STAGECOACH VINEYARDS EROSION CONTROL …reports.analyticalcorp.net/stagecoach/IS/Stagecoach_IS_0806F-WEB.pdf · Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPA

JULY 2006

Lead Agency:

Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning

1195 Third Street, Suite 210Napa, CA 94559

AUGUST 2006

Lead Agency:



INITIAL STUDY

STAGECOACH VINEYARDS EROSION CONTROL PLAN APPLICATION NO.P06-0042-ECPA

AUGUST 2006

Lead Agency:



Prepared By:

Analytical Environmental Services2021 "N" Street, Suite 200

Sacramento, CA 95814

INITIAL STUDY

STAGECOACH VINEYARDS EROSION CONTROL PLAN APPLICATION NO.P06-0042-ECPA

AUGUST 2006

Lead Agency:



Prepared By:

Analytical Environmental Services2021 "N" Street, Suite 200

Sacramento, CA 95814

INITIAL STUDY

STAGECOACH VINEYARDS EROSION CONTROL PLANAPPLICATION NO.P06-0042-ECPA

Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study

i

Table of Contents Stagecoach Vineyards Erosion Control Plan Application No. P06-0042-ECPA

Section 1 Introduction and Summary ............................................................................................1-1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................1-1 CEQA Lead Agency..........................................................................................................1-1 Purpose of the Proposed Project........................................................................................1-2

Project Setting and Zoning ................................................................................................1-2 Summary............................................................................................................................1-3

Section 2 Project Description ..........................................................................................................2-1 Project Location.................................................................................................................2-1 Description of Proposed Project ........................................................................................2-1 Required Permits and Approvals.......................................................................................2-6 Public Involvement............................................................................................................2-7

Section 3 Environmental Checklist ................................................................................................3-1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .....................................................................3-3 Determination ....................................................................................................................3-3

Aesthetics ..........................................................................................................................3-4 Agricultural Resources ......................................................................................................3-5Air Quality.........................................................................................................................3-6 Biological Resources .........................................................................................................3-7Cultural Resources.............................................................................................................3-9Geology and Soils ...........................................................................................................3-11Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................3-14 Hydrology and Water Quality .........................................................................................3-16 Land Use and Planning....................................................................................................3-17 Mineral Resources ...........................................................................................................3-21Noise................................................................................................................................3-22 Population and Housing ..................................................................................................3-23 Public Services ................................................................................................................3-24Recreation........................................................................................................................3-25 Transportation/Traffic .....................................................................................................3-26Utilities and Service Systems ..........................................................................................3-27 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...............................................................................3-29

Section 4 References Cited ..............................................................................................................4-1

Table of Contents

Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPA August 2006 Initial Study

ii

Figures

Figure 1 Regional Location Map............................................................................................................2-2 Figure 2 Site and Vicinity Map ..............................................................................................................2-3 Figure 3 Aerial Photograph ....................................................................................................................2-4 Figure 4 Project Features........................................................................................................................2-5

Analytical Environmental Services 1-1 Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study

Section 1 Introduction and Summary

Introduction

Stagecoach Vineyards Erosion Control Plan Application (ECPA) #P06-0042-ECPA proposes to develop approximately 90 acres of new vineyard and associated vineyard avenues within 107 gross acres. Activities included in this development process include the removal of existing vegetation, cultivation, trenching for irrigation systems, installation of trellis systems, laying out vine rows, and installation and maintenance of erosion control measures. The new vineyard would primarily be planted as infill of isolated pockets within existing vineyard blocks.

Pursuant to Chapter 18.108 of the Napa County Code (Conservation Regulations), ECPAs are required for agricultural projects involving grading and earthmoving activities on slopes over 5 percent1. Napa County is responsible for approval of the ECPA pursuant to Chapter 18.108 of the Napa County Code. The ECPA was prepared in accordance with Chapter 18.108 of the Napa County Code by PPI Engineering on behalf of Stagecoach Vineyards. The project is designed to minimize impacts to water quality, biological resources, slope instability and other associated environmental effects in accordance with Chapter 18.108.0702 of the County Code.

A total of 541.2 acres of vineyard currently exist on the property. The following three ECPAs covered the installation of 541.5 acres of vineyard: #95024-ECPA prepared in 1995 for 51.5 acres, #95374-ECPA prepared in 1996 and modified in 1997 for 374 acres, and #96586-ECPA prepared in 1997 for 116 acres. The property parcel numbers include 032-030-010, 032-030-059, 032-030-060, 032-030-061, 032-030-062 and 032-540-001.

CEQA Lead Agency

The Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department is the CEQA Lead Agency and has prepared this Initial Study to provide agencies and the public with information about the proposed project’s potential impacts, both beneficial and adverse, on the local and regional environment. This

1 County Code 18.108.070 (B) states that no otherwise permitted earthmoving activity, grading, improvement, or construction of a structure shall commence within any erosion hazard area for an agricultural project on slopes over 5 percent. Erosion hazard area means those portions of parcels of land having slopes over 5 percent. 2 County Code 18.108.070 specifically notes that erosion control plans shall create the least potential for erosion; avoid leavingany portion of a disturbed site unprotected from erosion between September 15 and April 1; vegetation removal shall be limited to the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the project and, the project shall not adversely affect sensitive, rare, threatened, or endangered plants or animals, or their habitats; temporary erosion control measures shall be sufficient to stabilizethe soil; and all erosion control facilities shall be maintained in accordance with the approved erosion control plan.



document has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 as amended and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Administrative Code, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3.

Purpose of the Proposed Project

The primary purpose of the project proposed under Erosion Control Plan Application (ECPA) #P06-0042-ECPA is to develop an additional 90 acres of vineyard on the Stagecoach Vineyards property. The new vineyard is primarly designed as infill development of isolated pockets within existing vineyard on the property, leaving a larger, more contiguous portion of the property adjacent to Rector Creek undeveloped.

Project Setting and Zoning

The project site is part of the hilly to steep mountains located in the interior Northern California Coast Range between Rector Canyon and Sage Canyon in south-central Napa County. A number of northwesterly parallel mountain ridges and intervening valleys of varying widths characterize this area. The majority of vineyard areas to be developed lie on moderately sloping ground, which ranges from 10 to 25 percent slope. Approximately 1.5 acres within the interior of the proposed vineyard blocks have slopes greater than or equal to 30 percent. Elevations range from approximately 1,150 to 1,775 feet above mean sea level. Soils within the project boundary include Guenoc-Rock outcrop complex, 5 to 30 percent slopes, Hambright-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes, and Rock outcrop-Hambright complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes. The project site currently consists of existing vineyards, access roads, and undeveloped areas within rural Napa County and is zoned Agricultural Watershed. Characteristic vegetation communities occurring within this region include annual grassland, oak savannah, oak woodland, pine-oak woodland, chaparral, and riparian woodland. Chaparral habitat occurs on the property throughout the proposed vineyard areas, and in the majority of undeveloped areas within the Stagecoach Vineyards property. Common plant species within this habitat type include Eastwood’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa), whiteleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos manzanita), common chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), hollyleaf ceanothus (Ceanothuspurpureus), chaparral pea (Pickeringia montana), leather oak (Quercus durata), coffeeberry (Rhamnuscalifornica), and mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides). Aquatic habitats in the project region include seasonal and perennial drainages, seasonal wetland, wetland swales, groundwater seeps, and man-made reservoirs. The property contains several existing stream corridors. Within the project area, an isolated ephemeral drainage (172 linear feet) runs from north to south through the west side of the proposed Block 22.

Species observed in the surveyed and adjacent areas include: mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus),Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), fence lizard (Sceloporusoccidentalis), lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria), blue heron (Ardea herodias), western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), raven (Corvus corax), and California quail (Callipeplacalifornica). Special status species that may potentially occur in the project area include Small-



flowered calycadenia (Calycadenia micrantha ), Tiburon buckwheat (Eriogonum luteolum var.caninum), Napa western flax (Hesperolinon serpentinum), Sonoma beardtongue (Penstemonnewberryi var. sonomensis), green jewel flower (Streptanthus breweri var. hesperidis), hollyleaf ceanothus (Ceanothus purpureus), narrow-leaved daisy (Erigeron angustatus), two-carpellate western flax (Hesperolinon bicarpellatum), Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus).

Summary

This Initial Study has identified potentially significant impacts associated with the development of the proposed project, as well as effects determined not to be significant. Therefore, this Initial Study supports the finding that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be prepared. For those environmental issues checked “potentially significant impact” in Section 3, the EIR will analyze the potential impact and recommend mitigation measures.

Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study

2-1

Section 2 Project Description

This section describes the project location, project elements, required permits and approvals, and public involvement.

Project Location

The 1,130± acre Stagecoach Vineyards property is located in the Rector Reservoir Watershed between Rector Canyon and Sage Canyon in south-central Napa County, California. The site is located at 3265 Soda Canyon Road, Napa, near Yountville, within Township 7 North, Range 4 West, Sections 15, 16, and 17 on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Yountville, California topographic quadrangle map. Figure 1 shows a regional location map of the area. Figure 2identifies the site and vicinity of the Stagecoach Vineyards property. An aerial photograph of the watershed is provided as Figure 3, and the project features are shown in Figure 4.

Description of Proposed Project

The purpose of the Stagecoach Vineyards Erosion Control Plan Application (ECPA) #P06-0042-ECPA project is to develop approximately 90 acres of new infill vineyard development within 107 gross acres. For CEQA purposes, the project under consideration is as follows:

Earthmoving and grading activities on slopes greater than five percent associated with soil cultivation, installation and maintenance of drainage and erosion control features, and vineyard plantings. Correction of several existing erosion/sediment problems, including: reconstruction of a rock line diversion ditch and rock berm near the lower portion of proposed Block E3, and upon plan approval, a maintenance program would be implemented for graveling avenues that may be eroding and/or delivering sediment into the stream channel network. Locations, specifications, and timelines for this work would be developed in conjunction with project specialists and Napa County Resource Conservation District personnel prior to start of construction.Installing straw wattles by September 1 of the year of construction and temporary erosion control measures as needed. Constructing an outsloped vineyard avenue between proposed vineyard Blocks 15 and 16 and two infield level spreaders in Block 16.

Napa

Yolo

Solano

SonomaSonoma

St. HelenaSt. Helena

WintersWinters

YountvilleYountville

Fairfield SouthwestFairfield Southwest

Napa

Fairfield

Vacaville

80

29

121

16

128

12116

121

12

29

29

12

29

1212

1212

29

128

128

12

12

128

1616

12

128128

128

121

12

128

128

12

121

12

Silverado

23

25

Dry Creek

8th

87

128

1st

Air Base

85b

Lyon

TaborTravis

86a

85

16

21a

Oakville

Hagen

Big Ranch

Wal

ters

Trancas

Trini

ty

Hyde

Abernathy

Vichy

Buh

man

Coombsville

Fremont

Riv

era

Oak Knoll

Siusun Valley

Cuttings Wharf

3rd

128

Sage Canyon

NapaCounty

Yolo

SolanoCounty

SonomaCounty

LakeCounty

Lake Hennessy Rec AreaLake Hennessy Rec Area

Lake Berryessa

Lake Hennessy

Rector Reservoir

Lake Curry

SodaC

anyon

Stagecoach Vineyards Initial Study / 206533

Figure 1Regional Location Map

SOURCE: ESRI Data, 2005; AES 2006

PROJECTBOUNDARY

PROJECT SITENAPA COUNTY

SCALE

NORTH

0 2mi 4mi

SILVERADO

TRAIL

SODACA

NYON RD

ATLAS PEAK RD

RECTOR CREEK

STAGECOACH VINEYARDSPROPERTY


Figure 2Site and Vicinity

SOURCE: USGS "Yountville, CA" 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle,Portions of Sections 15/16/17, Township 7N, Range 4W, Mt. Diablo Baseline & Meridian; AES, 2006

NORTH

0 2000' 4000'

LEGEND

Creeks and Other Drainages

RECTOR RESERVOIR


Figure 3Aerial Photograph

SOURCE: AES, 2006

RECTOR CREEK

SODA CANYON RD

LEGEND

NORTH

0 1000’ 2000’

Napa County Parcels

Proposed Vineyard Areas

Stagecoach VineyardsProperty Boundary

RECTOR CREEK

PROPERTYBOUNDARY


Figure 4Project Features

SOURCE: PPI Engineering, 1/7/2006; AES, 2006

NORTH

0 400’ 800’

Proposed Vineyard Areas

Unnamed Intermittent Stream

Rector Creek

LEGEND

Property Boundary


Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study2-6

Repairing a gully in proposed Block 22. Rock and spoils from the vineyard development will be used to create an outsloped bench to be used as a turnaround area for farm equipment and to function as a level spreader. The gully will be constructed on the contour using a bulldozer and an excavator.Constructing a rock energy dissipator/slope protection along the southern portion of proposed Block GM6. Adding drop inlet and an additional storm drain to the existing drainage system in existing vineyard Block P3. Constructing a sediment retention rock wall along the southern portion of proposed Block N10.Constructing and repairing waterbars each fall, as needed, located a maximum of 100 feet apart on slopes greater than 15 percent, such that surface runoff is directed off of vineyard avenues into vegetated areas. Performing the final pass with tillage equipment across slopes to prevent channeling water downhill the first winter of development. Seeding all disturbed areas and avenues with a permanent no-till cover crop and straw mulch, which would be applied to all disturbed areas at a rate of 3,000 lbs/acre prior to September 1 of the year of construction. The permanent, no-till cover crop would be managed each year such that any areas that have less than 70 percent vegetation cover would be reseeded and mulched until adequate coverage is achieved. The existing vineyards were designed for a minimum 70 percent vegetative cover and most are currently managed such that cover is at least 80 percent. The cover crop in the northern most blocks (37.53 acres) and southwestern most block (2.57 acres) would be managed each year such that any areas that have less than 75 percent vegetation cover would be reseeded and mulched until adequate coverage is achieved. These blocks were identified as requiring a slightly greater vegetation cover to control erosion, based on Universal Soil Loss Equation calculations.Installation of wildlife exclusion fencing around the southern perimeter of vineyard areas adjacent to Rector Canyon. Rock brought up by ripping would be crushed and used or stored on-site. Two rock staging areas are proposed; one is located adjacent to the southern boundary of proposed Block 16 and the other is located southeast of proposed Block 22, as shown in Figure 4.Installation of irrigation piping. Vineyards would be irrigated from existing on-site wells.

Required Permits and Approvals

The Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department is the lead agency under CEQA with the primary authority for project approval. In addition, the following responsible and trustee agencies may have jurisdiction over some or all of the proposed project:


Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study2-7

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) – Section 404 Permit. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – Endangered Species Act Compliance. San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) – State Water Quality Certification and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit. California Dept of Fish and Game (CDFG) – California Endangered Species Act Compliance and Streambed Alteration Agreement approval. Napa County Resource Conservation District (RCD) – Approval of the technical adequacy of the ECPA. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) – Fire Official approval of Notification of Open Burning (5-401.2 Crop Replacement), for the burning of brush piles from clearing of existing vegetation for vineyard development.

Public Involvement

In accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines, this document is being circulated to local, State, and Federal agencies, and to interested organizations and individuals that may wish to comment on the proposed project. Written comments may be submitted to the following address:

County of Napa Napa County Office of Conservation, Development and Planning Department Attn: Carly Aubrey 1195 Third Street, SuiteRoom 210 Napa, CA 94559

Analytical Environmental Services 3-1 Stagecoach Vineyards P06-0042-ECPAAugust 2006 Initial Study

Section 3 Environmental Checklist

1. Project Title: Stagecoach Vineyards Erosion Control Plan Application No. P06-0042-ECPA

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: County of Napa Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning

Department 1195 Third Street, Suite 210 Napa, CA 94559

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Carly Aubrey, Planner III (707) 265-2325

4. Project Location: The 1,130± acre Stagecoach Vineyards property is located in the Rector Reservoir Watershed between Rector Canyon and Sage Canyon in south-central Napa County, California. The site is located at 3265 Soda Canyon Road, Napa, near the town of Yountville (Figure 1).

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Stagecoach Vineyards Ltd. Ptn., Stagecoach Vineyards Limited, Oakville Heights, LLC

3265 Soda Canyon Road Napa, CA 94558

6. General Plan Designation: Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS)

7. Zoning: Agricultural Watershed (AW)

8. Description of Project: Stagecoach Vineyards Erosion Control Plan Application (ECPA) #P06-0042-ECPA proposes to develop approximately 90 acres of new vineyard and associated vineyard avenues within 107 gross acres. Activities included in this development process include the removal of existing vegetation, cultivation, trenching for irrigation systems, installation of trellis systems, laying out vine rows, and installation and maintenance of erosion control measures. The new vineyard would primarily be planted as infill of isolated pockets within existing vineyard blocks.

No pipes or open channels are required for runoff control and no trees will be removed to accommodate the project. All USGS blue-line streams will be avoided and buffers will be maintained



between the waters and the vineyard development. Wildlife exclusion fencing is proposed around the southern perimeter of vineyard areas adjacent to Rector Canyon. Irrigation water would be provided by onsite groundwater wells. From the wells, water would be transferred to the vineyard through 6” pipes that step down to 2” pipes. Water is applied to vines from hoses carried by a trellis system through half-gallon emitters.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is part of the hilly to steep mountains located in the interior Northern California Coast Range between Rector Canyon and Sage Canyon in southern Napa County (Figure 1). A number of northwesterly parallel mountain ridges and intervening valleys of varying widths characterize this area. Characteristic vegetation communities occurring within this region include annual grassland, oak savannah, oak woodland, pine-oak woodland, chaparral, and riparian woodland. Aquatic habitats in the project region include seasonal and perennial drainages, seasonal wetland, wetland swales, groundwater seeps, and reservoirs. The project site currently consists of existing vineyards, agricultural structures and equipment, access roads, and open space areas. Stagecoach Vineyards is located in the Rector Creek watershed, which has a drainage area of approximately 10.5 square miles. The area drains to Rector Creek, a perennial stream, which flows to Rector Reservoir (Figure 2). Rector Reservoir supplies municipal water to the Town of Yountville and the State Veterans home. The watershed has been designated by Napa County as a Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainage, with the goal of protecting the drinking water supply within Rector Reservoir from sediment, turbidity, and pollution impacts.

10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required: See “Required Permits and Approvals” in Section 2.



Potentially Significant

Impact

Less Than Significant

With Mitigation

Incorporation

Less than Significant

Impact

NoImpact

1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of

the site and its surroundings?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Setting

The proposed project is located in rural Napa County and the aesthetic setting of the project area consists of moderate to steep hills, ridges, and small valleys supporting open space, agricultural lands, and rural residences. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) oversees the California Scenic Highway Program, which recognizes highways that feature natural landscapes (Caltrans, 1996). Napa County has a Viewshed Protection Program Ordinance intended to protect the scenic quality of the County, however agricultural activities are not subject to the ordinance (Napa County, 2004). There are no designated scenic viewsheds, scenic view corridors or State or County scenic highways within the vicinity of the project site.

Discussion of Impacts

a, b) The proposed project is not located on or near a scenic vista or within a State scenic highway. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

c) The proposed project would result in minor alterations to the visual character of the site by converting chaparral habitat to vineyards; however, the property is not visible from a public roadway or from off-site residences. The proposed project is considered agricultural in nature, located within a previously developed agricultural area, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. Local aesthetics would not be significantly impacted; therefore, potential impacts are considered less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.



d) Current and proposed agricultural operations on the property require some lighted nighttime activities in the spring and summer months. The proposed project would require four lighted tractors one night per week from April through July. No lighting would be required during the harvest period. As noted above, there are no public views of the property; therefore, no day or nighttime views would be adversely affected. The EIR will not discuss this issue.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation. Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of

Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a

Williamson Act contract?

c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?

Setting

Agriculture and agricultural production are prevalent land uses in Napa County. Fertile valley and foothill areas have been identified by Napa County as areas where agriculture is and should continue to be the predominant land use. Development of urban type uses is considered by Napa County to be detrimental to the continuance of agriculture and the maintenance of open space, which are economic and aesthetic attributes and assets of the County (Napa County, 1983).


a-c) The property is not mapped as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance under the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (Department of Conservation, 2006a). The property is also not under Williamson Act contract (Department of Conservation, 2006b). The proposed project involves the development of 90 acres of new vineyard



development and therefore would not convert agricultural land to non-agricultural use. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

3. AIR QUALITY. When available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air

quality plan?

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria

pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant

concentrations?

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Setting

The proposed project is located within a mountainous region of the Coast Ranges and is located within the San Francisco Bay Air Basin, falling under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Air quality in the project area is influenced by local emission sources, including vehicles traveling along local roadways and agricultural operations, and by pollutant transport from upwind areas. Air pollutants of concern in relation to the proposed project include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or smaller (PM10); these pollutants could be generated by land-clearing activities and operation of construction equipment.


a-c) Potentially significant air quality impacts associated with the proposed project are limited to those resulting from short-term construction activities. Construction-related emissions could include exhaust from construction equipment and fugitive dust from land clearing, earthmoving,



movement of vehicles, and wind erosion of exposed soil during construction of the proposed project. Brush piles from the clearing of vegetation at proposed vineyard blocks would be burned. Burning would occur on designated burn days in the spring and winter. The EIR will discuss the existing air quality conditions and address air quality impacts associated with the proposed project.

d, e) There is one employee residence located on the Stagecoach Vineyards property and scattered residences in the vicinity of property, including one residence within a quarter mile of the property. Given the scale of the proposed project and the existing rural and agricultural nature of the project area, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial additional pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. This impact is considered less than significant and the EIR will not discuss these issues.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through

habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or

other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected

wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native

resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting

biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat

Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?



Setting

Napa County is located within the Inner North Coast Range Mountains, which is a geographic subdivision of the larger California Floristic Province, and has a strong influence from the coastal environment (Hickman, 1993). The climate of the region is characterized by hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters; average precipitation is approximately 30 to 60 inches per year (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1997). The average annual temperature for the region is highly variable, ranging from 45-90degrees Fahrenheit. The region is in climate Zone 14 “Ocean Influenced Northern and Central California,” characterized as an inland area with ocean or cold air influence. The Rector Reservoir watershed contains approximately 6,769 acres of land as recorded in Napa County drainage maps on file with Napa County Conservation, Development, and Planning Department. Of this acreage, approximately 1,222 acres exists as vineyards, residential developments, and other associated developments. In addition to the approximately 107 acres of development proposed for this project, approximately 160 acres of vineyard have been recently approved (Artesa 01226-ECPA, 66 acres), or are proposed in pending erosion control plans (Caldwell Vineyard Conversion, #98581-EPCA, +36 acres; Gaskins Vineyard Conversion, #02257-EPCA, +10.4 acres; Costa Vineyard Conversion, #03020-EPCA, +15.6 acres; Cordes Vineyard Conversion, #03522-EPCA, +24 acres; Mansfield/Baker Vineyard Conversion, #04086-EPCA, +7.3 acres). The addition of these projects to existing vineyard development indicates that the total land developed to vineyard within the Rector Reservoir watershed will be approximately 1,500 acres in the foreseeable future (Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department, 2006).

Four vegetation community types occur within the Stagecoach Vineyards property boundary: riparian/oak woodland, ruderal/developed, chaparral and vineyard. Two of these community types occur within the project area: ruderal/developed and chaparral.

Description of Impacts

a-e) The EIR will discuss the potential for the proposed project to adversely effect:

Any listed species, or species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status;

Any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; and,

Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act.

The EIR will also discuss the potential for the proposed project to interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. The EIR will discuss any conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as the County’s Conservation Regulations.



f) No Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other Federal, State, or local plans are applicable to the parcels (NCCP, 2005). There would be no impact; therefore, the EIR will not address this issue.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a

historical resource as identified in Section 15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource

or site or unique geologic feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of

formal cemeteries?

Setting

A historical resource under CEQA consists of “Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, military, or cultural annals of California”. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources” (CRHR) (15064.5[a][3]).

The significance criteria for archaeological and historical sites are defined in the CRHR, and are found in the CEQA guidelines (15064.5). A resource must be significant at the local, State, or national level in accordance with one or more of the following four evaluation criteria:

1. It is associated with the events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States;

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction,

or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or



4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, a resource must be at least 50 years old and must possess integrity, which is defined as “the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance” (OHP, 1992:2). To retain integrity, a resource should have its original location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Resources that are significant, meet the age requirements, and possess integrity will generally be considered eligible for listing on the CRHR.


a-d) The EIR will discuss the existing cultural resources in the project area based on a site reconnaissance visit, records search, and literature review. Five historic-period resources and prehistoric isolates were previously recorded on the property. A May 2006 Cultural Resources Study, undertaken by AES, did not identify any new prehistoric or historic-period cultural resources. Several of the historic-period resources were identified in the field and determined to be located outside the project area. However, there is always the possibility that subsurface archaeological deposits or human remains may exist within the proposed vineyard areas. The EIR will discuss any potential project impacts and mitigation measures.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:

a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,

including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

iv) Landslides?

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

c) Be located on strata or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the

Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic

tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?

Setting

The proposed project is part of the hilly to steep mountains of the California Coast Range. A number of northwesterly parallel mountain ridges and intervening valleys of varying widths characterize this area. The majority of vineyard areas to be developed lie on moderately sloping ground, which ranges from 10 to 25 percent slope. Approximately 1.5 acres within the interior of the proposed vineyard blocks have slopes greater than or equal to 30 percent. Elevations range from approximately 1,150 to 1,775 feet above mean sea level. Soils within the project boundary include Guenoc-Rock outcrop complex, 5 to 30 percent slopes, Hambright-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes, and Rock outcrop-Hambright complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes. The proposed project is located within Rector Creek watershed, which has been designated as a Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainage by Napa County to protect the drinking water supply within Rector Reservoir. Potential impacts to water quality in Rector Reservoir are of concern from sedimentation/erosion, turbidity and other pollution.




a-i) The project site could potentially experience strong ground shaking from a number of regional active earthquake faults, and based on historical earthquake records for the project area. Three active faults exist within Napa County. The West Napa fault is the closest, located approximately 4.5 miles from the project site. The project site does not lie within an Earthquake Fault Hazard Rupture Zone designated by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1999). Therefore, the risk of ground rupture within the limits of the property is low. The proposed project involves earthmoving activities, but does not include construction of any new structures (e.g., houses) or other facilities (i.e., enclosed areas where people would be congregating) that would be subject to seismic forces, thereby exposing people to seismic hazards. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving fault rupture, would be less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

a-ii) As discussed under (a-i) above, the project site is located in a seismically active area. However, the proposed project does not include construction of any new structures or other facilities. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving ground shaking, would be less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

a-iii) Liquefaction is the rapid transformation of saturated, loose, unconsolidated, non-cohesive sediment (such as sand) to a fluid-like state because of earthquake ground shaking. Soils on the project site consist of loam to very stony loam. According to Napa County’s GIS data (County of Napa, 2000), the project site is subject to very low liquefaction. As noted previously, the proposed project does not involve construction of any new structures or other facilities. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving liquefaction, would be less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

a-iv) Earthquake ground shaking can induce landslides, especially where unstable slopes exist because the ground shaking provides a mechanism for ground movement. Geologic and landslide mapping by Napa County identifies one large (3.77-acre) landslide deposit along the southwest boundary of the project site (County of Napa, 2002). Earthmoving activities associated with the proposed project would involve clearing, ripping, tilling and installation of irrigation lines in the proposed vineyard areas. The proposed project does not include construction of any new structures or other facilities. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides, would be less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.



b) Implementation of #P06-0042-ECPA would involve soil disturbance activities within the proposed vineyard areas. The existing natural vegetation would be replaced by vine rows and intervening avenues planted to a cover crop. The installation and maintenance of vineyards has the potential to cause excess erosion. The EIR will address this issue.

c) Geologic and landslide mapping by Napa County identifies one small linear landslide deposit and a portion of a large landside deposit along the project site (County of Napa, 2000). Installation of surface and subsurface drainage features with the implementation of #P06-0042-ECPA would reduce rather than increase the potential for future similar small landslide slips by preventing the concentration of runoff. Grading is not expected to create unstable slopes at the site. The Guenoc, Hambright and rock outcrop soils at the project site consist of loam, very stony loam, and very stony loam, respectively and, therefore, have minimal susceptibility to liquefaction. According to the County’s GIS data (County of Napa, 2000), the entire project site is subject to very low liquefaction. Installation of #P06-0042-ECPA would not increase the liquefaction potential at this site. Since liquefaction potential is very low, lateral spreading and subsidence would not be expected to occur. Earthmoving and grading associated with the project would involve clearing and ripping of the future vineyard areas. The amount of earthmoving and grading at the site would not produce the potential collapse of the existing bedrock. The EIR will not address these issues.

d) The proposed project does not include construction of any new structures or other facilities; therefore, the potential for the proposed project to pose substantial risk to life or property due to expansive soils would be less than significant. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

e) No septic tanks or wastewater disposal systems are proposed as part of the proposed project; therefore, this issue will not be discussed in the EIR.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment

through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

b) 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?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

h) 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?

Setting

Currently, the Stagecoach Vineyards property is being used for agricultural production. Wettable sulfur, herbicides, fungicides, diesel and gasoline fuels are stored on-site to service existing developed acres, and would continue to be stored with development of the proposed project. No pooling of hazardous liquids or contaminated soils was observed during site visits conducted by AES in November 2002 or June 2006. A search of Federal, State, and local hazardous materials databases also did not identify the presence of hazardous materials sites in the project area (Environmental Data Resources, Inc., 2002). A two-mile radius search from the project site was used to identify potential hazardous materials sites. Water quality and potential threats to public health and safety are important considerations as the project is located in Rector Reservoir watershed, a County-designated Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainage.




a, b) Project construction would require the use of potentially hazardous materials, such as fuels and oil. Project operation and maintenance would require the use and storage of pesticides and herbicides. These hazardous materials may have a potentially significant impact to the public and environment and will be discussed in the EIR.

c) The project site is not located near existing or proposed school sites. The nearest school is Yountville Elementary School located approximately four miles from the project site (Great Schools, 2006). No impact would occur. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

d) The project site is not included on any list of reported hazardous materials sites. No impact would occur. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

e, f) The project site is not located in the vicinity of a public airport or private airstrip. The closest airport, Napa County Airport, is more than 10 miles from the project site. No impact would occur. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

g) The project site is located off Soda Canyon Road, a low-volume road. The main evacuation routes in Napa County are State Routes 12 and 29 (Napa County, 1983). The proposed project would not interfere with any existing emergency response plans or evacuation plans. No impact would occur. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

h) The property is not adjacent to urbanized areas, nor does the project propose the construction of residences; therefore, the project would not result in an increased exposure of people or structures to significant loss or injury involving wildland fires. During installation of #P06-0042-ECPA and the operation and maintenance of the vineyard, workers will be on-site. However, the conversion of approximately 107 acres to vineyards would not significantly change the existing setting making it more vulnerable to wildland fires. A benefit of the proposed project is that vineyard avenues would be constructed, which may provide access for firefighting equipment and personal. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and the EIR will not address this issue.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

8. HYDOROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge

requirements?

b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there should be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or

area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or

area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial flooding on- or off-site?

e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the

capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

g) 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?

h) Occur within a 100-year flood hazard area structure, which

would impede or redirect flood flows?

i) 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?

j) Cause inundation of seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

Setting

Napa County is divided into three watersheds: Napa River, Putah Creek/Lake Berryessa, and Suisun Creek. The project site lies within the Rector Reservoir Watershed, a sub-basin of the Napa River watershed, which drains all surface water to San Pablo Bay via the Napa River. The Rector Reservoir Watershed drains an area of approximately 11 square miles into Rector Reservoir, which has a capacity of 4,600 acre-feet (LAFCO, 2004). The largest groundwater basins in Napa County are the north Napa



Valley (NNVB) and Milliken-Sarco-Tulucay (Napa County, 2005). The project site lies within the NNVB. Irrigation water for the proposed project is entirely derived from groundwater-bearing formations. The proposed project is located within Rector Creek watershed, which has been designated as a Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainage by Napa County to protect the drinking water supply within Rector Reservoir. Potential impacts to water quality in Rector Reservoir are of concern from sedimentation/erosion, turbidity and other pollution.


a-f) The proposed project has the potential to significantly impact water quality from earthmoving activities which could contribute to erosion and sedimentation, and potential spills associated with hazardous material transport and use. The proposed project also has the potential to significantly impact water supply from groundwater extraction. These issues will be discussed in the EIR.

g-j) The proposed project does not involve the construction of housing or other structures for human habitation. The proposed project also is not located within a 100-year floodplain and would not place people or structures at risk from flooding (FEMA, 1980). Hazard from a tsunami is considered low because Napa County does not have any oceanfront land. USGS calculated that a 20-foot wave at the Golden Gate Bridge would be nonexistent by the time it reached Napa County (Napa County, 1983). Napa County has the potential for a seiche due to proximity to the San Pablo Bay, although the Napa County General Plan states that the “population areas are sufficiently elevated” to avoid inundation. The project site is located at an elevation that would not be effected by a tsunami or seiche. The proposed vineyards will be located on existing contours; no recontouring or terracing will occur that would trigger a mudflow. These issues will not be discussed in the EIR.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established community?

b) 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 an environmental effect?

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or

natural communities conservation plan?



Setting

Napa County General Plan

The project site lies within an area designated as Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space by the Napa County Land Use Plan. The Napa County General Plan describes the intent of the Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space designation as follows:

To provide areas where the predominant use is agriculturally oriented; where watershed areas, reservoirs, floodplain tributaries, geologic hazards, soil conditions and other constraints make the land relatively unstable for urban development; where urban development would adversely impact on all such uses; and where the protection of agriculture, watersheds, and floodplain tributaries from fire, pollution, and erosion is essential to the general health, safety and welfare (Napa County, 1983: 2-41).

General uses of the Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space designation provided by the General Plan consist of agriculture, processing of agricultural products, and single-family dwelling (Napa County, 1983: 2-41).

The Conservation and Open Space Element of the Napa County General Plan provides the following planning goal and applicable policies for agricultural lands:

Planning Goal: Maintain and enhance the agricultural environment of Napa County.

Applicable Conservation Policies:

Limit growth to minimize urban development on prime soils and reduce conflict with the agricultural operations and economy (Policy a).

Encourage reclaimed water use for vegetation enhancement, frost protection and irrigation to enhance agriculture and grazing (Policy b).

Protect trees and shrubs for wildlife habitat and aesthetic purposes and encourage alternate uses, such as wildlife and recreation, if feasible, without undue environmental damage when grazing is phased out (Policy d).

Require that existing significant vegetation be retained and incorporated into agricultural projects to reduce soil erosion and to retain wildlife habitat. When retention is found to be infeasible, replanting of native or adapted vegetation shall be required (Policy e).

Minimize pesticide and herbicide use and encourage research and use on integrated pest control methods such as cultural practices, biological control, host resistance and other factors (Policy g) (Napa County, 1983: 8-16 & 17).

Napa County Zoning Ordinance

The project site lies within an area zoned as an Agricultural Watershed (AW) District. The Napa County Zoning Ordinance describes the intent of the Agricultural Watershed designation as follows:



The AW district classification is intended to be applied in those areas of the county where the predominant use is agriculturally oriented, where watershed areas, reservoirs and floodplain tributaries are located, where development would adversely impact on all such uses, and where the protection of agriculture, watersheds and floodplain tributaries from fire, pollution and erosion is essential to the general health, safety and welfare (Napa County, 2004: Code Section 18.20.010).

Agricultural uses are allowed within an Agricultural Watershed district without a Use Permit.

Napa County Erosion Control Plans

Erosion Control Plans are required for earthmoving activity, grading, improvement, or construction of a structure on sites of 5 percent slope or greater. The Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department administers the ordinance and grants approvals. The Napa County Resource Conservation District reviews all erosion control plans for agriculture on slopes greater than 5 percent, and passes on its recommendations to the Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department (Napa County Resource Conservation District, 2002).

Napa County Stream Setbacks

Section 18.108.025 of the Napa County Conservation Regulations states that clearing of land for new agricultural uses is required to comply with designated stream setbacks which are based on slope, unless a use permit is obtained from Napa County, or unless an exemption in Section 18.108.050 applies. Setbacks are measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream as it exists at the time of replanting, redevelopment, or new agricultural activity.

Napa County Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainages

Section 18.108.027 of the Napa County Conservation Regulations sets regulations for watersheds designated as Sensitive Domestic Water Supply Drainages, for vegetation cover, winter-shut down, and drainage facilities. Vegetation cover requirements include maintaining minimum amounts of tree canopy cover, shrub, brush and associated annual and perennial herbaceous vegetation during earth-disturbing activities. All earth-disturbing activities shall be limited to the period of April 1st through September 1st of each year. No earth-disturbing activities other than installation of winterization measures shall take place during other times of the year. Concentration of runoff shall, wherever feasible, be avoided. Runoff shall instead be spread in small incremental doses into relatively flat buffer areas.



Napa County Slope Regulations

Section 18.108.060 of the Napa County Conservation Regulations states that no construction, improvement, grading, earthmoving activity or vegetation removal associated with the development or use of land shall take place on those parcels or portions thereof having a slope of 30 percent or greater, unless an exemption under Sections 18.108.050 or 18.108.055 apply, or unless an exception through the use permit process is granted pursuant to Section 18.108.040.

Napa County Erosion Hazard Areas

Sections 18.108.070 and 18.108.100 of the Napa County Conservation Regulations outline requirements in erosion hazard areas, including vegetation preservation and replacement.

Description of Impacts

a) The proposed project would not physically divide an established community. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

b) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations for the property. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR. Appropriate stream setbacks have been maintained on the property, and the proposed project does not propose modifications to the setbacks. Approximately 1.5 acres within the interior of the proposed vineyard blocks have slopes greater than or equal to 30 percent. The proposed project is not exempt from Napa County slope regulations pursuant to the Conservation Regulations; an exception would be obtained from the County with the approval of #P06-0042-ECPA. As noted in the Biological Resources section, there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans for the property or adjoining parcels. Any potential conflicts with applicable policies or regulations of the State Water Resources Control Board or the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board will be discussed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section. Any potential conflicts with applicable plans or policies of the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Napa County vegetation preservation requirements will be discussed in the Biological Resources section. Any potential conflicts with applicable plans and policies regarding air quality will be discussed in the Air Quality section.

c) No Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other Federal, State, or local plans are applicable to the parcels (NCCP, 2005). There would be no impact; therefore, the EIR will not address this issue.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource

classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

b) 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?

Setting

Mineral resources of concern generally include metals, industrial minerals (e.g. aggregate, sand and gravel), oil and gas, and geothermal resources that would be of value to the region and residents of the State.

The Napa County General Plan identifies mineral deposit lands within the County and provides conservation policies to identify and protect these resources. These conservation measures include ensuring the long-term production of Aggregate Resource Areas identified by the State of California by recognizing mineral information classified by State geologists, assisting in the management of land use which affects areas of statewide and regional significance, and emphasizing the conservation and development of identified mineral deposits. The Napa County General Plan does not identify any mineral resources of significance to the County, region, or State within the Stagecoach Vineyards property (Napa County, 1983: 8-22 to 8-25).


a, b) Mineral resources have not been identified within the project site (Napa County Baseline Data Report, Mines and Mineral Deposits, Figure 2-2, November 2005). Implementation of the proposed project would not adversely impact known mineral resources. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

11. NOISE. Would the project result in:

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess

of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne

vibration or groundborne noise levels?

c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise

levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where

such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the

project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Setting

One of the policies of the noise element in the Napa County General Plan states the need to:

“Inform prospective residents of agricultural-related noise and the County’s “Right to Farm” policy in each parcel map approved for locations in or adjacent to agricultural areas” (Napa County, 1983).

In addition, the Napa County Code (Section 8.16.090 E) states the exemptions to noise regulations:

“Agricultural operation. All mechanical devices, apparatus, or equipment associated with agricultural operations conducted on agricultural property” (Napa County, 2006).

Sensitive receptors on and adjacent to the project site include several residences.




a-d) The proposed project would result in seasonal and temporary noise generation related to construction and maintenance activities of the vineyard. At the project site, construction activities would require the use of heavy equipment. The proposed project would not result in increased operational noise sources beyond current levels. During operation, work is typically conducted within the hours of 7 A.M. and 4 P.M., Monday through Saturday. Limited nighttime work may occur one night a week during the months of April through July to apply sulfur on the vineyard. Wind machines would be used a few times a year for frost protection from the hours of 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. There is one employee residence located on the Stagecoach Vineyards property and scattered residences in the vicinity of the property, including one residence within a quarter mile of the property. Given the scale of the proposed project and the existing rural and agricultural nature of the project area, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial noise. Impacts would be less than significant. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

e, f) The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of a public airport or private airstrip, or within the vicinity of an airport land use plan. No impact would occur. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:

a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly

(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating

the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Setting

According to the 2005 Bay Area Census, the population in Napa County is estimated to be 134,100 (ABAG, 2005). Vineyard construction and operation of the proposed project would require workers; construction activities would require approximately 20 workers, and operation would also require



approximately 20 workers. Of the 20 workers, five would be equipment operators, which are currently staffed by the vineyard, and 15 would be laborers that would be hired through a labor contractor. The workers are assumed to be year-round residents since they would typically be required from 7 A.M. to 4 P.M. 6 days a week.


a) The proposed project does not involve the construction of new homes or businesses, and no new roads or infrastructure are proposed. The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly. The addition of 20 workers would not create a significant need for additional housing. The EIR will not discuss this issue, either as an individual impact or cumulatively.

b, c) There is one residence located on the project site and one residence within a quarter mile of the project site. No residences or people would be displaced by the proposed project; therefore, there is no impact. The EIR will not discuss this issue.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:

a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with

the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of these public services:

i) Fire protection?

ii) Police protection?

iii) Schools?

iv) Parks?

v) Other public facilities?

Setting

Public services include fire and police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities. The project area is located within unincorporated Napa County and the Napa County Sheriff’s Department provides



law enforcement services for this area. The Napa County Fire Department and the California Department of Forestry (CDF) provide fire protection services. Napa Valley Unified School District operates schools in the area.


a) As discussed in the Population and Housing section above, the proposed project would not result in substantial growth in the area that would require additional public services. The proposed project would not adversely impact the County’s ability to provide fire and police protection, or impact the maintenance of schools, parks, or other public facilities. No impact to public services would occur. The EIR will not discuss these issues either as individual impacts or cumulatively.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

14. RECREATION. Would the project:

a) 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?

b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Setting

The proposed project is located in rural Napa County and the project area is characterized primarily by open space, agricultural, and rural residential land uses. Public recreational facilities are not located in the general vicinity of the project site.


a, b) The proposed project would not result in substantial population growth or the associated increased use of recreational facilities, and does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The proposed project would also not adversely impact recreational opportunities or prohibit the maintenance of existing recreational opportunities. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:

a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to

the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?

b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service

standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

c) 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?

d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp

curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access?

f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?

g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

Setting

The Stagecoach Vineyards property is located off Soda Canyon Road in rural south-central Napa County. Soda Canyon Road is a two-lane road that dead-ends at a property neighboring Stagecoach Vineyards. The posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour and the road has some reduced-speed curves. The closest major road is Silverado Trail, located approximately 1.5 miles west of the western property boundary. Silverado Trail is a two-lane road with a posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour. Peak hour traffic volumes on Silverado Trail near Soda Canyon Road are 780 vehicles during the morning peak hours and 1,100 vehicles during the evening peak hours. Roads in the project vicinity are currently lightly traveled.


a, b) The proposed project would generate minimal new vehicle trips. Vineyard construction and operation of the proposed project would require workers; construction activities and operation would each require approximately 20 workers. Of the 20 workers, five would be equipment operators, which are currently staffed by the vineyard, and 15 would be new laborers.



Construction activities are anticipated to last approximately six months (equipment would stay on-site during this time) and vineyard operations would continue to occur seasonally. There would also be a minimal increase in grape truck trips during harvest, as compared to current conditions on the property with approximately 541 acres of existing vineyard. Trips generated during construction and vineyard operations would typically occur during non-peak hours. The proposed project would not generate a substantial or continuous increase in traffic. The EIR will not discuss potential traffic impacts.

c-g) The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns since the project does not intrude into air space. The proposed project would not increase hazards to a design feature and does not involve changes to Soda Canyon Road or Silverado Trail that would impede emergency access. The project site has adequate areas for parking. The project would not conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. The EIR will not discuss these issues.


Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:

a) Exceed water treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

b) Require or result in the construction of new water treatment

facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

c) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater

drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project

from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

e) Result in a determination by the water treatment provider,

which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to

accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?



Setting

The project site is not served by public water or wastewater services. Residences in the project area rely on private wells for domestic water supply and private septic systems for wastewater treatment. The closest landfill is the Clover Flat Landfill located on Silverado Trail near Calistoga in Napa County, approximately 17 miles northwest of the project site.


a, b) The proposed project would not exceed water treatment requirements or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

c) The proposed project would include the construction of an additional storm drain that would tie into the existing drainage system. Since any new drainage would be incorporated into the existing system, impacts would be considered less than significant. However, the EIR will address this new drainage, because it is part of the proposed project.

d) The proposed project would rely on groundwater from existing wells on the property to irrigate the proposed vineyard. Impacts to the groundwater supply will be discussed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section of the EIR. The proposed project would not require additional water supplies, such as connection to public water supply. A less than significant impact would occur. The EIR will not address this issue.

e) The proposed project does not require a wastewater system. No impact would occur. The EIR will not address this issue.

f) The proposed project would only generate a minimum amount of construction waste and solid waste, which would be generated by on-site workers. A less than significant impact is expected with regards to the landfill capacity in the area. During land preparation, cleared vegetation would be burned (the potential impacts of burning will be discussed in the Air Quality section of the EIR.) Vineyard waste (such as prunings) would similarly be disposed of on-site. The EIR will not discuss this issue.

g) The proposed project would not conflict with any statutes or regulations related to solid waste.No impact would occur. The EIR will not discuss this issue.




Impact


With Mitigation

Incorporation


Impact

NoImpact

17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.

a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the

environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but

cumulative considerable? (“Cumulative considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause

substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?


a, c) The EIR will discuss project impacts to the environment or human beings and provide mitigation measures if the impacts are significant.

b) The EIR will discuss the cumulative impacts resulting from the project in combination with any past projects, current projects and reasonably foreseeable projects in the project area.


Section 4 References Cited

ABAG, 2005. Census 2005 Data: Bay Area Regional Projections, Population for Napa County and Sonoma County. Association of Bay Area Governments.

Caltrans, 1996. Guidelines for the Official Designation of Scenic Highways. March 1996. Available online at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/shpg1.htm#top, accessed June 29, 2006.

List of Eligible and Officially Designated Routes. Available online at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/cahisys.htm, accessed June 29, 2006.

California Division of Mines and Geology (now California Geological Survey), 1999. Special Publication 42, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California. Available online at http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap/Map%5Findex/F4H.htm, accessed June 26, 2006.

County of Napa, 2000. Liquefaction (vector digital GIS data). Conservation, Development and Planning Department. January 1, 2000. Available online at http://gis.napa.ca.gov/giscatalog/catalog.asp, accessed June 26, 2006.

County of Napa, 2004. Viewshed Protection Program Application and Excerpts from the Viewshed Protection Ordinance. Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department. August 5, 2004. Available online at http://www.co.napa.ca.us/GOV/Departments/29000/Forms/viewshed.pdf, accessed June 29, 2006.

Department of Conservation, 2006a. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Available online at: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/fmmp/county_info_results.asp, accessed June 29, 2006.

Department of Conservation, 2006b. Williamson Act Napa County Map. Available online at: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/lca/index.htm, accessed June 29, 2006.

Great Schools Inc., 2006. GreatSchools.net: Elementary, middle and high school information for public, private and charter schools nationwide. Available online at: http://www.greatschools.net/modperl/go/CA, accessed August 4, 2006.

FEMA, 1980. Flood Insurance Rate Map. Napa County, California (Unincorporated Areas). Map Number 0602050 275A. Effective date February 1, 1980. Available online at: http://www.fema.gov, accessed June 26, 2006.

Section 4 References Cited


Hickman, J. C., editor, 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 1,400 pp.

Napa County, 1983. Napa County General Plan. June 7, 1983. Amended thru July 28, 1992. Available online at www.co.napa.ca.us/GOV/Departments/DeptPage.asp?DID=29000&LID=959, accessed June 26, 2006.

Napa County, 2004. Napa County Zoning Ordinance. Title 18, Napa County Code. Napa County Conservation, Development and Planning Department. Available online at http://www.co.napa.ca.us/code2000/%5Fdata/title18/index.html, accessed June 26, 2006.

Napa County, 2005. Napa County Baseline Data Report. November 30, 2005. Available online at http://www.co.napa.ca.us/gov/departments/29000/bdr/index.html, accessed June 26, 2006.

Napa County, 2006. Napa County Code (8.16.090). Available online at http://www.co.napa.ca.us/search/Code_Search.asp?LID=495, accessed June 26, 2006.

Napa County Baseline Data Report, Mines and Mineral Deposits, Figure 2-2, November 2005. Available online at http://www.co.napa.ca.us/gov/departments/29000/bdr/pdfs/figures_maps/Figure_2-2.pdf, accessed August 24, 2006.

Napa County Resource Conservation District, 2002. Napa County Hillside Ordinance. Available online at http://www.naparcd.org/ordinance.htm, accessed June 29, 2006.

Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP), 2005. Natural Community Conservation Plans and Habitat Conservation Plans. Available online at www.dfg.ca.gov/nccp/index.html, accessed June 26, 2006.

OHP, 1992. California Points of Historical Interest. State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, California Office of Historic Preservation. Sacramento.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1997. Ecological Subregions of California. Prepared by U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. September 1997.

Documents

STAGECOACH VINEYARDS EROSION CONTROL …reports.analyticalcorp.net/stagecoach/IS/Stagecoach_IS_0806F-WEB.pdf · Analytical Environmental Services Stagecoach Vineyards 06-0042-ECPA