A. 
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires all public agencies to establish monitoring or reporting procedures for mitigation measures adopted as a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. Monitoring of such mitigation measures may extend through project permitting, construction, and project operations, as necessary.
B. 
The monitoring shall be accomplished by the county's standard mitigation monitoring program and/or a project specific mitigation reporting program.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
A. 
A mitigation monitoring and reporting plan (hereinafter "monitoring plan") is required for any private or public nonexempt discretionary project approved by Placer County that is subject to either a negative declaration or EIR and that includes mitigation measures necessary to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
B. 
For private projects, the county's standard mitigation monitoring program (Section 18.28.030) shall be utilized and certain projects may require the preparation of a supplemental mitigation monitoring plan.
C. 
Mitigation reporting plan shall be required only where the county's standard mitigation monitoring plan does not address required mitigation monitoring. This will most often be required where on-going monitoring of required mitigation measures extends beyond the county's permitting process (i.e., after subdivision improvements are accepted as complete by the county or after certificates of occupancy are issued.)
D. 
For public projects, the sponsoring department shall prepare the monitoring and/or reporting plan.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
The following mitigation monitoring program (and project specific reporting plans, when required) shall be utilized by the county of Placer to implement Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. Mitigation measures, adopted for discretionary projects, must be included as conditions of approval, for that project. Compliance with conditions of approval is monitored by the county through a variety of permit processes as described below. The issuance of any of the described permits or county actions which must be preceded by a verification by county staff that certain conditions of approval/mitigation measures have been met, shall serve as the required monitoring of those conditions of approval/mitigation measures.
A. 
Design Review Approval. Example. Design review committee review of project plans to verify that specific design features have been incorporated into the project to reduce visual impacts, noise impacts, or other potential impacts.
B. 
Improvement Plan Approval. Example. Development review committee(DRC) review of specific design related features such as grading, drainage, installation of sensitive habitat protection features, ensuring payment of mitigation fees, securance of responsible agency permits (e.g., Department of Fish and Wildlife Lake and Streambed Alteration agreements, etc.
C. 
Improvement Construction Inspection. Example. Community development/resource agency inspection of grading, drainage, fencing of trees, wetlands protection, etc.
D. 
Encroachment Permit. Example. DPW verification of safe access onto a county road.
E. 
Recording of a Final Map. Example. Ensuring payment of various mitigation fees, inclusion of subdivision design features required to mitigate impacts, creation of protective easements, etc.
F. 
Acceptance of Subdivision Improvements as Complete. Example. Community development/resource agency and/or DRC verification of actual construction of required sound walls, drainage improvements, roads, fences, etc.
G. 
Building Permit Approval. Example. Building department review of specific design details of structures such as installation of water conserving features, noise barriers, etc.
H. 
Certification of Occupancy. Example. Community development/resource agency review of completed project to ensure compliance with design review approval, improvement plan approval, building permit approval, payment of certain mitigation fees, installation of landscaping, etc.
I. 
Issuance of a PCCP Authorization. Example. Community development resource agency review for compliance with avoidance and minimization measures, PCCP development fee payments, purchase of mitigation credits, and/or acceptance of land dedications in lieu of fees.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001; Ord. 5373-B, 2005; Ord. 6042-B § 1, 2020)
A. 
EIRs. Draft mitigation reporting plans for projects for which an EIR is prepared shall be included in the draft EIR. The reporting plan shall be subject to the same public review and comment accorded all other portions of the EIR. The final reporting plan shall be adopted as a part of the CEQA findings for the subject project.
B. 
Negative Declarations. If a reporting plan is required for negative declarations that have mitigation measures, said plan shall be prepared by the lead department prior to posting the proposed negative declaration for public review. The reporting plan shall be attached to the proposed negative declaration as a supporting exhibit.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
The reporting plan shall contain, at a minimum, the following:
A. 
A listing of every mitigation measure contained in the EIR (or negative declaration) which requires monitoring and is not covered by the county's standard mitigation monitoring plan. (The approving authority may modify or delete recommended mitigation measures so long as the appropriate findings are made.) Also, reference should be made to the page in the EIR where the mitigation measure is described;
B. 
Identification of individuals or organizations responsible for monitoring and/or reporting;
C. 
Identification of individuals or organizations responsible for verifying compliance;
D. 
Identification of the phase (or date) of the permit process (e.g., prior to tentative map application, final map application, issuance of grading permit, issuance of building permit, certificate of occupancy, etc.) when each mitigation measure shall be initially implemented;
E. 
Identification of the frequency and duration of required monitoring, if a measure requires continuous, frequent, monthly, or annual monitoring;
F. 
Identification of the performance criteria for determining the success of the mitigation measure, if appropriate (e.g., success rate, measurement criteria, etc.);
G. 
Identification of the cost, proposed funding, and budget for the reporting plan, if appropriate;
H. 
For projects that are categorically exempt from CEQA, but must comply with Chapter 19, Article 19.10, a reporting plan shall be prepared that provides the information in subsection A through G for all best management practices and other measures imposed through the PCCP authorization.
(Prior code § 31.840; Ord. 6042-B § 1, 2020)
A. 
Private Projects. For private projects, the applicant shall be responsible for monitoring mitigation measure implementation and reporting in writing on the progress, completion, and any failures to comply with the approved mitigation measures to the lead department. The lead department, using qualified staff, shall verify all information set forth in the applicant's reports, using field visits as necessary.
B. 
Public Projects. For public projects, the sponsoring department shall be responsible for monitoring mitigation measure implementation and reporting in writing on the progress and completion, and any failure to comply with the approved mitigation measures.
C. 
Availability of Reports. The reports specified in this section are public information and shall be made available to the public.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
A. 
All costs for the preparation, administration, and implementation of a reporting plan shall be paid by the project applicant or sponsoring department.
B. 
The estimated cost of implementing the reporting plan shall be submitted to the county and deposited in a trust account prior to the acceptance of any plans for review by the county for the issuance of demolition, underground construction, site preparation, grading, building permits, or other entitlement.
C. 
If the actual cost of required monitoring/reporting activities exceeds the initial deposit, the additional funds necessary shall be submitted to the county prior to issuance of an occupancy permit unless otherwise specified in the reporting plan. If the actual cost is less, the difference will be refunded to the applicant.
D. 
Mitigation plans that extend beyond 12 months may be funded with periodic payments instead of the full cost being submitted as specified above. This alternative fee arrangement must be specified in the proposed reporting plan and approved by the county.
E. 
Projects that include reporting plans requiring monitoring for longer than 12 months will be required to demonstrate that long-term funding of monitoring will be assured through one or more of the following mechanisms: deed restrictions; conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs); cash deposit; letters of credit; or other financial assurances acceptable to the county.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
A. 
Violation of the County's Standard Mitigation Monitoring Plan or a Reporting Plan Prior to Project Completion. Violation of these plans, where a mitigation measure is to be implemented during site preparation or building construction, shall result in notification of the violation by the lead department and issuance of a stop-work order by the appropriate county permit-issuing authority until the matter is resolved.
B. 
Violation of Reporting Plan Following Project Completion. Violation of an approved reporting plan subsequent to project completion or occupancy shall result in one or more enforcement actions including, but not limited to:
1. 
Written notification by the lead department to the responsible party with a demand for correction of the violation;
2. 
Issuance of an infraction citation;
3. 
Prosecution of the responsible party for a misdemeanor;
4. 
Forfeiture of bonds, cash deposits, and/or letters of credit;
5. 
Revocation of any land use entitlements;
6. 
Recordation of development restrictions against the subject property.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001)
A. 
The agency director or designee or other government authority with responsibility for verifying compliance, as identified in the monitoring and/or reporting plan, shall determine whether proposed modifications are minor in nature and therefore in substantial compliance with the approved plan.
B. 
Modifications of an approved reporting plan, that are not in substantial conformance with that plan, shall be subject to review and approval by the approving authority.
C. 
The applicant shall submit a specified number of copies of the modification request to the lead department for distribution and processing. The request shall be accompanied by the appropriate processing fee set forth in the land development fee schedule.
(Ord. 5119-B, 2001; Ord. 5373-B, 2005)