Agricultural Resources. Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact
Agricultural Resources. Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation. Would the project:
Agricultural Resources. Would the project:
Agricultural Resources. The proposed Agreement will have less than significant impact on agricultural resources. The project and the Agreement will not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. The power plant facility will result in conversion of a relatively small area of productive timberland to non-timber use. The project will have less than significant impact. As an aside, this project is expected to benefit the surrounding forestlands in the region by converting residues to renewable energy. The County found less than significant construction and operational air quality impacts due to net emissions analysis and with certain mitigation incorporated. The project and the Agreement would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan with mitigation measures incorporated. The amount of net emissions produced by the facility including operations and fuel transportation are significantly less than the emissions from pile and burn. Mitigation measures include reducing dust emissions and implementing Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) standard construction phase mitigation measures. Xxxxx Environmental Consulting (Nevada City, CA) performed a complete biological inventory and assessment in February 2019. They identified no protected special status species or protected resources found on the relatively small parcel. The proposed Agreement will not have any significant impacts on biological resources, and will not change the impacts identified in the County’s CEQA documents. The proposed project site is not located in the Yuba-Xxxxxx Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) boundary. The Yuba-Xxxxxx NCCP/HCP plans are in the process of being prepared, however, no conservation strategies have been proposed to date which would be in conflict with the project. Therefore, the project will have no impact to conservation plans. Mitigation measures include: (1) requiring any fencing constructed as a perimeter barrier around the project site to adhere to design requirements to preserve the site for wildlife, such as a fencing height no greater than 38 inches above the ground to the top of the top wire or rail, and wood or similar material for top rails, and either wood rails or wire strands as horizontal elements in the fence (2) contractor shall exercise precaution to protect the streamside from pollution with sediments, fuel, oil etc.
Agricultural Resources. Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact
Agricultural Resources. No Mitigation Required
Agricultural Resources. No Mitigation Required III. AIR QUALITY Prior to Approval of Each Grading or Building Permit; Ongoing During Demolition, Grading, and Construction Prior to Approval of Each Grading Plan or Issuance of Each Grading or Building Permit Prior to Approval of Each Grading Plan or Issuance of Each Grading or Building Permit and Ongoing During Demolition, Grading and Construction Ongoing During Grading and Construction
2-1 (MMP No. 106) The following measures will reduce these emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. a) The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained to reduce operational emissions.
Agricultural Resources. The Property possesses important agricultural resources including, but not limited to good agricultural soils, water – including registered appropriative water rights and two (2) xxxxx, rolling topography and a good climate suitable for supporting a variety of agricultural operations. Approximately thirty percent (30%) of the Property is comprised of prime soils and a further approximately twenty-five percent (25%) is comprised of soils of statewide importance. The Property is in an area dominated by agricultural use, with extensive agricultural infrastructure and within a short drive of commercial centers and agricultural support services.
Agricultural Resources. The project site is currently used for cattle grazing and is designated by the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as Grazing Land with small portion of land at the southwest corner designated Other Land. Because no portions of the site are designated as Important Farmland, the analysis in this section will focus on potential conflicts between proposed development and other adjacent agricultural uses. Consultant will review existing literature sources regarding on-site and nearby soil conditions and their general suitability to support agricultural activities. Locally adopted agricultural protection policies and programs will be discussed to determine project consistency. A discussion of on-site soils and their agricultural capabilities based on USDA Soil Conservation Service and Important Farmland Inventory classification systems will be included. In coordination with the other sections of the EIR, potential impacts of the project on nearby agricultural operations (i.e. from air pollution, traffic, water and wastewater) will be evaluated, and a site reconnaissance will be performed to identify potential land use conflicts associated with the proposed project and agricultural land uses in the vicinity. This section will include mitigation measures to reduce agricultural impacts, if applicable. Mitigation may include the purchase of off-site agricultural easements, consistent with the Bluffs at Ridgemark EIR. The proposed project would generate temporary construction emissions and long-term emissions associated with project-related vehicle trips. The air quality analysis will incorporate the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment prepared for the project (ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2018). This assessment was prepared using methodologies and assumptions recommended in the rules and regulations of the Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD). This section will include the temporary construction emissions and long-term emissions quantified with CalEEMod, and the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) consistency determination prepared in accordance with the MBARD Consistency Procedure 4.0 (2011), based on ECORP’s Assessment. Mitigation measures identified in the Assessment will be incorporated into the impact analysis.
Agricultural Resources. The proposed Agreement will not have any impact on agricultural resources, and will not change the impacts identified in the County’s CEQA documents.
