Residential Roadway According to the General Plan Circulation Element, Pollard Station project would meet the adopted standard for impact on a local residential roadway if the Project does not increase Page 93 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood traffic on a local road (Pine Cone Road) by more than 1,000 ADT, or the Project increases traffic on a local road by more than 1,000 ADT, but the increase in ADT is less than 50 percent. Pine Cone Road will be constructed as an extension of the existing road which is a local street. The Project is estimated to produce an additional 287 total trips a day (Table 2 of the 2013 Traffic Study) on local roads of which approximately 10 percent (29 trips) will be on Pine Cone Road. As a result, the Project would not conflict with Circulation Policy P2.1. The current ADT on Pine Cone Road is 45 trips per day. Policy P2.4 of the Circulation Element addresses connectivity throughout the Town's roadway network to minimize residential neighborhood impacts. This policy discourages connections that could impact neighborhood character. As noted throughout, the Project is proposing to construct the roundabout on Brockway Road as its primary access. Pine Cone Road will only be used as a local road for secondary access. Comparison of Trip Generation: Senior Center to Previous Hilltop Master Plan DRM Land Use The Project site was previously identified as a portion of the HMP designated with the land use designation of DRM. This portion of the HMP was assumed to consist of 94 multi - family town homes or co- housing units. The HMP program MND evaluated the traffic generation for the build out projections for the master plan. Comparing the original DRM land use trip generation for the Project site to the trip generation under the Hilltop Senior Living Center, the Center would generate approximately 162 fewer daily vehicle -trips and 11 fewer peak hour vehicle- trips. This is equivalent to a 28 percent reduction in daily vehicle -trips and a 21 percent reduction in total PM peak -hour vehicle- trips. The HMP traffic study recognizes that at buildout that the LOS of the roundabout will fall out of compliance with the LOS E standard. The HMP program MND stated the following: "Future traffic volumes on Brockway Road may adversely affect levels of service and vehicle queuing lengths at the intersections of Brockway Road / Main Access Road and Brockway Road / Palisades Drive. Traffic volumes at 2025 with buildout of the project may result in a failing level of service at Brockway Road / Main Access Road and create long vehicle queuing lengths that will extend through and past neighboring intersections. To address these significant circulation impacts, the Hilltop Master Plan owners may need to make additional improvements to the Brockway Road / Main Access Road intersection when warranted and fund their proportional costs to improvements at the Brockway Road / Palisades Drive intersection, and /or reduce development in the Master Plan thereby reducing vehicular traffic trips, and /or demonstrate by updated traffic studies and best available information that the proposed Phase 1 roundabout improvements will be able to accommodate future traffic volumes (2025 + Project) at a LOS E or better and will not create significant vehicle queuing lengths." The HMP program MND developed three alternative mitigation approaches and summarized as follows: 1. MM 13.b. Prepare and submit preliminary design plans that would accommodate future traffic volumes at a level of service E or better for future improvements to the Brockway Road roundabout. This option also requires that the right of way for the full improvement be granted to the Town as part of the approval of the improvement plans. 2. MM 13.c. Prepare a fair share a "fair share," impact fee to fund future improvements to mitigate queuing lengths ,at the Brockway Road /Palisades Drive intersection. 3. MM 13.d. Reduce project development intensity such that it may limit future expansion to the size of the roundabout to remain at a single lane. Page 94 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood The traffic reductions from this project over the original HMP land uses, will contribute to a possible reduction in the size of the roundabout and therefore land dedication and related site disturbances. In order to maintain an adequate LOS for the single lane roundabout at the Old Brockway Road /Brockway (roundabout) intersection and adequate vehicle queuing lengths on Brockway Road in conformance with the Projected 2025 traffic volumes, trip generation resulting from development within the HMP would need to be limited to 62 percent of the estimated trip generation specified in the December 2007 HMP Updated Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. The actual trip generation comparison of this project to the projected land uses in the HMP is approximately 28 percent. Any such reduction could only occur should other lands within the HMP also be reduced accordingly. Mitigation Measures There are potential long term cumulative, significant impacts associated with this project, the buildout of the HMP and the proposed mixed use commercial /residential development on land at the southwest intersection of Brockway Road and Palisades Drive. The following mitigation measure reduce the cumulative traffic impacts to below significant levels: MM -15.a Brockway Road /Main Access Road/Trails /Bicycle Routes. Submit improvement plans for review and approval by the Town Engineer for Old Brockway Road and the Old Brockway Road /Brockway Road intersection, roundabout improvements as contemplated in the HMP. The design plans shall include improvements that will be able to accommodate future traffic volumes (2025 + Project) at an LOS E or better and to address significant vehicle queuing lengths. The preliminary design plans shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the Town Engineer. These improvement plans shall also include all Phase 1 non - vehicular access routes (trails, bicycle paths and sidewalks). Timing: Included in the final improvement construction/ grading plans prior to issuance of grading and building permits. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -15.b The applicant shall offer to the Town the necessary right -of -way to encompass the future improvements shown in the approved preliminary design plans. The location, size and method of the offer of dedication shall meet the requirements of the Town Engineer. Timing: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -15.c The applicant shall submit and the Town Engineer shall approve, a funding and construction agreement for the future construction of the improvements to the roundabout as shown on the approved design plan. The agreement shall incorporate all requirements of the Town Engineer and shall ensure that the improvements will be completed before the roundabout reaches a LOS F or before significant vehicle queuing lengths are created. Timing: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Page 95 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -15.d Brockway Road /Palisades Drive. Prior to approval of the improvement plans for Phase 1 of the common area infrastructure improvements, the Town Engineer shall approve a "fair share" impact fee program for properties in the HMP. The program shall identify the proportional impact that development in the HMP will have on future (2025 + Project) queuing lengths at the Brockway Road /Palisades Drive intersection, the approximate costs of future improvements that will be needed to reduce the queuing lengths to less than significant thresholds the fee that will be required for HMP development. The applicant shall provide information and documentation needed to prepare the program as required by the Town Engineer. All costs associated with the "fair share" impact fee program are reimbursable in accordance with the HMP. (From Master Plan MND, MM -13.c) Timing: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer MM -15.e In accordance with the Town Engineer's standards, the Old Brockway Road extension (main access road) shall include a stub road connection to the proposed mixed use commercial /residential project site at the southwest intersection of Brockway Road and Palisades Drive. Timing: As part of the improvement plans Responsible Agency: Town Engineer Overall Traffic and Transportation Impact Conclusion: With the inclusion of MM -15.a through MM -15.e, the Project will not have a significant impact on transportation and traffic. Item 15.b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program. The Town has not adopted a formal congestion management program. It does however address many of the elements of a congestion management plan in the General Plan Circulation Element . The Circulation Element includes the following features: • Levels of service that all projects are required to address, • Trails, bikeways and other sources of transportation • Public transit • Use of roundabouts instead of signals • Transportation control measures that include ✓ Passenger rail ✓ Trip reduction programs ✓ Alternate work schedules ✓ Telecommuting ✓ Ride -share programs ✓ Park and ride lots ✓ Bicycling programs ✓ Local and regional transit. As a senior age restricted development, this Project includes substantial trip reduction measures over conventional multiple - family development. The nature of the Project will result in trip reduction measure associated with the senior housing population. According to LSC, Page 96 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Transportation Consultants, Inc., senior apartments /condominium units generate substantially fewer daily trips than equivalent multiple family housing (see item 15.a, above). In addition, the Pollard Station project includes bicycle /pedestrian paths for both internal and outside HMP trips, shuttle service, and a future connection to the proposed commercial site (Grocery Outlet) to the northeast. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not result in impacts on a congestion management plan and no mitigation measures are required beyond the vehicular various traffic reducing components. Item 15.c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns or raises safety risks. The Project site is located within Safety Zone D of the Airport Plan. The Project is compatible because it is a clustered development with greater than five dwelling units per acre. There are concerns due to the nature of the residents who will be elderly and mobility restricted. There are adequate "open lands" in the immediate vicinity and throughout Safety Zone D for a pilot to make an emergency landing such that this use would not create a safety hazard for residents. See also discussion under Hazards and Hazardous Wastes. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not result in changes to air traffic patterns and no mitigation measures are required. Item 15.d. Increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. Standards are determined by the Town. All new or extended roads must meet the adopted design standards as determined by the Town Engineer. The propose roundabout in the northeast portion of the HMP area will be constructed as part of the Phase 1 project construction. By its very design, the roundabout will minimize hazards that could otherwise lead to severe traffic accidents associated with conventional intersection designs. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not result in hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use and no mitigation measures are required. Item 15.e. Result in inadequate emergency access. Old Brockway Road is an existing Town of Truckee owned road that provides access to the Hilltop property. Currently it is the primary access to the Cottonwood Restaurant. The project will be constructing the two primary access points required by the Phase 1 Infrastructure requirements of the HMP. This includes the required extension of Old Brockway Road to the new roundabout on Brockway Road and the extension of Pine Cone Road. Once completed, these two connections will result in two ways of ingress and egress from the project site. All on- site emergency access routes are required to conform with TFPD standards which require that the road be constructed to a 20 -foot unobstructed road width. Impact Conclusion: Since the two primary access routes are included as part of the project emergency access to the site will be provided, therefore the impacts on emergency access will be less than significant. Item 15.f. Conflict with adopted plans for alternative transportation sources. The HMP requires a number of new trails and bicycle paths. The Project will construct all such facilities as part of the Phase 1 infrastructure plan as required by the HMP. Page 97 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Impact Conclusion: The Project will not conflict with adopted plans for alternative transportation sources and no mitigation measures are required. • 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than No Would the Project. Significant Impact ;' p with Mitigation Significant Impact p Impact Incorporated a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan X Region? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of X existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlements and resources, X or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity X to serve the Project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal X needs? g. Comply with Federal, State and local statutes and regulations related to X solid waste? Environmental Setting — Wastewater collection for the Project will be provided by the TSD who conveys the wastewater to the T -TSA treatment plant. Water and power will be provided by the TDPUD through its groundwater supply and distribution system. Southwest Gas Company will provide natural gas to the subject site. Solid waste generated by the Project will be transported to the Eastern Regional Landfill that acts as a transfer station before solid waste is transported to the landfill in Lockwood, Nevada. Page 98 of 103 INI I IAL 51UDY Pollard Station - A Senior Neighborhood Impact Discussion Items 16.a, 16.b 16.e. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the LRWQCB or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities and has adequate capacity to serve the Project's projected demand. The T -TSA treatment plant was expanded to a capacity of 9.6 millions of gallons per day (mgd) in September 2006. Up to this point, the water reclamation plant operated at about 80 percent of its existing capacity of 7.4 mgd during peak summer -flow periods, based on a 7 -day average flow. T -TSA's water reclamation plant is sized primarily to treat maximum sewage flows that occur during summer periods with the influx of seasonal residents and visitors. While winter periods actually show larger seasonal populations in the T -TSA service area, the character and activities of the summer visitors actually result in greater sewage loadings on the treatment facility. New or expanded treatment facilities will not be necessary for this project which will ensure that the treatment plant does not exceed LRWCCB water quality standards. TSD provides sewer transmission service to the T -TSA regional wastewater treatment plant. TSD has an existing eight -inch sewer main pipeline on site serving the existing development. It will have to be extended as part of the overall master infrastructure plan to serve the entire development. In a letter dated September 24, 2009, TSD stated that they have adequate capacity and service can be provided to District and T -TSA requirements, including the payment of fees. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not impact wastewater treatment facilities and no mitigation measures are required. Item 16.c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. The master infrastructure improvement plans for the Phase 1 infrastructure will have to be designed to meet the Town and LRWQCB requirements. These plans will include appropriate retention ponds designed for a 20 -year 1 -hour storm event. Impacts and related mitigation measures for storm water drainage facilities are discussed within Biological Resources (Section 3) and Hydrology and Water Quality (Section 9) of this Initial Study. Impact Conclusion: With the Town's requirement for a comprehensive drainage plan, the Project will not impact storm water drainage facilities and no mitigation measures are required. Item 16.d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project. The TDPUD provides water service to the site. They currently have a 14 -inch water main on site. It will also have to be extended as part of the master infrastructure plan to serve the HMP. Pollard Station proposes extending water lines and installing water mains within roadways, in accordance with TDPUD requirements. In a letter dated May 24, 2011, TDPUD stated that the developer would be required to construct the entire on -site water system infrastructure. The District may also require the up- sizing of the Phase 1 infrastructure to ensure that the overall water system is adequate for the full area encompassed by the HMP. Mitigation Measures MM -16.a Water, Sewer and Dry Utilities. In conjunction with the improvement plans for the Phase 1 infrastructure improvements as contemplated in the HMP, the applicant Page 99 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood shall submit improvement plans for review and approval by the respective water, sewer and electrical facilities agencies. The design plans shall include improvements that will be able to accommodate all Phase 1 extension of services. The preliminary design plans shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the service provider. Timing: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project. Responsible Agency: Town Engineer, TDPUD and TSD Impact Conclusion: With MM -16.a, the Project will not impact pubic water, sewer and dry utilities. Items 16.f and 16.9. Served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs and comply with Federal, State and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Solid waste generated by individual projects within the HMP will be transported to a landfill in Lockwood, Nevada. All individual projects will be required to comply with the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act (Public Resources Code Sections 42900 through 42911), which require that residential and non - residential projects provide solid waste and recyclable material storage areas. The Project plans propose locations for recyclable receptacles. The ultimate location will need to be approved by the solid waste collection company. Impact Conclusion: The Project will not impact regional landfill facilities and no mitigation measures are required. MATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact p Less Than Sign t ifican with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact p No Impact 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 X 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 impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means X that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects Page 100 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future protects. c. Does the Project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial X adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The determinations of the mandatary findings of significance are supported by the discussion contained within the Initial Study. The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects on the environment, however, mitigation measures have been included to eliminate or reduce these environmental effects to a less than significant level. There is no substantial evidence that the Project, upon incorporation of the mitigation measures, may have a significant effect on the environment. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation, the Community Development Director finds: The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared_ The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact` or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable Iegal standards and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Initial Study Prepared By: Tom Parilo, Contract Planner Date Prepared /Revised: SeDiembel 2, 14 piq Initial Study Approved By: Qq.'-_ . n M Lau lin, fommunity bate Development Diredor Page 101 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood References These references and other documents and materials upon which the adoption of the Mitigation Negative Declaration is based are available for review at the Truckee Community Development Department, 10183 Truckee Airport Road, Truckee, California. EcoSynthesis, Wetland and Biological Resources Report for Hilltop Master Plan Site, October 2003. Foothill Airport Land Use Commission, Truckee Tahoe Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, December 2004. Google Earth maps (August 28, 2012) Holdrege and Kull, Geotechnical Engineering Report for Hilltop Senior Living lodge Project, December 8, 2009. Holdrege and Kull, Geotechnical Engineering Report for Hilltop Senior Living Cottages Project, December 8, 2009. Jensen, Peter M., Cultural Resources Evaluation Report (Hilltop Master Plan), October 2003. LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc., Hilltop Master Plan Updated Traffic Impact Analysis, October, 2007 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc., Hilltop Senior Living Center, Pollard Station, Traffic Impact Analysis, February 17, 2010. LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc., Hilltop /Pollard /Reynolds, Traffic Impact Analysis, July 1, 2013 North Fork Associates, Hilltop Master Plan Wetlands Assessment, February 19, 2003. Archaeological Inventory Survey, Peter M. Jensen, PhD, October 8, 2003. Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District, Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts of Land Use Projects, 2009. SCO, Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan, Air Quality Mitigation Calculations, Appendix "I" Supplemental Information, SCO, Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation /Monitoring Plan, January 27, 2012 SCO, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment, Pollard Station, August 2014 Town of Truckee, 2009 Annual Report for Particulate Matter Qir Quality. Town of Truckee, 2025 General Plan and Final EIR, November 2006. Town of Truckee, Downtown Truckee Specific Plan, Volumes 1 and 4: Existing Conditions Report and Final EIR, November 1997. Page 102 of 103 INITIAL STUDY Pollard Station — A Senior Neighborhood Town of Truckee, Initial Study for the Hilltop Master Plan, May 2008. Town of Truckee, Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan. Town of Truckee, Railyard Master Plan EIR, November 2008. Truckee -Tahoe Airport L Use Compatibility Plan, December 2004. WRA Environmental Consultants Technical Memorandum, Evaluation of Potential Impacts to the Hilltop- Ponderosa Wetland, April 6, 2011. WRA Environmental Consultants, Proposed Wetland Monitoring Strategy, May 19, 2011 WRA Environmental Consultants, Final memorandum regarding acceptance of Wetland Monitoring Plan, June 2011 Attachments Vicinity Map Pollard Station Senior Living Center Site Plan Preliminary Drainage Analysis and Wetland Mitigation Plan Page 103 of 103