The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutNegative Declaration _ .--','.'-h--:, ""'y--- 1kr*Lrt'+:elk.,{,4,;-4A.;y;';.--;,'.,',:?:111';1 'n 3"..s s„ '3,,=.,',1!,,,.,:”, r.,„.wr:;.-+ - '-,;',:'..:M .*”? «-b .� ; I . e',kF:r, .', N ,1, re .- , ., ; : : ® US Airbill i ,,r .d , , -. N`,-yix ` 4'- ' ^.;f^98722 8413 6996 --' ' 2�s ;v, r:,.}.y;. ,Te-, fi {w.i ,=fi,�,- tw , Express Numbtk:p.Nr _ ;i�r _`y „ , ; rrom Please print and press hard. /� 4a Express Package Service •T Mentons Packages up to 150 lbs. 315 1,I SendersFedFx (('t//VSa0��,t;n '(i„g� ,s��t ❑ FedEx Pnorfty0vemight •edExStandardOvernight ❑ FedExFrstOvemight late Account Number ! vac '' Next busnessmommg•rndey il! hsessafmmoon.• Eergestnextbusmessmommg derma=xall be delivered olondaayy Saturday Delrvery NOT eveable derverym selectlocemne j� • ---�'w c L /� unless SATURDAY Debvery is selected. 'enders t)0 rvo 1 eJ 1 i \om pJOf 630/ —1/00 ❑ ❑ Jame Phone saodn�rassaayyWWeemumaay �e�ExEac�paOysSaver unless SAwillbe Delivery on Monday Saturday Delivery NOT available is se :ompany T6W n OE' L r C.L�- 4b Express Freight Service -1-0.1.... Packages over 150 lbs FedExlDayFreight CALL 5 a�}0 nv2.d807 ^^ ❑ Next business f�Yan Fndeyslupments tell �,0 t�A Trema. Ps.fl• porgy R d he def red elected eyurdeooSATUflOAY Fed&1DayFegh BmmgNa \ddress Oelrveryrsselected Dept/noor/Suoe/floom FedEx2DayFreight ❑ Second business day Thursday shipments will bedelivered ❑ FedEx3Da��//Freight t , ��/,pQ,�o /! on Monday unlessSATURDAYDelvery¢selected thirdhumnessdey SetudayOelrveryNOTevadable :rty IT K ew+ State V A ZIP t kg, 1 5 pckaging •Declared value runrtgpa FedEx ❑ FedEx Pak` ❑FedEx ❑ FedEx ❑ Other (our Internal Billing Reference a f:T I n;,a. Envelope* Includes FedEsSmellPak end Box Tube est24 characters will appear on=mce FedEx large Pak ro 6 Special Handling and Delivery Signature Options Jamlecie C 1� l �" Phone(5�OIa(06- toa I ❑ SATURDAYDelivery ' 1 1 \ NOT evmlehla for rydEc StendaN Overnight,FedEx Express Saver,or FedEx 3DaY Freight (' p rte/ ^„ 1�(�/,, Of ///�� //�� ,�I5ao ag nature Required ❑DlrectSl nature ❑ Indirect Sirbature :ompany 04�\ r `J�\,J� i� + vin \ ' �� L1Q Packag9may be leftwrthout Someone at Signature adders afddress,'Tonelats eibieng I/ abtaimng a alone=for delivery may sign far delivery Feeepphes address may sign for dermery For HOLD Weekdaey resdenbel dehvenes only Fecapples �\/��,(� nr1 FedExloeaten address Does this shipment contain dangerous goads? \ddress io \• IW ix:1 4\ A 0`n.A d I ❑REDUIRED NOTevadahlofar One box must be checked Va cannot delrverto PSShoxes or PD ZIP codes Se ` FedEx Fust OvemlAht i pt/naor/Sune/floom HOLD Saturday No ❑Ayeep ravached ❑ Sln per'sfaclaraoon ❑ Dry Ice FedSmcatian address Shipper's Oeclamooa notrequued Dry¢e,9,UN 1845 a kg \ddress REQUIRED Avadable ONLYfor Oengere sgoodslmcludmgdymelcawok shippe4 FedExpckeg ng ❑Fedfx thorkyOvonghtaM ariipn edes.g Ex Express ompenr. [' Cargo Aircraft Only se this line ler the HOLD location address or for continuation of your shipping address Fedho Waym selectlocaons ` ` 7 Payment 8dlto: r `_&% . .J L-4 State N'V (�ZIP "` 4 A ender I Enter Acct No or Credit Card Na below V,a"TbNpaber— ❑ Recipient ❑Third Party ❑ CredrtCard ❑ Cash/Check FedEoAcctNo. Eql OedtCardNn Dam Total Packages Total Weight Total Declared Value, ',E�F .71` _r'_ ;.`, ti•__" T.TM1:-'_': ,-A:, ,.tr,'i "t,_:,_'---tri';st""717, t •r Ate^�. �z::-::17-7..., f�1J ® Learn'to,` acklikeia` ro atfedex;G,om/'acka inhe m 1 P P P 9 9 i '� t 606 K' `O „-^ ,r, t;l - f-' sM' r _y;, Ourliatulity¢lunrtedmS100 mass you See hack fur By,Or'fetour,pros,packforyou'withFedEx'Offlce .Pack;&,Slilp;."r`:,*,, fagree mthe semcecondmonsonthe back of durba dmthe cunemFed&Setnt Guide,mdudngem¢ 4t'',...12:,.: - - o, r, _v z thatgmdaurhabtTrty Rev Date 2/10•Pert 1150280.01994-2010 FedEx•PRINTED IN U s A.SRY itdbi ® US,4irbiff -� ��,„ -2.4,,,,,,--;;,,..,el ;r :_ �� _ , Tracking 8 7 2 2 8 41,3 7 0 0 0 �'Fdm ,;p �;�,,, r. ,, yp: . ; Express Ft,iDNu '2,'Ol0 .,,;',,i,-,-14.2:4:.:-,-;.-,,,M `4 , ,,,-.544.::: , l!i tt, Jz From Please print and press hard. 4a Express Package Service -re locasans. Packages up to 150 lbs. / Sender's FedEx P r t �� C,r;-;Z.I F�ku Lw FedEx Pnorfty Overnight edEx Standard Overnight ❑ FedEx Rrst OvermgM Date �/(� Account Number ` �a "/ fir �) I ❑Nextbxulsumommg•r,1, Nextbusasahemoon Fadert nex business teaming shipments will be delivered on Monday Saturday Delivery NOT evadable delrverym select location• /� uNessSATURDAYDelmeryLsselected Name Senders on n`l e, Th Ov (\ SUI 1 Phone(53 1) c> -1(30 ❑ FedEx 2Day ❑ FeEx Express Saver Second business day Thursday Third businassday shipments MI be delivered on Monday Saturday Delivery NOT evadable _ unless SATURDAY Delivery is selected Company• Ok,...J in of T�L(LK-e---e..._. 4h Express Freight Service ••r rwstlswsot¢ Packages over 150 lbs FedEx1DayyFreight ctiL'. : bvP :.2 Gii6,7 1 �"'� •/.(' T'/'� /� p ,/ /'� ❑ Ne#hvered odav rndoyaEpmemsmll Address \ V t 1•l. • \ ` Ll lrzl_� �\1 eof-k- R6 Dederyreaan Monday unle sSAT ROAY Fede rooyFnaaBookmgNa Dein/aryls Is selected Dept/noor/SurmlRoom FedEx 2Day Frejht ❑seoondbusmeeaday Thueodeyshipmem unObedelrvered ❑ FedEx3Day Freight City ��t� State CR ZIP�� l lQ t on Mondayunless SATUflDAYOeliveryis selec ed Thad husmessday Saturday Delivery NOT evadable 5 P kaging •Declared value tut t edEx ❑ FedEx Pak' ❑FedEx ❑ FedEx ❑ Other Your Internal Billing Reference L,,,r r,t I,a Envelope` Includes FedEaSmallPak and Box Tube Frst24 characters MI appear on invoice FedEx Large Pak To 6 Special Handling and Delivery Signature Options Recipient's SATURDAY Delrve Name Phone( i ❑NaTevedable lar FedEx Standard Overnight FedEx Express Save;orFedEa 3Day Freight. Com an O�CiL� �1(�1(1�`(�[j (� ( (�( � 2,6Signature nature Re tilled DlrectSl nature ❑ lino vaableSignature J1 C J 7/Iv g Q g too one is avaSablea recipient's P y �' LLJJ Package may be lehwNiout ❑Someone at recipients address address,someone at a nelghbonng obtaining a signature for delivery may sign for delnery Fee apples address may sign for delivery For HOLD Weekday resdenoel delrvenes only Fee applies HUD I/l O -e r\ r ❑Fed&location address Does this shipment contain dangerous goads? Addles �J REQUIRED NOT nonrIabielor One box must be chocked FedExia,OvenghtI We cannot deliver w PO boxes or PO ZIP codes Dept/noon/Sole/Room yes YBS HOLD Saturday No ❑Asper attached ❑ Shtpper'sDeclaration ❑ Drylce FedEdocabon address Shipper's Declaration. not required Dnil 9,UN 1845 x kg REDUip_D Aw:.,.ONLY1or Address ❑Fed&peytoseengtdend or placedinerous aoodsFeaExEFxpessDrropdry Boxnobeshipped mFedFxpackaging ❑ Cargo Aircraft Only Use this line lar the HOLD location address or for continuation of your shipping address Fed&2Daym selep[klcaoant �n n ,"/� n vo C C1 c 1 �1 7 Payment Bill to. Clh`1v�C�l�l� ` 1 F,1 I 'v State ZIP`” IJ oder r______ Einer FedEx Acct No lir Credit lard No below —___, rid, mth"amn"esa`e0n ❑ Recipient Third PartyCredit Card ❑ ❑ ❑ Cash/Check FedeeAcct Na EV. CredtCardNo Date Total Packages Total Weight Total Declared Value, 4a Ship and track packages at fedex.con _, '. ','''‘> 1 , �D lbs s .03 y tOurriabiityis=red ms100unless you declarerhigher value See back for detaisByusingthis Anhdlyou 606 i Sgnphfy,your shipping.Manage your account Access all the tools you need. gree to thesemceconan,ansonthebapheld Arbaand mthecunemr/Exsem;eG de,inpwdingterms that Lela our Eabiky 'a Town Council Department Heads TOWN OF Tony Lashbrook, Town Manager Richard S.Anderson,Mayor ackE J. as , Townhof olce Joan deRyk Jones, Vice MayorTiw Nicholas Sensley, Chief of Police John McLaughlin, Community Development Director Barbara Green, Council Member pe i; ; s r 99 Kim Szczurek,Administrative Services Director ro -- __(1))ii� ..~. • f9 Judy Pnce, Town Clerk Dr.Mark Brown D.C, Council Member z°61 --(1))11111 -7, e ' Alex Terrazas,Assistant Town Manager Carolyn Wallace Dee, Council Member l eQ9 `'' n�v Daniel Wilkins,Public Works Director/Town Engineer March 15, 2011 Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Office of Planning and Research: Enclosed please find a Notice of Determination for the Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The original and a check for the review and posting fees were also mailed to the Nevada County Clerk's Office. If there are any questions please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, e2C/VV\r\_/•--Q_ ( Bonnie Thompson Administrative Secretary • 10183 Truckee Airport Road, Truckee, CA 96161-3306 www.townoftruckee.com Administration: 530-582-7700/Fax: 530-582-7710/email:truckee@townoftruckee.com Community Development: 530-582-7820/Fax: 530-582-7889/email: cdd@townoftruckee.com Animal ServicesNehicle Abatement: 530-582-7830/ Fax: 530-582-7889/email: animalservices@townoftruckee.com Police Department: 530-550-2328/ Fax: 530-550-2326/email:policedepartment@townoftruckee.com Printed on recycled paper. w h Notice of Determination , Appendix D To: From: g Office of Planning and Research Public Agency: Town of TruckeelTown of Truckee Redevelopment Agency For U.S. Mail: Street Address. Address: 10183 Truckee Airport Road P.O.Box 3044 1400 Tenth St. Truckee,CA 96161 Contact: Jenna Endres Sacramento,CA 95812-3044 Sacramento.CA 95814 Phone: 530-582-2922 h County Clerk County of: Nevada Lead Agency(if different from above): Address: 950 Maidu Avenue,Suite 210 Nevada City,CA 95959 Address: Contact: Phone: SUBJECT:Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. State Clearinghouse Number(if submitted to State Clearinghouse). SCH#2010112040 Project Title: Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Plan Amendment Project Location (include county): Redevelopment Project Area, Nevada county Project Description: _ Amendment of existing Redevelopment Plan to establish a maximum dollar limit on the principal amount of bonds that can be outstanding at one time.The Plan was inadvertantly adopted without such a limit,so the Agency is proposing to add a bond limit of$75 million to the Plan. This is to advise that the Town of Truckee Town Council/Redevelopment Agency has approved the above described project on Xi Lead Agency of L„]Responsible Agency March 3, 2011 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Date) 1.The project[❑will ®will not]have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. Q A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3.Mitigation measures[Owere were not]made a condition of the approval of the project. 4.A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [0 was ® IAas not]adopted for this project. 5.A statement of Overriding Considerations[0 was Igi was not]adopted for this project. 6.Findings[were ['were not]made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval,or the negative Declaration. is available to the General Public at: 10183 Truckee Airport Road,Truckee, CA 96161 Signature(Public Agency /"40 Title Associate Planner Date March 11, 2011 v Date Received for filing at OPR Authority cited:Sections 21083,Public Resources Code. Reference Section 21000-21174,Public Resources Code. Revised 2005 i d Town Council Department Heads TOWN OF Tony Lashbrook, Town Manager Richard S.Anderson,Mayor J.Dennis Crabb, Town Attorney Joan deRyk Jones, Vice Mayor ][� cuE Nicholas Sensley, Chief of Police John McLaughlin, Community Development Director Barbara Green, Council Member e, i� �Y _, ; r ®' Kim Szczurek,Administrative Services Director 9 Judy Price, Town Clerk Dr. Mark Brown D.C., Council Member Q4e, iii .. .` Alex Terrazas,Assistant Town Manager Carolyn Wallace Dee, Council Member .4. 4. U)18,3 lac°`4��eDaniel Wilkins,Public Works Director/Town Engineer March 15, 2011 Nevada County Clerk 950 Maidu Avenue, Suite 210 Nevada City, CA 95959 Dear Nevada County Clerk's Office: Enclosed please find a Notice of Determination and a check for $2,076 for the review and posting fees. If there are any questions please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, V - `r ' ' �-V `U , , ,, Bonnie Thompson Administrative Secretary • 10183 Truckee Airport Road, Truckee, CA 96161-3306 www.townoftruckee.com Administration: 530-582-7700/Fax: 530-582-7710/email: truckee@townoftruckee.com Community Development: 530-582-7820/Fax: 530-582-7889/email: cdd@townoftruckee.com Animal ServicesNehicle Abatement: 530-582-7830/ Fax: 530-582-7889/email: animalservices@townoftruckee.com Police Department: 530-550-2328/ Fax: 530-550-2326/email:policedepartment@townoftruckee.com Printed on recycled paper. Notice of Determination Appendix D To: From: RI Office of Planning and Research Public Agency: Town of Truckeeftown of Truckee Redevelopment Agency For U S Mail Street Address. Address: 10183 Truckee Airport Road P.O.Box 3044 1400 Tenth St. Truckee,CA 96161 Sacramento,CA 95812-3044 Sacramento,CA 95814 Contact: Jenna Endres Phone: 530-582-2922 g County Clerk County of: Nevada Lead Agency(if different from above): Address: 950 Maidu Avenue,Suite 210 Nevada City,CA 95959 Addy ess: Contact: Phone: SUBJECT:Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. State Clearinghouse Number(if submitted to State Clearinghouse): SCH#2010112040 Project Title: Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Plan Amendment Project Location (include county). Redevelopment Project Area, Nevada county Project Description: Amendment of existing Redevelopment Plan to establish a maximum dollar limit on the principal amount of bonds that can be outstanding at one time.The Plan was inadvertantly adopted without such a limit,so the Agency is proposing to add a bond limit of$75 million to the Plan. This is to advise that the Town of Truckee� Town Council/Redevelopment Agency has approved the above described project on i Lead Agency or U Responsible Agency March 3, 2011 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Date) I.The project[Elwin ®will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A Negative Declaration wa"s prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3.Mitigation measures[❑were were not]made a condition of the approval of the project. 4.A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [❑was ® was not]adopted for this project. 5.A statement of Overriding Considerations[❑was ®was not]adopted for this project. 6. Findings[were ❑were not]made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final FIR with comments and responses and record of project approval,or the negative Declaration, is available to the General Public at: 10183 Truckee Airport Road,Truckee, CA 96161 Signature(Public Agcnc_TOM&A) Title Associate Planner Date March 11, 2011 Date Received for filing at OPR Authority cited.Sections 21083,Public Resources Code. Reference Section 21000-21174,Public Resources Code. Revised 2005 41. , r s„_ ”' . '''¢. :_ s°�` "',.. •'. THIS•DOCUMENT CONTAINS:A;COL•'ORED BACKGROUND•AND IV)ICRO.PRINTED.SIGNATURE'LINE.°' :y;;;.'.:1,.7,'-_'. `_7- WELLS FARGO 9ANK N.A: #, •THE TOWN OFF;TRUCKEE; • _ : tn) i;�C!'� •.1 I `10183 TRUCKEE,A(F PQRT ROAD , , _ ' , ' (1-a-' ':.''' nn. •,'' '_ ; _ N®a __________ ,` `TRUCKEE,CA'961_-61 GHECK,NO: '0,'7'7-6_'3 1 ••a"•.t.ae ..T I'e --•..•,.., , '}' ;(530)582-7700 _ , ' -_. __ _ _- _- , � DATE AMOUNT, , 03/15/2011 ** *«* ****,' -' 20,7,6`:00. -_PAY '�•'`Two Thousand_Seventy Six Dollars;and;00,Cents** - - -•` - _ - n __ TO THE - , , ORDER NEVADA COUNTY - `OF, , 950 Maidu Ave.,' , ''',; .;I , , - - ° 'Nevada-City, CA 9.5959 ��, ' AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE _ , -• - ,' . II.07763LII' I: L2L0428821: 2476257E16,611' • rr TOWN OF #*41 • ,•e•''ee8 �.,.L��atroo'*o �e TOWN OF TRUCKEE INITIAL STUDY / PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION BACKGROUND • Application: 10-027/ND Project Name: Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Plan Amendment Project Proponents: Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency 10183 Truckee Airport Road Truckee, CA 96161 Agent: Alex Terrazas, Assistant Town Manager Lead Agency: Town of Truckee Planning Commission do Truckee Community Development Department 10183 Truckee Airport Road Truckee, CA 96161 (Documents and other material upon which the decision for the adoption of the Negative Declaration is based may be found at the above location.) Contact Person: Jenna Endres, AICP, Associate Planner (530) 582-2922 e-mail:jendres@townoftruckee.com Other agencies whose approval may be required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): • Town of Truckee SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW It has been determined that the project is discretionary in nature and is not otherwise exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the State Guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The proposed Redevelopment Plan amendment affects the entirety of the Redevelopment Project Area (Figure 1). The Town of Truckee Redevelopment Agency(Agency) is proposing to amend the existing Page 2 Figure 1. ,.,., Am •1„170„,,,,,,,,z,,,,,v,i t ,x.,3, 9.„4,-,.61 .r.,,,,,,,5t,1 f4 .z' -,r ,",- r, : 'i• -, . ! _-�`.,,�"•,_. , '"'.• .z,.,,,,„,,,,,,,,y;,,,,,-.T.41 -01,c ▪ ' �x� t ,'.., � ' 6._",'i•t,4,n ; Y_.�•� ';..*,"•.''Y' -' ' � _S: �r s ° AI T k ,a 4 e `� „1:;.,„----1,,,--,,--,c;, ^h, "_�—; " ' OA, x =zi-f2 >,z?K• /h umot4Ys'` �ti -). x 7l+T}•,F,c +3t � iwzA \�4 f0i,N !?,? t ° � , _v ` ytz,' ' �,-�sr'‘ :;+ky�t 'ti:v r-11T?mss � ',+ X ;` < ,,1� , J; ' " ti vy ,, `rfMri ysrr- z, 84Via , r F� itia.:1/44.4.„„vAittrikit -,- ..-it- r, h " 'T- 111i '.,, 1> t, x� ,� :1m1. .Nfittioq I!',-„,,,i, 4'kz s p a,, ss A ,, ezh*4 1 5( k3 01 r` ( '!'z^a w??rF,4 F' , ,`sv,,r,71, syi4E + r : • ya de •^,c,-. k0-, wtt + z +^ � ti tac; .`T3; stiff, ;ioi> Y ti.wR� � ' d :',,, sY cA3si,•° i� - f �� lgp,?'▪ " ° rfs� Y "x s',mt •( a, , C �ts.t a 14 .h - F , , t r . t ,-,,,,:,•-• .,;LA to�a&'; � i{ �;�1Ts, r , tL z '�� rxww:Q"i e " x; y�;i ;, -,, 4• ,," �:st` writ L ^ ��" ▪ __, � ' v - -� , ',v'.S ,,,,,%.,;,,,,,,,,,-Ari � , r- 1ys ,irt � ',,,41,:,,,,,,•-•,, , ' _, - at?�i'�] , � er ', rt4n�, � s ;aYa :,,A,,,, ra1 z,;" Ey, ik;.,,, :te4 a3va 0 �'� 2 R •a.. a .r $ �3 <xY "t,` ":. ,-1:4,-i:1',;;,4;,20: A3 < , 4:n cv`t.r";lik � `.:;, .y f T '�� *;Y.4Sw'ssy. , •f,- rh� { 4 . fr,f, P,F' g.;U4,,JiLxt, Ft,$;-t ' + ,` 4y �: r.,es-\ ,,,,,,A � x; cc +,x ,:;c '''-'. c Su' ,' ° t .'.r.z t rt k mu s ,.`>vo `' p�ti : f; es E'',.;,M, L ' P • ' att7 ,t ' 7t1 v,••••-,r,,,?..,,,,,', l4-( , s t s4A-,-,0a-c-;.. 4 E y(,r t111 ` :,,,';;;`ti;*1• , :1vd� ' ,,,i ..-c','': ''l! • . EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than , Would the project: Significant With Mitigation Significant Impact act Impact Incorporated Impact p a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, X and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual X character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or X glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create any visual impacts. There are locations within the Redevelopment Project Area that offer views of scenic vistas or are situated within a prominent slope, ridge line, bluff line or hillside; however, future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures— None required. Less Than _ Significant 2. AIR QUALITY. Potentially . With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X Truckee Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan or other applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project X region is non-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 substantial X pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create air quality impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. All projects would Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 4 be subject to the Town's adopted Particulate Matter Air Quality Management Plan (PMAQMP) and mitigation measures would be applied consistent with the PMAQMP. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than Significant 3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial -adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special X status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community X identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the . X Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species X or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree X preservation policy or ordinance? • f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community X Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? - - Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create biological resource impacts. Portions of the project area do contain wetlands and potentially could contain species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 5 Less Than 4. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Potentially Significant Less Than SignificantWith Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section X 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 unique geologic X feature? - d. Disturb any human remains, including those - X interred outside of formal cemeteries? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create cultural resource impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than 5.` FOREST RESOURCES. Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public X Resources Code Section 12220[g]), timberland (as - defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104[g})? b. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion X of forest land to non-forest use? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, X could result in conversion of forest land to non-forest - use? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create forest resource impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 6 Less Than Significant 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential potential ' WizerIRRO � substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss �� , - iti �_f � ,id , 'G,qi� �r injuryor death involving: t f k N - ; „", ,z;" P geir v1 i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State X 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, including X liquefaction? iv. Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is X unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in X • Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting X the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create geology and soils impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures —None required. Less Than 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Potentially Significant Less Than SignificantWith Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact X on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or _ regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the X emissions of greenhouse gases? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not exacerbate greenhouse gas emissions. At this time, the Town has not Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 7 adopted a Climate Action Plan, nor have any mitigation measures been established to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures— None required. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Less Than Significant MATERIALS. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, X substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to X Government Code Section 65962.5, 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 Compatibility Plan, result in'a safety X hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere X with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g. Expose people or structures to a significant X risk of loss, injury or death involving wildiand fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create hazards and hazardous materials impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 8 Less Than Significant 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such - X that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the 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 granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 1 - of the site or area, including through the alteration of X the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or . - off-site?- d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern X of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or 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 stormwaterX 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 X or Floor Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area X structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including X flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche or mudflow? X Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create hydrology and water quality impacts. Portions of the Project Area are located within the 100-year floodplain of a water body. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. • Projects would also be subject to the Town's Stormwater Management Plan and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program. Mitigation Measures —None required. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 9 • Less Than 10. LAND USE, PLANNING, Significant POPULATION, AND HOUSING. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with the Truckee General Plan, X 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 anrenvironmental effect? b. Physically divide an established community? X c. Induce substantial population growth in an X area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? d. Displace substantial numbers of existing X housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? e. Displace substantial numbers of people, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create hazards and hazardous materials impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. The proposed amendment would allow for the issuance of additional bonds by the Redevelopment Agency to fund projects already planned and approved as part of the Redevelopment Plan within the Project Area. This would help increase and preserve the Town's rental housing stock. The proposed amendment itself will not result in actual development and therefore, would not result in the displacement of any housing or persons within the Project Area. Future projects which have the potential to displace persons within the Project Area will be reviewed in accordance with California Redevelopment Law and the requirements for relocation assistance. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than Significant 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region X and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on X a local general plan, specific`plan or other land use plan? Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 10 Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create mineral resource impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures— None required. Less Than Significant 12. NOISE. Potentially With Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Would the project result in: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the X Truckee General Plan or Development Code, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise X levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing •X without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels X existing without the project? e. For a project located within the Truckee-Tahoe Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, expose people X residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create noise impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than Significant 13. PUBLIC SERVICES, Potentially With Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse 77V `"7.` _ xa physical impacts associated with the provision of new or ,'b s _ ; `Yi. . ;�`;. V ; physically altered governmental facilities, need for new : ,', 23 or physically altered governmental facilities, the g =- -` .,r ; z if,4, 'f es construction of which could cause significant ;a. 044.; . ,. environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable - 1i* 44 . m�;,3: �<, .. ,h w . service ratios, response times or other performance s ; -"`. _ ;° x _� =,R ;`�`°`.:m tit.�", .py �Yr ,;: ' '�'' objectives for any of the public services: � , ; ; i. Fire protection? X ii. Police protection? X iii. Schools? X • Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 11 iv. Other public facilities? X Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create any impacts on public services. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration,by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. • Less Than Significant 14. RECREATION. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational X facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational X facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create- any impacts on recreational facilities. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than - Significant 15. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the project: Impact Incorporated • Impact Impact a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant X 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 standards and travel X demand measures, or other standards 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 X in location that results iri substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design X feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 12 or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Conflict with •adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian X facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create any transportation or traffic impacts. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town and may be required to pay traffic impact fees. Mitigation Measures—None required. Less Than 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Significant Would the project: Potentially With Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region? , b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of 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 construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, 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 to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted S capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? _ g. Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Impact Discussion — The proposed amendment would not result in actual development and therefore, would not create any impacts on utilities and service systems. Future projects proposed within the Project Area would require formal environmental review prior to consideration by the Town. Mitigation Measures—None required. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 13 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact 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 eliminate a plant or animal community, - X, 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 that the X incremental effects of a project are considerable when , viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) - c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? ' , The determinations of the mandatory findings of significance are supported by the discussion contained within the Initial Study. 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: X The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Initial Study/Proposed ND for Redevelopment Plan Page 14 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: Jenna Endres, AICP Date Prepared / Revised: Nove b r 12, 2010 Initial Study Approved By: L 11. 16. a4I0 cLaughl , Com unity Development Dir Date