CRYSTAL LAKE FAMILY ALUMNI AMP AND NVIRONMENTAL E C · TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1.0-Introduction 1.0-1 Section 2.0-Executive Summary 2.0-1 Section 3.0-Project Description 3.0-1

CRYSTAL LAKE FAMILY ALUMNI CAMP AND

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER

Draft Environmental Impact Report

State Clearinghouse No. 2015062034

Prepared By:

ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY

University of California

One Shields Avenue

436 Mrak Hall

Davis, California 95616

September 2015

The following Initial Study has been prepared in compliance with CEQA.

Contact: A. Sidney England, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Environmental

Stewardship and Sustainability

530-752-2432

UC Davis Crystal Lake Alumni Camp Draft EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Section 1.0-Introduction 1.0-1

Section 2.0-Executive Summary 2.0-1

Section 3.0-Project Description 3.0-1

Section 4.0-Environmental Setting, Impact, and Mitigation Measures 4.0-1

Section 4.1-Introduction............................................................................................................... 4.0-1

Section 4.2-Scoope of the EIR ...................................................................................................... 4.0-1

Section 4.3-Aesthetics ................................................................................................................... 4.3-1

Section 4.4-Agricultural and Forestry ........................................................................................ 4.4-1

Section 4.5-Air Quality ................................................................................................................. 4.5-1

Section 4.6-Aquatic Resources .................................................................................................... 4.6-1

Section 4.7-Terrestrial Biological Resources.............................................................................. 4.7-1

Section 4.8-Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 4.8-1

Section 4.9-Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................... 4.9-1

Section 4.10-Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................. 4.10-1

Section 4.11-Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................... 4.11-1

Section 4.12-Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................ 4.12-1

Section 4.13-Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................... 4.13-1

Section 4.14-Mineral Resources ................................................................................................ 4.14-1

Section 4.15-Noise....................................................................................................................... 4.15-1

Section 4.16 Population and Housing ...................................................................................... 4.16-1

Section 4.17-Public Services and Recreation ........................................................................... 4.17-1

Section 4.18-Transportation/Traffic .......................................................................................... 4.18-1

Section 4.19-Utilities ................................................................................................................... 4.19-1

Section 5.0-Alternatives 5.0-1

Section 6.0-Other CEQA Considerations 6.0-1

Section 7.0-List of Preparers and Persons Consulted 7.0-1

Appendices

Appendix 1.0 Notice of Preparation, Initial Study, Scoping Comments Received.

Appendix 4.1 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas CalEEMod Files

Appendix 4.2 Biological Resources Files

1.0-1 UC Davis Crystal Lake Alumni Camp Draft EIR

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA September 2015

Davis Campus

PROJECT INFORMATION

Project title:

Crystal Lake Family Alumni Camp and Environmental Education Center

Project location:

South of Interstate 80 near Yuba Gap exit and Eagle Lakes Road exit,

Nevada County a portion of section 24 T17 NR IZE MDM (main project area). (Portions of Section 24 in Township 17 North, Range 12 East, on the Cisco Grove 7.5‐minute USGS quadrangle)

Placer County, (road improvements along Crystal Lake Road).

Lead agency’s name and address:

The Regents of the University of California

1111 Franklin Street

Oakland, CA 94607

Contact person:

A. Sidney England, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Environmental

Stewardship and Sustainability, 530-752-2432

Project sponsor’s name and address:

Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability


One Shields Avenue

436 Mrak Hall

Davis, CA 95616-8678

Location of administrative record:

See project sponsor.

Identification of previous documents relied upon for tiering purposes:

The environmental review is not tiered from a prior environmental review.

1.0 Introduction


1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluates the potentially significant environmental effects of the

proposed University of California (UC or the University) Davis (UC Davis) Crystal Lake Family Alumni

Camp and Environmental Education Center (hereinafter “proposed project”). The proposed project

would establish a new 210-acre recreation facility for UC Davis alumni purposes in Nevada County near

Cisco Grove and Yuba Gap. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this EIR

(1) assesses the potentially significant environmental effects of the proposed project, including

cumulative impacts of the proposed project in conjunction with other reasonably foreseeable

development; (2) identifies feasible means of avoiding or substantially lessening significant adverse

impacts; and (3) evaluates a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, including the No

Project Alternative. The University is the “lead agency” for the project evaluated in this EIR. The

University Of California Board Of Regents of (The Regents) or delegates of The Regents have the

principal responsibility for approving this project.

1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS EIR

The University has completed this EIR on the proposed project for the following purposes:

To inform the general public; the local community; and responsible, trustee, and other public

agencies of the nature of the proposed project, its potentially significant environmental effects,

feasible measures to mitigate those effects, and its reasonable and feasible alternatives;

To enable the University of California to consider the environmental consequences of approving the

proposed project;

For consideration by responsible agencies in issuing permits and approvals for the proposed project;

and,

To satisfy CEQA requirements.

As described in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, public agencies are charged with the duty to avoid

or substantially lessen significant environmental effects, where feasible. In discharging this duty, a public

agency has an obligation to balance the project’s significant effects on the environment with its benefits,

including economic, social, technological, legal, and other benefits. This EIR is an informational

document, the purpose of which is to identify the potentially significant effects of the proposed project on

the environment and to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be avoided or

significantly lessened; to identify any significant and unavoidable adverse impacts that cannot be

mitigated; and to identify reasonable and feasible alternatives to the proposed project that would

1.0 Introduction


eliminate any significant adverse environmental effects or reduce the impacts to a less than significant

level.

The lead agency is required to consider the information in the EIR, along with any other relevant

information, in making its decisions on the proposed project. Although the EIR does not determine the

ultimate decision that will be made regarding implementation of the proposed project, CEQA requires

the University to consider the information in the EIR and make findings regarding each significant and

unavoidable effect identified in the EIR. The University will review and consider certification of the Final

EIR prior to any decision on whether to approve the proposed project.

1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND

In 2014, the University of California purchased the Crystal Lake property with the intent to plan and

consider developing the property for future use as an alumni camp and environmental education center.

After acquisition of the property, the University has continued the existing management of the property

as a single-family residence and begun to plan and consider options for an alumni camp and

environmental education center. At this time, the University is evaluating the potential environmental

impacts of constructing and operating facilities for the alumni camp, conference center and

environmental education center.

1.3 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

UC Davis proposes to construct and operate an alumni family camp/environmental education center and

conference center on the 210-acre Crystal Lake property south of Interstate 80 between the Yuba Gap and

Eagle Lakes freeway exits in Nevada County. The proposed project is described in detail in Section 3.0,

Project Description. The camp and education center would serve a population of up to 350 campers with

70 staff. The conference center would serve as an event venue for professional social gatherings for up to

50 people for a total population of approximately 470 people during peak periods.

The proposed project will necessitate pre-construction vegetation removal and initial management as

well as long-term operational vegetation management to reduce fire hazards, clear areas for building

sites, prevent invasive species, maintain existing species, and enhance the user experience. Construction

of the following types of camp facilities would be included in the proposed camp: dining hall

(approximately 17,000 square feet); lodge, (approximately 10,000 square feet), sleeping pods (80 sleeping

cabins and 7 restroom/shower buildings for campers and staff), swimming pool, craft center, caretaker’s

house and equipment building, amphitheater, developed recreation facilities, registration building, utility

and infrastructure buildings, informal recreation trails, and a lake recreation beach and dock area.

1.0 Introduction


Existing roads and utilities within the property would be expanded and improved to serve the new camp

layout and expanded population. Roads off the property including the two-mile Crystal Lake Road from

the property toward the Yuba Gap/Interstate 80 exit may also need minor widening in select narrow

locations, vegetation removal to remove select branches and small trees, and improved surfacing with

asphalt or gravel.

1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS

1.4.1 Notice of Preparation and Scoping

Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14,

California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), completed an Initial Study in June 2015 as a

preliminary environmental analysis as a basis for determining whether an EIR, a Mitigated Negative

Declaration, or a Negative Declaration is required for a project. The Initial Study is provided in

Appendix 1.0 of this Draft EIR. After preparing the Initial Study, the University determined that an EIR

would be required for the proposed project.

The Initial Study was circulated for public and agency review from June 12, 2015 to July 13, 2015. Copies

of the document were available for review at the following locations:

UC Davis Office of Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability in 436 Mrak Hall on the UC

Davis campus

Reserves at Shields Library on the UC Davis campus

Nevada County Public Library at 980 Heling Way, Nevada City, CA.

Placer County Public Library at 350 Nevada Street, Auburn, CA

Online: http://sustainability.ucdavis.edu/progress/commitment/environmental_review/index.html

On July 9 at 6:00 pm in the Nevada County Contractor’s Association Conference Room at 149 Crown

Point Court, Grass Valley, CA 94945, the University hosted a scoping meeting as an opportunity for the

public to provide information about environmental issues or concerns that would have been relevant to

the preparation of the environmental impact report (EIR). Comments on the Initial Study were due by

5:00 PM on July 13, 2015 and could have been e-mailed to [email protected] or sent to:

A. Sidney England

Assistant Vice Chancellor – Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability


One Shields Avenue

436 Mrak Hall

Davis, CA 95616

http://sustainability.ucdavis.edu/progress/commitment/environmental_review/index.html

mailto:[email protected]

1.0 Introduction

1.0‐5 UC Davis Crystal Lake Alumni Camp Draft EIR

Comments received during the scoping period are provided in Appendix 1.0 of this Draft EIR. All

comments received during the scoping period were considered in the preparation of this Draft EIR.

Areas of controversy identified through the scoping process included potential effects on the adjacent

camping land use along Crystal Lake Road with controversy indicated in the areas of land use

compatibility, air impacts, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and hazard impacts.

1.4.2 EIR Preparation and Review

After preparing the Draft EIR, the University determined that the Draft EIR would be circulated for

public and agency review from September 2, 2015 to October 16, 2015. Copies of this document are

available for review at the following locations:

UC Davis Office of Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability in 436 Mrak Hall on the UC

Davis campus

Reserves at Shields Library on the UC Davis campus

Nevada County Public Library at 980 Heling Way, Nevada City, CA.

Placer County Public Library at 350 Nevada Street, Auburn, CA

Online at:


On September 30 at 6:00 pm in the Nevada County Contractor’s Association Conference Room at 149

Crown Point Court, Grass Valley, CA 94945, the University will host a public hearing as an opportunity

for the public to provide verbal comments about environmental issues or concerns that may be relevant

to the proposed project or the adequacy of the Draft EIR. Comments on the Draft EIR are due by 5:00 PM

on October 16, 2015 and can be e‐mailed to [email protected] or sent to:

A. Sidney England

Assistant Vice Chancellor – Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability


One Shields Avenue

436 Mrak Hall

Davis, CA 95616


mailto:[email protected]

1.0 Introduction


1.4.4 Publication of Final EIR

Following the close of the Draft EIR review period, the University will consider the written comments

received and prepare responses to the comments that pertain to the environmental analysis and effects of

the proposed project. After considering the comments and the potential environmental impact

implications of the proposed project, the University may prepare a Final EIR for approval consideration.

After considering the Final EIR, the University will review and consider whether to approve the

proposed project and adopt findings of fact regarding the significant effects identified in the Final EIR

(State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091). CEQA requires that the findings be based on substantial (factual)

information in the record. A statement of overriding considerations will also be prepared and adopted for

significant effects that were determined to be unavoidable or infeasible to reduce to a less than significant

level through mitigation or implementation of alternatives. The University will also adopt a mitigation

monitoring and reporting program that will ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the findings

are implemented. If the University have certified the Final EIR and approved the project, phases of the

project, or portions of the project, the University will file a Notice of Determination (NOD) for the

approval with the State Clearinghouse.

1.5 INTENDED USES OF THIS EIR

Three uses are envisioned for this document. The University will use this EIR to review and consider the

environmental implications of approving the proposed project or portions of the project. Secondly, if the

portions of the project are approved, this EIR could be used in the environmental review of subsequent

approval of any remaining elements of the project. Lastly, this document may be used as a source of

information by responsible agencies with permitting or approval authority over the project. It is

anticipated that the University may consider approval of the project in November of 2015.

Possible responsible agencies as defined under CEQA may take further discretionary actions to approve

portions of the project or items connected to the project. Examples of possible responsible agencies

include Nevada County, Placer County, CalFire, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

1.0 Introduction


1.7 REPORT ORGANIZATION

Volume 1 of this EIR is organized into the following sections:

Section 1.0, Introduction, provides an introduction and overview describing the purpose and scope of

topics addressed in this EIR and the environmental review process.

Section 2.0, Executive Summary, summarizes environmental consequences that would result from the

proposed project, provides a summary table that denotes anticipated environmental impacts, describes

identified mitigation measures, and indicates the level of significance of impacts before and after

mitigation; and presents alternatives evaluated in this EIR for their ability to reduce or avoid the

significant impacts of the proposed project. The summary also lists areas of controversy known to the

lead agency and provides a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the proposed project.

Section 3.0, Project Description, provides a detailed description of the proposed project, including

objectives, background information, maps, and a description of construction activities needed to complete

the project.

Section 4.0, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, contains the individual and

cumulative environmental effects of the proposed project by environmental topic. Based on a preliminary

review of the project by the University in the Initial Study that was prepared and circulated with the NOP

and the comments received in response to the NOP, this section evaluates the following environmental

topics in detail:

Aesthetics

Agricultural and Forestry Resources

Air Quality

Biological Resources

Cultural Resources

Geology and Soils

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Hydrology and Water Quality

Land Use and Planning

Mineral Resources

Noise

Population and Housing

Public Services and Recreation

Transportation and Traffic

Utilities and Service Systems

Section 5.0, Alternatives, describes alternatives to the project and presents the comparative

environmental consequences and benefits of each alternative. This section includes an analysis of the No

Project Alternative, among others, as required by CEQA.

Section 6.0, List of Preparers/Organizations Consulted, provides a list of the individuals involved in the

preparation of this EIR and organizations and individuals who were contacted in the preparation of the

EIR.

1.0 Introduction


Section 7.0 – Other CEQA Considerations: provides a discussion of the project’s significant and

unavoidable impacts, significant irreversible changes which would be caused if the project were to be

implemented, the potential for growth inducement from the project, and a brief description of the

environmental effects that were found not to be significant and, therefore, not evaluated in further detail..

Appendices: Appendices are included with the following items: Appendix 1.0 Initial Study and Scoping

Comments, Appendix 4.1: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Appendix 4.2 Biological

Resources.

A list of references used in preparation of a section is provided at the end of each of the sections in this

EIR.

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 PURPOSE

This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluates the potentially significant environmental effects of the

proposed UC Davis Crystal Lake Alumni Camp and Environmental Education Center (proposed project).

This Executive Summary is intended to provide the decision makers, responsible agencies, and the public

with a clear, simple, and concise description of the proposed project and its potential significant

environmental impacts. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15123) require

that a summary be included in an EIR that identifies all major conclusions, identifies each significant

effect, recommended mitigation measure(s), and describes alternatives that would minimize or avoid

potential significant impacts of the proposed project. The summary is also required to identify areas of

controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public and issues to be

resolved. This summary includes Table 2.0-2, Summary Comparison of Alternatives.

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION

The approximately 210-acre Crystal Lake property is located in Nevada County in the Sierra Nevada.

The property is near Interstate 80 approximately 70 miles east of Sacramento and 20 miles west of

Truckee at an elevation of approximately 6,000 feet (Figure 3-1). The main UC Davis campus in Davis is

approximately 80 miles from Crystal Lake. The Crystal Lake property is in rural, mountainous terrain

with strong seasonal weather conditions ranging from mild and dry summer periods to cold and snow

covered winter periods. The Crystal Lake property is south of Interstate 80 between the Yuba Gap and

Eagle Lakes freeway exits in Nevada County.

2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The UC Davis Cal Aggie Alumni Association proposes to construct and operate an alumni family

camp/environmental education center and conference center on the 210-acre Crystal Lake property south

of Interstate 80 southwest of the Eagle Lakes freeway exit (Figures 3-2 and 3-3). The camp and education

center would serve a population of up to 350 campers with 70 staff (Figure 3-4). The conference center

would serve as an event venue for professional social gatherings for up to 50 people for a total population

of approximately 470 people during a peak period. The mountainous geography of the property and

nearby areas consist of steep mountain peaks, heavily forested vegetation, areas of open granite

outcroppings, and streams, rivers, and lakes serving to drain and impound water from snow and rainfall.

UC Davis has grown to include a wide variety world-class research interests and highly-ranked

undergraduate, post-graduate, and professional education programs. With on-going growth in

enrollment and graduations, an annual increase in UC Davis alumni have created strong collaborative

relationships for supporting the University mission. While other opportunities exist for expanding

alumni participation, an alumni camp is a focused activity that can uniquely garner alumni participation

in a campus related activity.

Site planning for the camp identified a desire to have an alumni camp with specific natural features and

proximities to UC Davis. The proposed project will necessitate pre-construction vegetation removal and

initial management as well as long-term operational vegetation management to reduce fire hazards, clear

areas for building sites, prevent invasive species, maintain existing species, and enhance the user

experience.

Construction of the following types of camp facilities (Figure 3-4) would be included in the proposed

camp: dining hall (approximately 17,000 square feet); lodge, (approximately 10,000 square feet), sleeping

pods (80 sleeping cabins and 7 restroom/shower buildings for campers and staff), swimming pool, craft

center, caretaker’s house and equipment building, amphitheater, developed recreation facilities,

registration building, utility and infrastructure buildings, informal recreation trails, and a lake recreation

beach and dock area.

Existing roads and utilities within the property would be expanded and improved to serve the new camp

layout and expanded population. Access to the property is provided by Crystal Lake Road, a public road

in existence since the 1800’s. Roads off the property including the two-mile Crystal Lake Road from the

property toward the Yuba Gap/Interstate 80 exit may also need minor widening in select narrow

locations, vegetation removal to remove select branches and small trees, and improved surfacing with

asphalt or gravel. Crystal Lake Road, or portions of Crystal Lake Road, are also called Kelly Lake Road

on some maps. This EIR refers to the road as Crystal Lake Road as shown on Figure 3-2.

2.4 PROJECT NEED AND OBJECTIVES

UC Davis is a university campus with enrollment of approximately 35,000 students and 232,000 living

alumni and is one of the 10 campuses within the University of California system. The University of

California was established by amendment of the State of California constitution in 1868 as an

autonomous branch of state government, to provide California with a university system for research and

education. UC Davis began in 1908 as the farm school for UC Berkeley and from 1908 through 1959,

continued as a component of UC Berkeley. Since 1959, UC Davis has operated as a separate

comprehensive campus under governance of the University of California Board of Regents and has

grown to include a wide variety world-class research interests and highly-ranked undergraduate, post-

graduate, and professional education programs. With growth in enrollment and graduations, an annual

increase in UC Davis alumni have created strong collaborative relationships for mentoring new students,

advising on professional opportunities, and supporting the University mission. These efforts are typical

of an alumni association and represent the unique interest among UC Davis graduates to continue their

affiliation and support of UC Davis.

Alumni associations typically support a University by serving as a catalyst for alumni to participate in

university-related social, professional, charitable, and philanthropic events and programs. By

maintaining strong connections among alumni and between alumni and the university, an extended

university experience can mutually benefit the university and the life-long learning, discovery, and public

service interests of alumni. Typical events include gatherings at sporting competitions, travel

opportunities, lectures, performances, professional networking, and social events.

Many alumni organizations have created alumni camps to further support the interests and

collaborations of alumni. Within Northern California, Stanford and UC Berkeley have established alumni

camps in the Sierra Nevada that successfully provide a vacation opportunity for alumni seeking to renew

or expand their connections with friends, family, colleagues, and their respective universities. UC Davis

does not provide an alumni camp opportunity but has identified that the expanding base of enthusiastic

alumni along with the projected growth in alumni represent a unique period to plan and operate an

alumni camp. While other opportunities exist for expanding alumni participation, an alumni camp is a

focused activity that can uniquely garner alumni interest, provide a high-quality annual experience,

involve entire families with activities for multiple generations, and generate interest among other alumni

in camp participation.

The Board of Directors of the Cal Aggie Alumni Association identified development of an alumni camp

as a key element for expanding the success of the alumni association and initiated a planning committee

consisting of board members and the executive director of the alumni association to consider the real

estate and financial planning aspects for building and operating an alumni camp. The alumni association

would pay for and operate the camp independently of UC Davis campus funding. Financial planning for

the camp identified the ability to generate camp income from user fees to pay for the costs of land

acquisition, construction, and camp operation. Site planning for the camp identified a desire to have an

alumni camp with specific natural features and proximities to UC Davis.

The following specific objectives of the alumni camp and environmental learning center detail the site

planning, programming, financial and operational objectives of the project:

Create an alumni family camp on property with a water feature such as a lake, stream, or river

that would allow water recreation opportunities.

Provide seclusion within a separate special place for visitors to appreciate and treasure.

Minimize driving distance from Davis, Sacramento, and San Francisco. Remain within a 2.5 hour

drive from Davis to facilitate management of the property and employment opportunities for

students.

Operate a camp that is free from poison oak and at an elevation that is not subject to the extreme

heat of the Central Valley in order to provide the highest quality camp experience.

Provide a full-service camp experience with an adequate revenue base to support dining,

lodging, and activities included in the design and operation of the camp.

Operate a camp primarily during summer months to match vacation planning goals of alumni

but also generate income from other activities during non-summer months.

Operate an alumni camp for a diverse range of interests including people interested in active,

passive, independent, or highly facilitated vacation activities that will appeal to a wide range of

ages.

Operate a camp based on a one-week stay scheduled from Sunday arrival to Saturday departure

to allow visitors to maximize the amount of vacationing time with minimal time missed at work.

Operate a camp with unique opportunities for learning about natural and human history.

Minimize environmental impacts through site selection, camp design, and camp operation.

Utilize development and construction methods that respect the natural environment.

Provide long-term stewardship of natural features and human historical features.

In addition, the following objectives were identified as items that are specifically not desired and would

not be included in camp operations. These are identified here in the project description for the

environmental review in order exclude certain activities that could result in particular environmental

impacts. Items excluded from camp operation are: pets, equestrian activities, firearms, motorized boats

or all-terrain vehicle recreation, and hunting.

In addition to an alumni camp, the size of the Crystal Lake property and the presence of the existing large

home represent an opportunity to improve the financial viability of the proposed project and support off-

season use of the property. The existing large home could be used for events such as weddings, executive

professional conferences, retreats, academic conferences, and other gatherings for groups of 15 to 50

people. Specific project objectives of these uses are the following:

Hosting conferences and events.

Provide an event venue that is separate from the alumni camp and environmental learning

center.

Utilize the existing main house to provide additional income for the management and operation

of the property.

2.5 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY KNOWN TO THE UNIVERSITY

During the scoping period, members of the public expressed concern and displeasure regarding road

access to the Crystal Lake property, traffic volumes, noise, dust, water quality impacts, and land use

compatibility impacts between the proposed alumni camp and the adjacent camp (known as the

Snowflower INc., Raccoon camp) located along the Crystal Lake access road.

2.6 ALTERNATIVES

Consistent with CEQA requirements, a reasonable range of alternatives were evaluated and considered in

an effort to assist in the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. The alternatives

analyzed in detail in this EIR are presented below.

2.6.1 Alternative 1: Event Center Only

Under Alternative 1, the Alumni Camp would not be constructed and the existing lodge would undergo

interior renovations to function as an event center for small conferences, wedding, and other private

events. Exterior improvements would include replacement of the existing children’s play structure with a

gazebo and a deck or paved area approximately 40 feet by 40 feet. Events could take place during spring,

summer, or fall. Attendance would be limited to 50 people. None of the facilities for the Alumni Camp

(pool, lake beach development, maintenance facilities, roads or infrastructure) would be constructed.

Recreational fishing would not be a featured activity and fish stocking would not occur. The total acreage

of disturbance associated with this alternative would be approximately 4 acres.

2.6.2 Alternative 2: Smaller Alumni Camp

Under Alternative 2, the Alumni Camp would be scaled back to 50 percent of the planned size; the total

acreage of disturbance associated with this alternative would be approximately 10 acres. The proposed

dining commons building would be constructed near the existing caretaker house. No pool would be

constructed and no beach would be proposed along the lake shore. The existing dock and grass area

would serve as the lake recreation access point for camp attendees. Sleeping cabins would be installed

north and east of the caretaker house. No camp development would take place east of the existing tennis

court.

2.6.3 Alternative 3: No Project Alternative

State CEQA Guidelines require a consideration of the No Project Alternative. Under the No Project

alternative, UC Davis would not develop the Crystal Lake property. No construction would take place

under the No Project Alternative. No ground disturbance expected. The property would continue under

the current management with existing activities (occasional use of the existing lake house) expected to

stay the same.

2.7 IMPACT SUMMARY

A detailed discussion regarding potential impacts of the proposed project is provided in Section 4.0,

Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures. A summary of the impacts of the proposed

project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures indicating whether implementation of the

recommended mitigation measures would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Table 2.0-2,

Summary Comparison of Alternatives, presents the environmental impacts of each alternative to allow

the decision makers, agencies and the public to compare and contrast these alternatives and weigh their

relative merits and demerits.

IMPACT AND MITIGATION SUMMARY

AESTHETICS

Impact AES-1: Substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measure is required.

Impact AES-2: Impacts to scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock

outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway (No

Impact)

Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measure is required.

Impact AES-3: Degrade the existing visual character and quality of the project site and its

surroundings (Potentially Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure AES-3: Final site planning, to the extent feasible, shall place visually intrusive

project components outside of sensitive view corridors such as the arrival

corridor of the main road, the views across Crystal Lake from the north side of

the lake, and views to the north from the northern edge of the property. Where

visually intrusive elements such as parking lots, maintenance buildings, loading

docks, trash/recycling, mechanical equipment, equipment storage or similar uses

are placed within a visually sensitive area, such elements shall be screened from

view through the use of existing vegetation, new plantings, or screen fencing that

is compatible with overall architectural style and materials of the proposed

camp.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from AES-3 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level

with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-3.

Impact AES-4: Implementation of the proposed project would create new sources of light and

glare that could affect day and nighttime views in the area (Potentially

Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure AES-4a: Design for buildings shall require the use of textured, non-reflective

exterior surfaces, dark colors, and non-reflective (non-mirrored) glass.

Mitigation Measure AES-4b: All new outdoor lighting shall utilize directional lighting methods with

shielded and cut-off type light fixtures to minimize glare and prohibit upward

directed lighting.

Mitigation Measure AES-4c: All new outdoor lighting shall be turned off when not in use. Non-

essential exterior lighting shall be turned off when the camp is closed or partially

closed. Motion sensors and bi-level lighting fixtures shall be utilized where

feasible to minimize light use.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from AES-4 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level

with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-4.

Cumulative Impact AES-1 Potential for cumulative substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

(Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required.

Cumulative Impact AES-2 Potential for cumulative impacts to scenic resources, including, but not

limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic

highway (No Impact)


Cumulative Impact AES-3 Potential for cumulative degradation of the existing visual character

and quality of the project site and its surroundings (Potentially Significant;

Less than Significant with Mitigation)


Cumulative Impact AES-4 Implementation of the proposed project would create new sources of

light and glare that could affect day and nighttime views in the area.

(Potentially Significant)


AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY

Impact AG-1: Result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of

Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources

Agency, to nonagricultural use (No Impact)

Mitigation Measure(s): No mitigation measures are required.

Impact AG-2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract

(No Impact)


Impact AG-3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined

in Public 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)) (Significant; Less than

Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure AG-3: As necessary, according to CalFire regulations, the project will comply

with the timber conversion plan and timber harvest plan application, review, and

approval process prior to project initiation. At a minimum, activities related to

timber harvest processes will include the California Forest Practice Rules for

silvicultural methods, harvesting practices and erosion control, site preparation,

water course and lake protection, hazard reduction, fire protection, and wildlife

protection.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from AG-3 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level

because the CalFire process will evaluate the context of the proposed timberland reduction in comparison

to overall timberland resource protection and will apply appropriate environmental protections prior to

approval.

Impact AG-4: Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non-forest use

(No Impact)


Impact AG-5: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location

or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or

conversion of forestland to non-forest use (No Impact)


4.4.4.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures

Cumulative Impact AG-6: Cumulative losses to timberland resources (Less than Significant)



AIR QUALITY

Impact AIR-1: Construction of the proposed project would not result in construction

emissions that violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an

existing or projected air quality violation. (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measures: No project-level mitigation measures are required. However, the NSAQMD has

provided suggested mitigation measures for projects within the Level A and Level B thresholds. To

further reduce the less than significant impacts caused by construction emissions of the proposed project,

the following mitigation measures are proposed.

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: To further reduce the identified less than significant impact, the project

shall comply with the following Level A and Level B NSAQMD mitigation

measures.

a) Alternatives to open burning of vegetative material for land management will

be used unless otherwise deemed infeasible by the District. Among suitable

alternatives are 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 and/or Caltrans.

d) Construction activities shall be scheduled to direct traffic flow to off-peak hours

as much as practicable.

e) 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.

f) Comply with NSAQMD Rule 226 (dust control) prior to start of land disturbing

activities.

g) Firewood for campsites should be seasoned and kept in a dry location. In

addition, camp rules should prohibit the burning of garbage, including paper

products, for disposal.

h) Complete all air district permitting requirements for emission sources such as

emergency generators, fueling facility, a boiler exceeding 3 million BTU/hour,

and any other source with annual emissions greater than 1,000 lbs of any criteria

pollutant, and air toxics sources.

Significance after Mitigation: Upon implementation, the less than significant impacts caused by

construction emissions would be further reduced.

Impact AIR-2: The proposed project would not result in operational emissions that would

violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or

projected air quality violation. (No Impact)

Mitigation Measures: No project-level mitigation measures are required. However, the NSAQMD has

provided suggested mitigation measures for projects within the Level A and Level B thresholds. To

further reduce the less than significant impacts caused by operation emissions of the proposed project,

the following mitigation measures are proposed.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: To further reduce the identified less than significant impact of

operational emissions, the project shall comply with Mitigation Measure AIR-1.

Significance after Mitigation: Upon implementation, the less than significant impact of AIR-1 caused by

construction emissions would be further reduced.

Impact AIR-3: Implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors

to substantial concentrations of carbon monoxide. (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measures: No project-level mitigation measures are required.

Impact AIR-4: Implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors

to substantial concentrations of toxic air contaminants. (Less than Significant)


Impact AIR-5: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct

implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (Less than Significant)


Impact AIR-6: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people (Less than

Significant)


Cumulative Impact AIR-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a

cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the

project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient

air quality standard (Significant; Significant and Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measures: No project-level mitigation measures are available.


AQUATIC RESOURCES

Impact FISH-1: Increased turbidity and sedimentation in drainages, lakes, ponds, and

wetlands during project construction and from increases in impervious

surfaces could reduce the quality of fish habitat (Significant; Less than

Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure WQ-4: Incorporate findings and recommendations from the site-specific

drainage study to mitigate effects on drainage alteration and/or erosion

Significance after Mitigation: The long-term impact from increased turbidity and sedimentation in

drainages, lakes, ponds, and wetlands from increases in impervious surfaces would be reduced to a less-

than-significant level.

Impact FISH-2: Reduction in quality of fish habitat due to potential discharge of contaminants

during construction and as part of long-term operations could reduce the

quality of fish habitat (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)



Significance after Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure WQ-4 would reduce the

operational water quality impact of the project to a less-than-significant level.

Impact FISH-3: Potential for acute and chronic toxicity of fish from degradation of water

quality associated with the proposed septic system (Less than Significant)


Impact FISH-4: Reduced abundance of game fish species in Crystal Lake and Raccoon Pond from

increased fishing pressure (Potentially Significant; Less than Significant with

Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure FISH-4a: Prevent harvest of game fish species in Crystal Lake and Raccoon Pond

Significance after Mitigation: The impact of reduced abundance of game fish species in Crystal Lake and

Raccoon Pond from increased fishing pressure would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact FISH-5: Introduction of undesirable or invasive aquatic species or pathogens to water bodies

affected by the proposed project through fish stocking program (Significant;


Mitigation Measure FISH-5a: In consultation with CDFW, prepare and implement a fish stocking plan

consistent with current CDFW fish stocking protocols

Mitigation Measure FISH-5b: Develop and implement an educational awareness program on the risks

posed by invasive species and preventative measures to avoid introductions

Significance after Mitigation: The impact of potentially introducing undesirable or invasive aquatic

species or pathogens associated with fish stocking would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Cumulative Impact FISH-1 Potential for cumulative effects on fish populations in the South Yuba

River (Less than Significant)



TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Impact BIO-1: Adversely affect special-status plants or habitat occupied by special-status

plants (Less than Significant)


Impact BIO-2: Adversely affect fishless lakes within the study area (Potentially Significant;


Implementation of Mitigation Measures FISH-5a, FISH-5b, BIO-2a, BIO-2b, and BIO 2c would reduce

this impact to a less-than–significant level.

Mitigation Measure FISH-5a: In consultation with CDFW, prepare and implement a fish stocking plan

consistent with current CDFW fish stocking protocols

This mitigation measure is described in Section 4.6, Fish and Aquatic Resources.

Mitigation Measure FISH-5b: Develop and implement an educational awareness program on the risks

posed by invasive species and preventative measures to avoid introductions

This mitigation measure is described in Section 4.6, Fish and Aquatic Resources.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2a: Conduct mandatory contractor/worker awareness training for construction

personnel

Before any work takes place on the project site, including grading, a qualified biologist

will conduct mandatory contractor/worker awareness training for construction

personnel. The awareness training will be provided to all construction personnel to brief

them on the need to avoid effects on sensitive biological resources (e.g., riparian habitat,

special-status species, nesting birds, wetlands, and other sensitive biological

communities) and the penalties for not complying with permit requirements. The

biologist will inform all construction personnel about the life history of special-status

species with potential for occurrence onsite, the importance of maintaining habitat, and

the mitigation requirements of the EIR or other authorizing document. Proof of this

instruction will be submitted to UC Davis, or other overseeing agency, as appropriate.

The training will also cover the restrictions and guidelines that must be followed by all

construction personnel to reduce or avoid effects on sensitive biological communities and

special-status species during project construction. The crew leader will be responsible for

ensuring that crew members adhere to the guidelines and restrictions. Educational

training will be conducted for new personnel as they are brought on the job during the

construction period. General restrictions and guidelines for vegetation and wildlife that

must be followed by construction personnel are listed below.

Project-related vehicles will observe the posted speed limit on hard-surfaced roads and a

10-mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved roads during travel in the study area.

Project-related vehicles and construction equipment will restrict off-road travel to the

designated construction area.

All food-related trash will be disposed of in closed containers and removed from the

project site at least once a week during the construction period. Construction personnel

will not feed or otherwise attract fish or wildlife to the study area.

To prevent possible resource damage from hazardous materials such as motor oil or

gasoline, construction personnel will not service vehicles or construction equipment

outside designated staging areas.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Develop and implement a visitor educational awareness program on

special-status species known or with potential to occur in the study area

UC Davis will develop and implement an educational awareness program for visitors to the

project site, highlighting the known and potential special-status species on the project site.

Species that would be addressed include Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog, western pond

turtle, nesting birds, and bats. UC Davis will include educational information to campers

about the potential for negative effects on aquatic resources including the western pond

turtle and Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog from the introduction of fish to Honey Lake and

the unnamed lake. Options for providing information include a framed information board in

a central use location, a binder with species information and photographs, and information

boards in key locations near specific resources such as Honey Lake. In some locations a post

and rope fence may be necessary to discourage users from entering sensitive habitats such as

Honey Lake and the unnamed lake. Signage describing the legal status and biology of the

frog could be posted at points along the fence emphasizing the species sensitivity to human

disturbance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Develop trails a minimum of 25 feet from Honey Lake and the Unnamed

Lake and prohibit wading or swimming in honey lake and the unnamed lake.

Trails outside of the alumni camp would primarily consist of marked routes designed to

follow existing contours along exposed areas of granite or relatively flat dirt.

Construction work at Honey Lake and the unnamed lake will be limited to trail crews

placing small rocks as markers for a trail route, trimming vegetation to show a trail route,

and, as necessary, hand digging trail grading and installing water bars. There will be no

vehicles or powered equipment. Trails around Honey Lake and the unnamed lake will

maintain a minimum 25-foot buffer to ensure wildlife is not disturbed. Information on

the sensitivity of the wildlife at these two lakes will be included in the educational

program (Mitigation Measure BIO-2b) with information on the prohibition of wading

and swimming in the two lakes.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from project activities on wildlife resources in Honey Lake and

the unnamed lake would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-3: Adversely affect western pond turtle (Significant; Less than Significant with

Mitigation)

Incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2a, BIO-2b, and BIO-3 would reduce these impacts to a less-

than–significant level.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Exclude turtles from construction area.

If construction activities will take place in aquatic habitat where western pond turtles are

known to occur, UC Davis or its contractor will install a sediment curtain to secure the

construction area within 48 hours of disturbance. The sediment curtain should be

somewhat loose on the bottom to allow western pond turtles the ability to leave the

construction area. A biological monitor will be present during installation and

periodically to ensure that no western pond turtles are trapped in the construction area.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from project activities on western pond turtles would be

reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-4: Result in the loss or disturbance of tree-, shrub- and ground-nesting special-

status and non-special–status migratory birds and raptors (Significant; Less

than Significant with Mitigation)


personnel

This mitigation measure is described under the discussion of Impact BIO-2.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Develop and implement a visitor educational awareness program on special-

status species known or with potential to occur in the study area.


Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Avoid disturbance of tree-, shrub-, and ground-nesting special-status and

non-special-status migratory birds and raptors and conduct preconstruction

nesting bird surveys.

To avoid and minimize effects on nesting special-status and non–special-status migratory

birds and raptors, UC Davis will implement the appropriate surveys and restrictions.

To avoid removing or disturbing any active northern goshawk or California spotted owl

nests, other special-status birds’ nests, or non–special-status migratory bird nests, tree

and shrub removal will be conducted during the nonbreeding season (generally between

September 1 and mid-February ) or after a qualified biologist determines that fledglings

have left an active nest. If this is not feasible, it is likely that there will be nesting birds in

the study area, which will require a buffer and avoidance during construction until the

birds have fledged. This could seriously constrain construction and result in project

delays.

If construction or tree-felling activities will occur during the breeding season (mid-

February through August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist (with knowledge of the

species to be surveyed) will be retained to conduct surveys for nesting birds for all trees

and shrubs and ground-nesting habitat located within 500 feet (0.25 mile for northern

goshawk and California spotted owl) of construction activities, including grading,

vegetation removal, and excavation in borrow sites.

If the biologist determines that the area surveyed does not contain any active nests,

construction activities, including removal or pruning of trees and shrubs, can commence

without any further mitigation.

If an active nest is located in the proposed disturbance area, the wildlife biologist will

consult with CDFW to establish a suitable buffer zone. If it is determined the nest is of a

listed species, the applicable agency will be contacted for further avoidance measures. At

a minimum, all work within 0.25 mile of the nest will be halted until consultation with

the CDFW and/or the USFWS. If a non-listed raptor nest is located within 250 feet or a

migratory bird nest is located within 100 feet of disturbance, and the disturbance must

take place during the breeding season, a buffer zone will be established by the biologist

and confirmed by the appropriate resource agency (CDFW and/or USFWS). A qualified

wildlife biologist will monitor the nest to determine when the young have fledged and

submit bi-weekly reports throughout the nesting season. The biological monitor will

have the authority to cease construction if there is any sign of distress to any raptor or

migratory bird. Reference to this requirement and the MBTA will be included in the

construction specifications.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from project activities on nesting birds would be reduced to a

less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-5: Result in the loss or disturbance of special-status bats and bat roosts

(Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)


personnel.


Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Develop and implement a visitor educational awareness program on special-

status species known or with potential to occur in the study area.


Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Conduct preconstruction surveys for roosting bats and implement protective

measures.

To avoid and minimize impacts on bat roosts and special-status bats, UC Davis will

implement the following surveys and protective measures. UC Davis will retain qualified

biologists with knowledge of the natural history of the species that could occur in the

study area and experience using full-spectrum acoustic equipment to conduct the

surveys described below. During surveys, biologists will avoid unnecessary disturbance

of occupied roosts.

Preconstruction Structure Surveys

Before work begins on a structure or the structure is demolished or removed, qualified

biologists will conduct a daytime search for bat sign and evening emergence surveys to

determine whether the structure is being used as a roost. Biologists conducting daytime

surveys will listen for audible bat calls and use naked eye, binoculars, and a high-

powered spotlight to search structures that could house bats. The ground around the

structure will be surveyed for bat sign, such as guano, staining, and prey remains.

Evening emergence surveys will consist of at least one biologist stationed on each side of

the structure watching for emerging bats from a half hour before sunset to 1–2 hours

after sunset for a minimum of two nights within the season that construction would be

taking place. Night-vision equipment is recommended during emergence surveys to

improve the ability to see bats as it gets dark. Concurrent with evening emergence

surveys, passive monitoring with full-spectrum bat detectors will be used to assist in

determining species present. Detectors will be set to record bat calls for the duration of

each night. Surveys will be conducted during favorable weather conditions (calm nights

with temperatures conducive to bat activity and no precipitation predicted).

The biologists will analyze the bat call data using appropriate software and prepare a

report with the results of the surveys. If the results of the surveys are inconclusive and/or

CDFW requires additional information on the type(s) of roosts present and/or the species

roosting in the structure, additional night surveys and/or acoustic surveys may be

recommended.

Preconstruction Tree Surveys

If tree removal or trimming is necessary during construction or fuel management,

qualified biologists will examine trees to be removed or trimmed for suitable bat roosting

habitat. High-quality habitat features (e.g., large tree cavities, basal hollows, loose, or

peeling bark, larger snags) will be identified and the area around these features searched

for bats and bat sign (e.g., guano, culled insect parts, staining).

Protective Measures for Bats using Structures and Trees

Measures to avoid and minimize impacts on bat roosts and special-status bats will be

determined in coordination with CDFW and may include any combination of the

measures listed below.

To the extent feasible, disturbance or removal of suitable roosting habitat will be avoided.

Removal or disturbance of structures and trees that provide suitable roosting habitat for

bats will be avoided between April 15 and September 15 (the maternity period), or until a

qualified biologist has determined the roost is no longer active, to avoid impacts on

reproductively active females and dependent young.

If a non-maternity roost cannot be avoided, eviction procedures will be determined in

coordination with CDFW to reduce the likelihood of mortality of evicted bats. Exclusion

devices will be installed from March 1 through April 14 or September 15 through October

30 to preclude bats from occupying onsite structures likely to be inhabited during

construction. Exclusionary devices will only be installed by or under the supervision of

an experienced bat biologist.

Trees that provide suitable roosting habitat for bats will be removed in pieces, rather

than felling the entire tree. All tree removal will be conducted between September 15 and

October 30, which corresponds to a time period when bats would not likely have entered

winter hibernation and would not be caring for flightless young. If weather conditions

remain conducive to regular bat activity beyond October 30, later tree removal may be

considered in consultation with CDFW. Qualified biologists will monitor the removal

and trimming of trees that provide suitable bat habitat. If possible, tree

trimming/removal will take place in the late afternoon or evening when it is closer to the

time that bats would normally arouse. Prior to removal/trimming, each tree will be

shaken gently and several minutes will pass before felling trees or limbs to allow bats

time to arouse and leave the tree.

The biologist will prepare a biological monitoring report, which will be provided to UC

Davis and CDFW.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from project activities on bats would be reduced to a less-than-

significant level.

Impact BIO-6: Adversely affect riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community

identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW

or USFWS (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Avoid, minimize and/or compensate for project impacts on riparian

habitat.

Impacts on riparian habitat will be minimized by limiting removal of riparian trees and

shrubs to the area required for construction of the new dock and beach area. Riparian

habitat that is removed for construction of the new dock and beach area will be

compensated for by restoring and replanting riparian habitat elsewhere in the study area

on a 1:1 basis (removed habitat:restored habitat). The location of the compensation site

and details of the methods and materials used for the riparian restoration will be

determined through the development of a habitat mitigation and monitoring plan

(HMMP). The HMMP will be developed prior to the construction of the new dock and

beach area and will be implemented within 1 year of constructing the new dock and

beach area. If compensating for the loss of riparian habitat should be determined to be

infeasible, then the new dock and beach area will be relocated to an area that avoids

impacts on riparian habitat, such as the existing lawn area at the proposed event center,

or else removed from the proposed project design.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from the loss of riparian habitat would be reduced to a less-

than-significant level.

Impact BIO-7: Adversely affect wetlands and/or waters through direct removal, filling,

hydrological interruption, or other means (Significant; Less than Significant

with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Avoid, minimize, and/or compensate for loss of waters and wetlands.

During Project construction, the applicant will minimize disturbance of Crystal Lake and

any associated riparian vegetation due to the construction of the new dock and beach

area. Any temporary disturbance areas will be restored to pre-project conditions. The loss

of wetlands and/or other waters will be compensated for through restoration actions at

suitable locations along the lakeshore or along the outlet creek. These restoration actions

will include replanting of vegetation to compensate for any permanent loss of riparian

vegetation at a minimum ratio of 1:1 for any permanent areas of disturbance. As

discussed under Mitigation Measure BIO-6, these restoration actions would be

implemented through an HMMP, and if implementing the HMMP is determined to be

infeasible, then wetlands will be avoided by relocating and redesigning the new dock

and beach area or by removing these elements from the project design.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from the loss of wetlands would be reduced to a less-than-

significant level.

Impact BIO-8: Adversely affect common plant species and common habitats in the study area

as a result of ground-disturbing activities (Less than Significant)


Impact BIO-9: Adversely affect common wildlife species in the study area (Less than

Significant)


Impact BIO-10: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory

fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory

wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites ([Less

than Significant])


Impact BIO-11: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,

such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance (No Impact)


Impact BIO-12: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural

community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state

habitat conservation plan (No Impact)


Cumulative Impact BIO-1: Contribute to a cumulative effect on special-status wildlife

populations (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact BIO-2: Adversely affect riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community

identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW

or USFWS (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact BIO-3: Adversely affect wetlands or other waters (Less than Significant)



CULTURAL RESOURCES

Construction-Related Impacts

Camp and Lodge Area

Impact CUL-1: Impacts from construction activities on identified or previously unidentified

cultural resources (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure CUL-1a: Initial Archaeological Monitoring. Qualified professional

archaeologists will monitor initial ground clearing and construction trenching for

utilities in search of significant cultural resources. Native American monitors will be

included at their discretion and by scheduled appointment during archaeological

monitoring activities.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1b: Prehistoric Cultural Resource Evaluation and Data Recovery. If

previously unidentified cultural resources are identified during construction

monitoring, construction at and within 30 meters of the find will be suspended. UC

Davis will retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the new discovery according to

State CEQA Guidelines for their significance and potential eligibility to be listed on the

California Register of Historical Resources. In the case of a prehistoric archaeological

site, evaluation may be completed by examining existing records and reports, detailed

recording, and/or through excavation to determine the data potential and California

Register eligibility of the site. Native American monitors will be included at their

discretion and by scheduled appointment during archaeological evaluation fieldwork

activities. Resources determined not eligible for the California Register of Historical

Resources by UC Davis require no further management.

If the discovered resource is found to be eligible for the CRHR, avoidance is the

preferred mitigation measure. If avoidance is not possible, however, alternative

mitigation measures for a prehistoric archaeological site that is California Register

eligible under Criterion 4 for its scientific research value may include detailed

recording, excavation, detailed analysis, and/or further research depending on the

nature and type of the resource to recover the important scientific value residing in the

site. Native American monitors will be included at their discretion and by scheduled

appointment during archaeological data recovery fieldwork activities. Excavated

materials would be curated at an appropriate facility, to be identified by the lead

agency. Data recovery would be implemented to reduce impacts to less than

significant levels per §15064.5 of State CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1c: Extended Archaeological Monitoring. Archaeological

monitoring of construction beyond the initial monitoring of utility trenching in the

Camp and Lodge Area will occur if and only if previously unidentified cultural

resources are discovered during the initial monitoring. If additional cultural resources

are discovered, those resources will be subject to the same procedures of evaluation

and data recovery mitigation if they are found to be CRHR eligible. These procedures

will reduce impacts to less than significant levels per §15064.5 of State CEQA

Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1d: Discovery of Human Remains. In the unlikely event that human

remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, all work within a 30

meter vicinity of the find will be halted immediately, and UC Davis and the Nevada

County Coroner will be notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American,

the Native American Heritage Commission will be notified within 24 hours as required

by Public Resources Code §5097.94 and §5097.98. The Native American Heritage

Commission will notify the designated Most Likely Descendant(s), who will in turn

provide recommendations for the treatment of the remains within 48 hours of being

granted access to the find.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1e: Construction Personnel Training. Construction supervisory

personnel will be notified of the general existence of cultural resources within the

Crystal Lake property and construction personnel will be required to keep equipment

and activities within specified construction areas only. Prior to construction activities,

a qualified archeologist will conduct an awareness and identification training for

construction personnel to stress the importance of preserving and avoiding impacts to

prehistoric archaeological resources, and train those personnel on the identification of

archaeological materials so that they may recognize previously unidentified

archaeological materials if they are unearthed during construction and notify UC Davis

and its designated professional archaeologist.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from CUL-1 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact CUL-2: Impacts from construction activities at identified historic period sites have the

potential to impact historic period archaeological resources (Significant; Less


Mitigation Measure CUL-2a: Exclusion Barrier. An exclusion barrier (e.g., temporary, four-foot tall,

orange plastic mesh barrier fencing) will be installed in a north-south direction from

the south edge of Crystal Lake Road near the dam to the north to the Crystal Lake

property boundary. This exclusion barrier will clearly alert and exclude all

construction personnel from areas east of the Camp and Lodge Area, prohibiting access

by both equipment and personnel. This exclusion barrier will be inspected by

archaeologists to ensure that all cultural materials are avoided and excluded from

construction areas. The exclusion barrier will include signs that identify all areas

outside the barrier as prohibited from access, except for emergency access/evacuation.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2b: Mapping of Construction Exclusion Areas. All exclusion zones for cultural

resources within the project site will be shown on construction maps that alert

construction personnel that these areas are exclusion zones that may not be breached or

accessed except during emergencies. Vegetation management can occur if an on-site

archaeologist monitoring the proposed activity determines that the activities would

occur outside of the cultural resources site.


Petroglyph and Other Non-Construction Areas

Impact CUL-3: Impacts from construction activities have the potential to impact CRHR

eligible Native American petroglyph sites (Significant; Less than Significant

with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure CUL-3a: Exclusion During Construction. An extension of the exclusion barrier

shall be installed along the south edge of Crystal Lake Road as it traverses the north

side of Crystal Lake. This extension will join the exclusion barrier as it crosses the road

at the east edge of the Camp and Lodge Area (see Mitigation Measure CUL-2a). The

barrier will be installed to clearly alert and exclude construction personnel from all

petroglyph/archaeological site areas. The exclusion barrier along the south edge of

Crystal Lake Road will extend west to the southern turn in the road and thence be

installed along the east edge of Crystal Lake Road to the southern property boundary.

This barrier will exclude construction equipment and personnel from all petroglyph

and prehistoric archaeological sites, as well as CRHR eligible historic era archaeological

sites within the Crystal Lake property for the duration of construction. The exclusion

barrier in total will extend approximately 1000 meters. This exclusion barrier will be

inspected by archaeologists to ensure that all cultural materials are avoided and

excluded from construction areas. The exclusion barrier will include signs that identify

all areas outside the barrier as prohibited from access. Vegetation management can

occur if an on-site archaeologist monitoring the proposed activity determines that the

activities would occur outside of the cultural resources site.


Submerged Area within Crystal Lake

Impact CUL-4: Impacts of construction within Crystal Lake on previously unidentified

cultural resources (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure CUL-4a: Cultural Resource Survey. When Crystal Lake is drawn down for the

construction of a recreational beach, UC Davis will retain the services of a qualified

professional archaeologist to conduct an intensive pedestrian survey of the exposed

lake bottom in search of previously unknown prehistoric archaeological resources.

Native American monitors will be included at their discretion and by scheduled

appointment during cultural resource survey fieldwork activities.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4b: Prehistoric Cultural Resource Evaluation and Data Recovery. If

previously unknown prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during the

cultural resources survey of the exposed lake bottom, UC Davis will retain the services

of a qualified professional archaeologist to determine if the resource(s) qualify as

CRHR eligible in a manner consistent with Mitigation Measure CUL-1a. Native

American monitors will be included at their discretion and by scheduled appointment

during archaeological evaluation fieldwork activities.

If the discovered resource is found to be eligible for the CRHR, avoidance is the

preferred mitigation measure. If avoidance is not possible, alternative mitigation

measures for a prehistoric archaeological site that is California Register eligible under

Criterion 4 for its scientific research value may include detailed recording, excavation,

and detailed analysis and/or further research, depending on the nature and type of the

resource to recover the important scientific value residing in the site. Native American

monitors will be included at their discretion and by scheduled appointment during

archaeological data recovery fieldwork activities. Excavated materials would be

curated at an appropriate facility, to be identified by the lead agency. Data recovery

would be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant levels per §15064.5 of

State CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4c: Protection of CRHR Eligible Sites. Any and all portions of prehistoric

archaeological sites and features found in the draw down portion of Crystal Lake for

which avoidance is possible will be protected by exclusion barriers, signing, and

informing construction supervisory personnel of the need for protection during

construction of the recreational beach. This exclusion barrier will be installed by

archaeologists to ensure that all cultural materials are avoided and excluded from

construction areas. Protection measures will reduce impacts to less than significant

levels per §15064.5 of State CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4d: Modify Exclusion Barrier. A segment of the continuous exclusion barrier

that prohibits access to all property south and east of Crystal Lake Road, as described

in Mitigation Measures CUL-3a, will be modified to allow access by construction

personnel and equipment for the limited areas subject to the development of a

recreational beach. The exclusion barrier will be modified so that exclusion remains for

areas west and east of Crystal Lake that are not subject to beach development.


Operation-Related Impacts

Impacts and mitigation measures related to potential impacts resulting from the operation of the Crystal

Lake Alumni Camp and event are described below.

Petroglyph and Other Native American Archaeological Sites

Impact CUL-5: Impacts from increased visitation during camp operation on petroglyph sites


Mitigation Measure CUL-5a Cultural Resources Management Plan. UC Davis will develop and

implement a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP) to ensure the long-term

monitoring and protection of Native American petroglyph elements and other Native

American archaeological deposits. The CRMP will provide specific detail to a variety of

monitoring and protective measures that will include the following key elements.

i. Public exclusion from all petroglyph and other archaeological sites until

the CRMP is completed and implemented. Temporary exclusion barriers

(e.g., temporary, four-foot tall, orange plastic mesh barrier fencing)

installed for exclusion of construction personnel and equipment will

remain in place until the CRMP is developed and executed.

ii. A key element of the CRMP will be a plan for prohibiting direct contact

with petroglyphs at easily accessible and visible petroglyph site P-29-

2152. Access will be controlled by the development and installation of

permanent barriers that allow viewing of the petroglyphs without direct

contact (further described in the educational program provision, below).

iii. Restricted access to petroglyph site P-29-2152 by swimmers, canoers, and

kayakers on Crystal Lake.

iv. Collection of initial baseline documentation on the present condition of

petroglyphs and Native American archaeological deposits. Baseline

documentation, including high-resolution photography, will allow

repeat photographs (on an annual basis) to gauge the condition and

threats to these resources.

v. Surface collection of artifacts at Native American sites P-29-2152 and P-

29-1373. The CRMP will describe a program of systematic surface

collection to record and collect artifacts visible on the surface of these

two sites to prevent unauthorized artifact collection by visitors. The

CRMP will describe the appropriate disposition of surface collected

artifacts.

vi. The CRMP will include a plan for incorporating Native American

archaeological sites into the educational program for visitors.

Educational information and media will be enhanced by the collection of

additional data on traditional Native American use of the Crystal Lake

property and general region. UC Davis will acquire these data by

sponsoring the following:

o Native American Survey. UC Davis will sponsor a visit to the

Crystal Lake property by knowledgeable Native Americans from

tribal organizations whose members are ancestral to the project area

(Maidu, Konkow, Miwok, Washoe). A Native American Survey may

identify locations and resource areas used by ancestral groups that

may not have an archaeological manifestation.

o Oral History and Ethnographic Research. Additional information on

Native American use of the area will be obtained by UC Davis

sponsorship of ethnographic research, including (if possible) oral

histories from knowledgeable individuals with ties to the project

area.

o Permanent physical barriers will be installed to protect the

petroglyphs at Site P-29-2152. The barriers will be designed to be

compatible with the environment and nature of Native American

use of the area. These barriers will prevent visitors from walking on

accessible petroglyphs while maintaining the ability for visitors to

view and appreciate the petroglyphs, consistent with the educational

objectives of the camp and environmental education center.

o Interpretive Media. Information obtained from existing regional

archaeological studies, ethnographic research, oral history, and

Native American Survey will be used to develop interpretive

information for visitors to the UC Davis Crystal Lake Alumni Camp.

The CRMP will describe the nature of interpretive media, which may

include some combination of the following: signage at petroglyph

site P-29-2152; brochures; photographs displayed at the Lodge;

archaeological materials collected from the surfaces of P-29-2152 and

P-29-1373 securely displayed at the lodge and/or used in interpretive

lectures; and lectures and guided tours by docents.

vii. Long-Term Monitoring. The CRMP will describe a program of monitoring the

condition of Native American archaeological sites to determine whether visitor

impacts occur. If impacts resulting from operation of the facility are

documented, additional protective and/or treatment measures will be

implemented. The monitoring program will include the following elements:

o Annual photo-monitoring to provide comparative data on the

condition of the petroglyph elements and other Native American

archaeological deposits. The CRMP will identify specific photo-

monitoring stations, aspects, time of year, lighting conditions, and

any special filters or treatment of digital images to enhance

petroglyph images.

o Annual visual inspection of archaeological site features and surfaces

for signs of vandalism and unauthorized digging or collection of

artifacts.

o A description of further treatment options should operation-related

impacts be observed. Such options may include additional exclusion

barriers to petroglyph sites, electronic monitoring devices (e.g., trail

cameras), mapping and additional surface collection of artifacts

threatened by unauthorized collection, archaeological excavation,

and placement of ground cover that obscures surface archaeological

evidence.


Impact CUL-6: Impacts from increased visitation during camp operation on historic era

railroad work camp (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure CUL-6a. Annual Monitoring. Protocols for the annual monitoring of Site P-29-523

will be included and coordinated with the CRMP for Native American archaeological

resources. Qualified Professional Archaeologists will monitor the site for evidence of

unauthorized artifact collection and vandalism.

Mitigation Measure CUL-6b. Data Recovery. If unauthorized artifact collecting and/or vandalism is

documented by systematic annual monitoring, UC Davis will sponsor a program of

data recovery at the site by professional historical archaeologists. Archaeological

materials will be mapped and systematically collected for study and reporting. A

discard policy will be developed for common historical materials after they are

inventoried. Historical materials that are unique, have ongoing research value, or

public interpretive value will be curated at an appropriate facility identified by UC

Davis. Data recovery would be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant

levels per §15064.5 of State CEQA Guidelines.


Impact CUL-7: The proposed project will create new sources of light and glare that has the

potential to reduce visibility of the night sky for the study of possible ethno-

astronomical relationships.

Mitigation Measure CUL-7. Lighting Control. Section 4.3 of this EIR addresses visual impacts of the

project, including night-time lighting. Mitigation measures (AES-4a-c) described in

Section 4.3 include: building materials that are textured, non-reflective exterior

surfaces, dark colors, and non-reflective (non-mirrored) glass; installation of outdoor

directional lighting with shielded and cut-off type light fixtures to minimize glare and

prohibit upward directed lighting; extinguishing outdoor lights when not in use; and

use of motion sensors and bi-level lighting fixtures to minimize light use. These

measures will reduce impacts to less than significant levels per §15064.5 of State CEQA

Guidelines.


Cumulative Impact CUL-1: Development of the proposed project would make a cumulatively

considerable contribution to cumulative damage to and loss of the resource

base of unique archaeological and historical resources (including

archaeological sites and historic buildings and structures) in Nevada and

Placer Counties (Significant; Significant and Unavoidable)

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from Cumulative Impact CUL-1 would be significant and

unavoidable.


GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Impact GEO-1: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including

the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake

fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning

Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial

evidence of a known fault (No Impact)


Impact GEO-2: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including

the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking;

seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; and landslides


Mitigation Measure GEO-2: Incorporate findings and recommendations from the site-specific

geotechnical investigation to mitigate any effects caused by strong seismic

ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, and expansive soils

A site-specific, design-level geotechnical investigation will be conducted during the

design phase for the project. This investigation will be conducted by a licensed

geotechnical engineer and include a seismic evaluation of ground acceleration under the

design event, as well as relevant soil conditions at the site (including the potential for soil

expansion). Engineered fill material and placement, as well as slope configuration,

grading recommendations, and erosion control procedures will be included in the

investigation. Geotechnical recommendations will subsequently be incorporated into the

foundation and building design.

Significance after Mitigation: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, which would require

implementation of the recommendations of a geotechnical investigation, impacts related to strong seismic

ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact GEO-3: Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (Less than Significant)


Impact GEO-4: Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become

unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite

landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse (Significant;


Mitigation Measure GEO-2: Incorporate findings and recommendations from the site-specific

geotechnical investigation to mitigate potential effects caused by strong

seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, and expansive soils

Significance after Mitigation: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, which would require

implementation of the recommendations of a geotechnical investigation, impacts related to unstable

geologic units and associated hazards would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact GEO-5: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the 2013 CBSC,

creating substantial risks to life or property (Less than Significant)


Impact GEO-6: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or

alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not

available for the disposal of wastewater (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact GEO-1: Contribute to a cumulative impact on local geologic, soils, and seismic

conditions in the study area (Less than Significant)



GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Impact GHG-1: The proposed project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either

directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.



Impact GHG-2: The proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or

regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. (Less than

Significant)


GHG Cumulative Impacts

As the impact from a project’s GHG emissions is essentially a cumulative impact and program-level

emission reductions are necessary to consider the overall efforts to reduce GHG emissions. For this

reason, project-level impacts are considered one and the same as cumulative impacts. This approach is

consistent with the guidance provided by the SMAQMD and the analysis presented for GHG emissions.

The potential impact would be less than significant.


HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Impact HAZ-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the

routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials (Less than

Significant)


Impact HAZ-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through

reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of

hazardous materials into the environment (Less than Significant)


Impact HAZ-3: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,

substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school (No

Impact)


Impact HAZ-4: Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites

compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create

a significant hazard to the public or the environment (No Impact)


Impact HAZ-5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has

not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport,

result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area (No

Impact)


Impact HAZ-6: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard

for people residing or working in the project area (No Impact)


Impact HAZ-7: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency

response plan or emergency evacuation plan (Significant; Less than Significant

with Mitigation)

Mitigation Measure HAZ-7: The emergency evacuation plan for the proposed project will be

reviewed and approved through consultation with CalFire and will, at a

minimum, include a rapid emergency notification process, safety zones within

the project site, and fuel reduction efforts to ensure that the resulting emergency

plan is adequate.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from HAZ-7 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact HAZ-8: Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death

involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized

areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands (Significant; Less



Cumulative Impact HAZ-1: Cumulative effect of proposed project in relation to hazards and

wildland fires (Less than Significant)



HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Impact WQ-1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during

construction (Less than Significant)


Impact WQ-2: Substantially deplete groundwater supplies, resulting in a net deficit in

aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (Significant;



aquifer study to determine if adequate groundwater supplies are available for

the long-term needs of the project

A site-specific aquifer study will be completed by a registered hydrogeologist prior to

well installation on the property. The purpose of this study will be to estimate the water-

bearing capacity of the underlying aquifer; to estimate the groundwater recharge rates in

the study area and local vicinity (immediate Crystal Lake drainage basin and other

subbasins where development activities are proposed; and present groundwater

extraction recommendations for the proposed project. To the extent possible, the study

will determine the total volume of storage available within the underlying aquifer and

take other local neighboring drawdowns into account to create a groundwater budget.

Conclusions and recommendations from the site-specific aquifer study will be

incorporated into the final project plans for groundwater extraction.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from substantially depleting groundwater supplies, resulting

in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level would be reduced to a

less-than-significant level.

Impact WQ-3: Interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in

aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (Less than

Significant)


Impact WQ-4: 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 manner that

would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite (Significant;




A hydrologic and hydraulic analysis will be submitted for all proposed drainage

facilities. The analysis must include an introduction/background, location

map/description, catchment description/delineation, hydrologic analysis, hydraulic and

structural analysis, risk assessment/impacts discussion, unusual or special conditions,

conclusions, and technical appendices. The analysis will address the following topics.

A calculation of predevelopment runoff conditions and post-development runoff

scenarios using appropriate engineering methods. This analysis will evaluate potential

changes to runoff through specific design criteria, and account for increased surface

runoff.

An assessment of existing drainage facilities within the study area, and an inventory of

necessary upgrades, replacements, redesigns, and/or rehabilitation, including the sizing

of onsite stormwater detention features and pump stations.

A description of the proposed maintenance program for the onsite drainage system.

Standards for drainage systems to be installed on a project/parcel-specific basis.

Proposed design measures to ensure structures are not located within intermittent creek

areas.

Water quality treatment, infiltration, and erosion control options for the development.

Drainage systems will be designed on a site-specific basis in accordance with the findings

of the analysis. As a performance standard, measures to be implemented will provide for

no net increase in peak stormwater discharge relative to current conditions to ensure that

100-year flooding and its potential impacts are maintained at or below current levels and

that people and structures are not exposed to additional flood risk. Water quality

treatment options, such as vegetated swales, for the development will be fully evaluated

and clearly described. These measures will be incorporated to ensure the proposed

project’s effect on drainage patterns would not cause or exacerbate the rate of

sedimentation or siltation in a manner that would adversely affect the function of natural

onsite or offsite drainages, streams, or creeks.

County Comprehensive Site Development Standards will also be reviewed and

incorporated, where necessary.

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from substantially altering the existing drainage pattern of the

site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would

result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact WQ-5: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 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 that would result in

flooding onsite or offsite (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)



Significance after Mitigation: The impact from substantially altering the existing drainage pattern 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 that would result in flooding onsite or offsite would be

reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact WQ-6: Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or

planned stormwater drainage systems (Significant; Less than Significant with

Mitigation)



Significance after Mitigation: The impact from creating or contributing runoff water that would exceed

the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional

sources of polluted runoff would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact WQ-7: Create or contribute runoff water that would provide substantial additional

sources of polluted runoff or create conditions that would pose a hazard to

existing groundwater resources (Less than Significant)


Impact WQ-8: Otherwise substantially degrade water quality (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Avoid, minimize, and/or compensate for project impacts on riparian

habitat (described in Section 4.7, Terrestrial Biological Resources).

Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Avoid, minimize, and/or compensate for loss of waters and wetlands

(described in Section 4.7, Terrestrial Biological Resources).

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from otherwise substantially degrading water quality would

be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact WQ-9: Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal

Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard

delineation map (No Impact)


Impact WQ-10: Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or

redirect floodflows (No Impact)


Impact WQ-11: Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death

involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or

dam (No Impact)


Impact WQ-12: Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow (Less than

Significant)


Cumulative Impact WQ-1: Contribute to a cumulative effect on surface and groundwater quality and

hydrology as a result of the proposed project (Less than Significant)



LAND USE AND PLANNING

Impact LU-1: Physically divide an established community (Significant; Significant and

Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measure LU-1: With approval of the landowner, UC Davis or the Cal Aggie Alumni

Association would purchase the approximately 10-acre Snowflower, Inc.

Raccoon Camp. The Snowflower, Inc. organization could then move from the

site to use existing sites at other camp areas or could develop new camp sites.

None of the potential relocation sites would be within 300 feet of the Crystal

Lake Road.

Significance after Mitigation: If implemented, the impact from LU-1 would be reduced to a less-than-

significant level because the north and south areas used by Snowflower, Inc. Raccoon members would no

longer be utilized. If not implemented, the impact from LU-1 would be significant and unavoidable

because the Snowflower, Inc. Raccoon south camp sites would be divided from the open area north of

Crystal Lake Road.

Impact LU-2: Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency

with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general

plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the

purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect. (Significant; Less

than Significant)

Mitigation Measure LU-2: Prior to proceeding with the project, implement mitigation AG-1

(Comply with timber harvest and timber conversion requirements of CalFire to

eliminate the conflict with an adopted regulation).

Significance after Mitigation: The impact from LU-2 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact LU-3: Conflict with existing and future adjacent land uses (Significant; Significant

and Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measure LU-3: Implement mitigation LU-1 (Purchase adjacent property to eliminate

land use impacts on nearby campers.)

Significance after Mitigation: If mitigation LU-1 is implemented, the impact from impact LU-3 would be

reduced to a less-than-significant level. If mitigation LU-1 is not implemented, the impact from impact

LU-3 would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact LU-4: Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation program or natural

community conservation plan (No impact)


Cumulative Impact LAN-1: The proposed project, together with other regional growth and

planning efforts, would not result in development that would conflict with

any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with

jurisdiction over the project. (Less than Significant)



MINERAL RESOURCES

Impact MIN-1: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of

value to the region and the residents of the State (Less than Significant)


Impact MIN-2: Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource

recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use

plan. (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact MIN-1 Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that

would be of value to the region and the residents of the State (Level of

Significance)



NOISE

Impact NOI-1: Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in

a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other

agencies (Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation or Significant and

Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Restrict vehicle speeds along Crystal Lake Road to 5 mph by posting of

speed limit signs and implementing other traffic control features such as speed

bumps and limits on when facility users can access the alumni camp

UC Davis will post signs limiting speeds to 5 mph, install speed bumps, and prohibit users of the facility

from accessing the project site between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:30 a.m.

Mitigation Measure LU-1: Purchase Snowflower Raccoon Camp

This mitigation measure is described in Section 4.13, Land Use and Planning.

Significance after Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce operational

noise from vehicle traffic entering the project site and would prohibit nighttime access to the project site

by facility users. Implementation of Mitigation Measure LU-1, as described in Section 4.13, Land Use and

Planning, would reduce operational noise from vehicle traffic by moving the noise sensitive land use

(Snowflower Inc. Campground) about 300 feet further away from the roadway.

Implementation of both Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and LU-1 would reduce this impact to a less-than-

significant level. If Mitigation Measure LU-1 cannot be implemented, and only Mitigation Measure NOI-1

can be implemented, this impact would be significant and unavoidable because operational project traffic

would remain in close proximity to the campground and could potentially exceed the 50 dBA evening

noise standard.

Impact NOI-2: Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or

groundborne noise levels (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Impact NOI-3: Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the

project vicinity above levels existing without the proposed project (Significant

and Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Restrict vehicle speeds along Crystal Lake Road to 5 mph by posting of

speed limit signs and implementing other traffic control features such as speed bumps and limits on

when facility users can access the alumni camp. This mitigation measure is described under Impact NOI-

1.

Mitigation Measure NOI-3: Prohibit usage of the project amphitheater and event center between the

hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. UC Davis will prohibit use of the amphitheater

and event center between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Mitigation Measure LU-1: Purchase Snowflower Raccoon Camp. This mitigation measure is described in

Section 4.13, Land Use and Planning.

Significance after Mitigation: As described previously for Impact NOI-1, implementation of Mitigation

Measures NOI-1 and LU-1 would reduce operational noise from vehicle traffic entering the Project site,

and reduce the level of effect for Impact NOI-3; however, noise levels would still increase from the

current ambient conditions by more than 3 dB, resulting in a substantial permanent increase in noise.

Impacts from traffic noise would remain significant.

As Mitigation Measures NOI-1, NOI-3, and LU-1 would not reduce operational noise impacts to less-

than-significant levels, and a substantial permanent increase in noise would still result, noise impacts

from operation of the proposed project would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact NOI-4: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels

in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Significant

and Unavoidable)

Mitigation Measure NOI-4a: The construction contractor will employ noise-reducing construction

practices to reduce construction noise

UC Davis will require the construction contractor to employ noise-reducing construction

practices. Measures that can be used to limit noise include, but are not limited to, those

listed below.

Locating equipment as far as feasible from noise sensitive uses.

Requiring that all construction equipment powered by gasoline or diesel engines have

sound-control devices that are at least as effective as those originally provided by the

manufacturer and that all equipment be operated and maintained to minimize noise

generation.

Not idling inactive construction equipment for prolonged periods (i.e., more than 2

minutes).

Prohibiting gasoline or diesel engines from having unmuffled exhaust.

Scheduling construction activities and material hauling that may affect traffic flow to off-

peak hours and using routes that would affect the fewest number of people.

Using noise-reducing enclosures around noise-generating equipment.

Constructing temporary barriers between noise sources and noise-sensitive land uses or

taking advantage of existing barrier features (terrain, structures) to block sound

transmission.

Mitigation Measure NOI-4b: Restrict noise-generating construction work to only take place between

the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and non-holidays

UC Davis will require the construction contractor to limit noise-generating construction

to the hours between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and non-holidays. No noise-

generating construction activity will be allowed on weekends and holidays between

Memorial Day and Labor Day.

Significance after Mitigation:

Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-4a would reduce construction noise by ensuring that all

feasible measures to reduce excessive construction noise are implemented; even with implementation of

many noise-reducing construction practices, construction noise will result in a substantial temporary

increase in noise near noise-sensitive land uses. This impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Impact NOI-5: Be located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not

been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport and

expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels


AND

Impact NOI-6: Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or

working in the project area to excessive noise levels (Less than Significant)

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.


POPULATION AND HOUSING

Impact POP-1: Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (for example,

by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through

extension of roads or other infrastructure) (Less than Significant)


Impact POP-1: Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the

construction of replacement housing elsewhere (No impact)


Impact POP-1: Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of

replacement housing elsewhere (No impact)


Cumulative Impact POP-1: Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (for

example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,

through extension of roads or other infrastructure) (Less than Significant)



PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION

Impact PS-1: Adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically

altered governmental facilities for any governmental facilities, the

construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts (Less

than Significant)


Impact PS-2: Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other

recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility

would occur or be accelerated (No Impact)


Impact PS-3: Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of

recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the

environment (No Impact)



TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

Impact TRA-1: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing the

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 components of the circulation system, including

but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian

and bicycle paths, and mass transit (Less than Significant)


Impact TRA-2: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but

not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other

standards established by the county congestion management agency for

designated roads or highways (No Impact)


Impact TRA-3: Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic

levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks (Level of

Significance)


Impact TRA-4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or

dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) (Less

than Significant)


Impact TRA-5: Result in inadequate emergency access (Less than Significant)


Impact TRA-6: Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative

transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact TRA-1: Contribute to cumulatively considerable transportation/traffic effects




UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Impact UTIL-1: Exceed the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s wastewater treatment

requirements (No Impact)


Impact UTIL-2: Require or result in the construction or expansion of water or wastewater

treatment facilities, which would cause significant environmental effects (Less

than Significant)


Impact UTIL-3: Require or result in the construction or expansion of storm water drainage

facilities, which could cause significant environmental effects (Less than

Significant)


Impact UTIL-4: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing

entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed (Less

than Significant)


Impact UTIL-5: Exceed available wastewater treatment capacity (Less than Significant)


Impact UTIL-6: Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the

project’s solid waste disposal needs (Less than Significant)


Impact UTIL-7: Comply with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations

related to solid waste (Less than Significant)


Impact UTIL-8: Require or result in the construction or expansion of electrical or natural gas

facilities which would cause significant environmental impacts (Less than

Significant)


Impact UTIL-9: Result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of energy (Less than

Significant)


Impact UTIL-10: Place a significant demand on regional energy supply or require provision of

substantial additional capacity (Less than Significant)


Cumulative Impact UTIL-11: Cumulative contribution to water, wastewater, stormwater, or solid

waste disposal capacity (Less than Significant)


UC Davis Crystal Lake Draft EIR

Table 2.0-1

Summary Comparison of Alternatives

Resource Topic Proposed Project

Alternative 1

Event Center

Only

Alternative 2

Smaller Alumni

Camp

Aesthetics S/LTS Reduced Reduced

Air Quality S/SU Reduced Reduced

Forestry S/LTS Reduced Comparable

Aquatic Resources S/LTS Reduced Comparable

Terrestrial Biological Resources S/LTS Reduced Comparable

Cultural Resources S/SU Reduced Comparable

Geology & Soils S/LTS Reduced Comparable

Greenhouse Gas Emissions LTS Reduced Reduced

Hazards and Hazardous Materials S/LTS Reduced Reduced

Hydrology & Water Quality S/LTS Reduced Comparable

Land Use S/SU Comparable Comparable

Mineral Resources LTS Comparable Comparable

Noise S/SU Reduced Comparable

Population and Housing LTS Reduced No Impact

Public Services & Recreation LTS Comparable Comparable

Traffic LTS Reduced Comparable

Utilities LTS Reduced Comparable

KEY

S Significant impact

PS Potentially significant impact

LTS Less than significant impact

S/LTS Significant/ Less than significant with mitigation

S/SU Significant/Significant and Unavoidable

NI No Impact

= Impact similar to proposed project

-- Impact less than proposed project

+ Impact greater than proposed project

Documents

CRYSTAL LAKE FAMILY ALUMNI AMP AND NVIRONMENTAL E C · TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1.0-Introduction 1.0-1 Section 2.0-Executive Summary 2.0-1 Section 3.0-Project Description 3.0-1