Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout006-170-029r : t u N , a+ 4 a } S w -r .• : � ': to �.,, ,. , : 1 +F +r ', :' - � 4. � b '. ; .. •-.... :rrrwM^^" � A.wr�°'°"'. 1. � � 1 fie. .. �,". •. t r, lye So r ,17a 4r71 1 k r ' ra ( 5. n54 63 AA Y/ t f 4� m� , Y , n r .. ♦ V rte• W , 1 .� ..- rf 1 , t } ! M i 1 4 Wit" _ Wyf d" � i 1 4 Wit" _ A•N'. .a m I 1 t, 1 ° } 3 d / / iti (, �. 5 y� . 1 R 011 I u ... d1.� � 'e r ry I � � 1` alb �, � n "`' t III+ 1+y1■y��' /1f„1 t , .• �Y\Yj� 4 � A 1 S ' I � '� �.i d + `� }#c � t ep°n - , ' l ��• 5¢ y l g��i � ill ' tuN 1YjY "Wt, I# 11' a "'4., rf �• •1 rl ^ 1 i.lr 7 Ilv N jA 1SI Ti vJyS,l ti r ,Y Bti� r./�r�' C a + �d; ! �•- 4 0.� • yA l t (b t�b�f 5. W .� �t4p 5F. i A•N'. .a m I 1 t, 1 ° } 3 d / / iti (, �. 5 y� . ' �..� FILE NO. 86-43 LOG NO.X3.6-03-•-.07-03 _ Noble Engle & Associates Cliff. Ashby - re�resen'.:.ative - - appliceat P.O. box_- 923 5549 The Esplanade ADDRESS. Red Bluff, CA 96080 Chico, CA 95926 527-6810 345-4071 PRONE: Same as applicant property owner ADDRESS: R- a:X SGTP0N= Modification of Use PPrmi-- to include � � sewage treatment'' pond & land irrigation northwest corder of Esplanade and Nord an property zoned U located -__-�- 6-17--29 to,�m/area: Chico Road identified as AP -- DATE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 195 "5 (kECEIPT NUMBER:8 746 3- 7- 8 6 PRE -APF FEE PA3D - $ i ___�� -q ACCEPTIZU" 2�� �� RECEIPT APPLICATION FINAL API: PAID: ��-- - PERCENTAGE: ____..._ % p,EZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CHEC D MAILING LIST PREPARED MAIL -OUT NOTICES WRITTEN NUMBER. IiOTICES: MAILED LEGAL DEsCRi"PTION PREPAkF.D PUBLICA'�TION NOTICE WRIT2'EN DISPLAY: Ai' PREPARED 0 C G B R DATE OF PUBLICATION: NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION ,,ITIAL STUDY PREPARED F"IRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categor-kcm , Dc--nption FILED: FILED;: Negative Declaration - Mitigated Negative Declaration i' IIM: ynviro;mental Impact PePort CERTIFIED Other STATIF yL;RINGHOJSE ITER: - APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE VOTIFIChNION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETER,�IINATZON PLANNING COMMISSIn 0 B<aARD OF SUPERVISORS' HEaRING(s): ADOPTED: RESOLUTION NUMBER (GPAs) 01MINANCE IuM R - ADOPTED: NOTICE 0r DETERMINATION (Appendix H) FILED kPY environmental impact ireport is bhich the C1 i f f A,_ shb - Mmd i__ f _cat i on oy use Perm f C Item on w,a i ng appealed ) requirA'rent for an to ''allow a sewage treatment plant and sewage disposal pend on (Unclassified) locaited on the northwest ;corner of property tuned U Esplanade and NorJ Road, i Grit i f i ed as �P 6� 17-29, Chico. co. Staff stated that this is an appeal of the requirement for an Environ t and should be ;onfined o that subject. mental Impact Report The hearing was, opened to the public- Noble ubl'ic.Noble Engle, project e'n9 newer, stated that they were working on an existing use permit-, that they propos- to build out the project and propose ponds for sewage storage on one of the parcels to be used for irrigartion in the orchard. He stated that the ,sewage ponds will be treated waterand are holding ponds 4,or i rr'f gat? i ur He stalced i t w i 1 1 be at least 25 years before they Will, haN,s City sewer in thus at -ea. He felt thatthe ponds would solve the nitrate problem by not having' septic tanks and having the orctage hardtreHepd. t;atte also felt that ed ttiai- they propoeei;o caster would be good for h e put in ,curb, gutter, alnd sidewalk. on the frontage on NaY^d lAV -nue . He did not see.' the 'need' for an EIR Nancy Nelson was opposed to the project . She felt, It was n conflict with the General Flan. Sq-jv stated that sewer ponds were -burned down on other projects and did not feel they, sh'aoyl d ibe allowed 'here . She was concerned with water pollution and with flooding. She was also concerned with odor emitting from ponds. She did ` not � ec 1 the 'ponds were compatible with the= ne i ghbol-hood . Brad Wood said he would like to know how much liquid comes out of a tr~a i l er park and how much liquid you can dump on 20 acres of orchar^d 56.5 days a year. He was against the project Marvin Smith, who owns 40 acres next to this propertya stated the greatest damage to walnuts � is root rot theoschoa 1 too mond tl-�e�yrhaveetotusetl that the water is already polluted at bottled water' He felt' th'e project thou l d be �den;i ed . Hie was In favor d -l' an EIR' being required. Bruce 11cCl i ntock stated that the orchard Is on the ag. side OF the gr',„enline and sewage disposal ponds were not allowed on the aq. side of the �r,s,an l i ne . Staff stated that the 'Board' i nterpr etat i ori Nays "you can not have slawagee ponds can A-40." Ct,�tnrrt i ss i onor Lamber~ t dl scussed the amount of water being r,el ceased and si�le estimated it v ou l d be approximately SFO 0 gallons per iacre . adcording to information in the ElIviro=e—ental, j:'Nmluation ilepo•rt. Mr. t4cCl i ntock; was In favor of the SIR I ��31'1i�x CoiS ��{1 Janet St i tiger was cc 's ,;; ti }h water po l 1 ut i on , traf f �, c and Impacts to the school and r.n. r + t »' ,r if the Ei Steve 'Hughes stated that the Ashbys have beengoodneighborse but. he felt an E1R was necessary, for the safety and welfare of the rzOmmun i ty. Noble Engle stated, that thryre were �-ont:ainment dikes propos6d to 'stop Hater flowing over property. He stated that odor should not be a problem, that. 150 units now on septic tanks, will go through the treatment plant. He submitted graphics on the type of plant. He stated that'the new system will be superior to what now exist He stated that the water can be held in ponds for one year. Commissioner Peabody asked about the gallons perr,day. Mr. Engle stated that. it was just under 60,000 gallons a day. q Commissioner Fol^bess asked how much irrigation,a year would be done or 20 acres. Mr. Engle stated that they will have to add water to the water received from the trailer park in order to irrigate the orchard. Commissioner Lambert questioned if this was to be a 4 acre pond or 1 a acre pond. Mr. Engle submitted a watel^ sheet. There was a d i sc.uss'lon on how much would be pumped into the orchard. Commissioner Lambert asked if the orchard was part of the project. Staff stetted it would have to be a part of the project, but there Is r' still the question of whether a pond can go on property zoned A•-40. Commissioner Forbes felt there was no quest' on they needed an, EIR. Commissioner Lambert asked how they determine if a pond is allowed when the Board said no Staff stated treat i f the i nfcst-mat i on that can bea brought to tham indicates that It is ;dust straight water that cEin go across the creek and immediately be appl i'ed an 1^rops, then perhaps it Is not a part of the "treatment' It was moved by Commissioner Forbes, 'seconded by Commissioner Lambert - and'unanimously carried for the Environmental Impact Report to be required for the request to expand the mobile home .park Ito include a sewage treatment plant and sewage disposal pond, for' property identified as 'AP 6-17-29 and 6-2-1 72 ( C l If f A,shlbyi ) A�lJrk"[ )�k.s �`CJ��'1r']�I°1i��13C l riw ,� �.���j�� 'i��N��l�� � ��t �� R 1987 _� __ ..iio�n s.nn...x.��:. -vim w."Itl��► BUTTE CoiJN-y PLANNING COMM I S S I oN STAFF FINDINGS - May 27, 1987 APPLICABLE REGf.JLA`i" I oNGi:Ca-llfornia Government Cede Sactions 15.063, 15064, 150 0., Ce RENTS RE::EI VEi1: �. pub t i c Work s: "We w} 1 1 requ i re urban } m provemen,i F i rnproventer7t a5 acoed } t i an Of ttheUse Permit.- and storm drainage Eny } ronmera i -,a 1 } X31 th : see letter er of ;Janl-r rY 16, 1987 attached. _C_ity of Chioo: "The F" City recommends a through review of the proposed project by tl-e Butte County Health and Environmental Sanitation Dgpartment:s . 1987u . I e Coni"v_. I�Idsau i to Abatement a see attached 1 etter dated at -ch 31, 1 X137 NOrtheasl, Information C"A prehistoric site CA/BUT/541 may e -X- end i Il O the Project area. We strongly strong l y recommend that anarchaeolagica1 reconnaissance be cancucted of the area by � qualified and appropriate Mitigation measures prepared, ` P'ijb1 i c Comment: A pet i t i C n has Leen received w,fl th 71 signatures objecting to the installation ref Open sets eponds and rP�ueat i n� an Environmental Impact Report, A,NA,LY4 Y S The Project is mod i f i ca•t i an of an existing , Use Permit for a mobile he -ne mark to allow an alternative Sewage disposal system Proposed park (150 and 271 units respectively) oil( ba, served exi sbing 'and sel,9er sYstern . the sewers will gravity flow to �a packaged tb,/ a ,lent plant at ti -le Southwest corner. A i sa lot ated at the Southiniest corner, ;i s a 60000 gallon holding tank After 24 Hours of aeration, the ;sewage will Pumped to a 4 acre pond. Two s i to p i sns have been subm 1 t:ted , The ori i g nal site p l ar. s} ;sawed a i�ortid at✓ 'the southwest corner _ of APi6-'17-29 on 1 sand designated Medium Density Residential. At tl,1s location the Chico Land 41se P 1 an t Pond u4C is l d comply with Policies reserving urban land For urban uses. It Haul d, however, be c 1 rose to ' res } dances, r to i ghbor i rig we 11 1 s and the, Mud Creek Levee. Pond water r ou 1 d be p i peri over Mud Creek and, app, l i ed as } rr }gat i on water on AP 6-2-172. A second site l art re l ocat ;ertl the p north, a Mud Creek on AP 6-2-172 Forced Mains Would conveysepond from the Package. p1 ant C on the M . H P . rage Corner, under Mud Creek Bridge, and r,varral parcel) •the n�;rthest Property proposed to irrigate d. Pond Water is t':he walnut orchard. APP6-2-172 S designai;ed Orchard and Field Crwop, zoned A-20,, and 18 1 ocated West Of the Chico 2 Aft BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDINGS May 27 � ' 1987 Qrchard and Field Crop, zoned A-20, and is ,located orated w(�st Of the Gh S co Urban ,area Green 1 i ne,, Staff explicitly i ri forried the rIpp l i can k• that a sewage pond can not be located on land zoned A-20. Engle a'1d Associates, on behalf of Mr. Ashby, requested an i nfwcrprref;atI on on w1-,ether sewage ponds co) rl d be constructed an 1 ands :?,0tedd , :�_2tl (see letter of 12/27/85). With a unanimous vote, theh�c;:irard fot„rnd that sewage disposal: 'ponds are not an ai 1 l owab 1 e use S n an A-t”. ,t Zone (2/14/86 Item 86-64). ` The amended site Plan providing for Ponrl�; on the ting A--20 .gone would require a General' Plan Amendment and f-ezone on�r"Ps6 2- 17.2 to an urban land use and zone, Prior to cons i dor at i an ofUse Permit, The. SnStSal study Is sufficier7i d a 1 ternat S .•e .or' either . prF', .sect The sewage disposal system will allow for an expansion of the existSng mob' i 1 e home Par-k to 271 units. Without a prepackaged Plan, or ser° v i sae by thtie city of Chi co sewer systema expans un would not be allowed under~ the Nitrate Action Plan. The ex) sting mobile home of approximately 3 dwellSng units per acre. park has.a density 5. 1 units - The proposed density s - per acre. Imoacts of this project were fully described in the f n i t i al study aa�ro aui�+segUent EIR requirement l atter sent to the applicant. The impacts will be summarised here: primary I. Operation of a sewage' disp'osaf irrigation prrrld and use l o f the 'waters for purposes may impact the prodr,.tct i v i ty of surrcaund i rad p a 1 1 r..'t` 't cin . orchards because OF the Potential i al for surface and ground ;eater 2. Removal of 4+ sates Of agricultural soils and production capabiiitSeswould undermine the Chico Urban Area land use 1301 i s i,es designed to preserve Greec,1 i ne. pr i mE agricultural soils west of the 3. The Chard of Supervisors stars has determ i no d thrat sewage disposal pond= are not a compatible use on Property zoned A-20. 4. The pond may be hazardous' because of its placement so close to Mud' Creek Levee and could cause extess i rte soil sa her tion and levee fa i 1't-Are. Th,e pond may be anattractive riu i saFnce to, Children, and Could become: Pote; ;t i a 1 1 y, toxic by ccs 1 1 ect, i n spray drift from sLrrround I `7q orchards 5. Approval Of an alternative sewage d i spersa 1 sgrste(fl' may under^(rri ne commun S tY support ' for sewer me i n "extens S carts as descr i,bed i n th*' adopted , N S trate Action Plan. 6. Sado plan has been subm,l i_ted for disposal of solids and sediments and tither , items not broken down by aeration. i BUTTE C011%T`t' PLANNING', -COMMISSION STA%'F May 27 � 1987 7. Safe pedestrian access steeds to be C-,rov i ded , along Mord M i ghway and acr^otis Espl,aiiade. The purpose of an initial study is to nrov1de -the mount• w1'Yh information to use asa basis for d i ding whether to prep,arrr- an ' Env i ronmerrta l Impact 'Report, (EIR) or Negative Declaration. It also Provides the County and an applicant the opportunity to m 1, L i r,iate' adverse i mpact5 before an EIC is prepare thus en'abl Ing the )ro,jewc;t to qualify r'or^ a `Negative Declaration The third purpose of an initial study is to assist In th6,� preparation o' an EIR by Identifying the 1 sues:to be resolved.As stuted in Government Cole $ ct i'on 150 ,,3, If on agency dater -mines that there Is substantial ev t denr,r. that any aspect of tine project, either 'individually or cumulative 1 y , may ccar,. tie a s' gn i f i cant effect on the env i ronmert, r^egardl es of whrather the overall: affect OF the project is adverse or benef` i c. i al ,, the County shall prepares an EIR. Government Code Section 15064 recognizes that determ i n t r o Ahether^ a project may hEive a significant effect plays a - ' .. w r i t 's ca l ' roil 16 the CEt�A process . I t goes on to state "when s lead agency determines tha. there is substantial evidence that a'project may have a significant ef'f'e:ct on the env i ronri ent % -the agency shall prepare a draft EIR," The County's Use Permit file contains such evidance,. In determ i,n i ng wh ether an affect will be adverse orr beneficial ' the lead ac„ ncy sha'l l cons i der the v i ergs held by members of the public in all ar ,-as' effected Staf f has received numerous phone calls and Fret i t i ons fr.am ,surrounding neighbors raising ser i l,)u!�; concerns afro ut the potential env`i Ironmeotal impacts arid the viability of this project. These public comments support the preparation of the EIR IArhen making a ' deer is i on to prepmre an E I R or Negative Declaration, there must be substantial evidence in the record supporting the deo i s i ort , not conclusions that there will be no significant impacts'withouL facts and evidence. If the record shows there may be significant impacts, an EIR is required. There i s no evidence in the C,,aurLy'rr file which would support the preparation of a Negative Decl arab. i cin Dover"nmer7t Code Sect 1 on 15070 states ,"A Negative declaration sha l ` be prepared for a Project subject to ' CEQA when either the initial s,Wd-v shows there is no sUbstantial ev-idence that the pro,je-ct may have a s i gn i'i• i cant e4 feel an the environment ear° the i rr i t i al study t dent i f i red pt�tentiallV significant effectsd but has been substantlal1y revised, and •m i i i gated to a poi n t where c 1 ear l y no sign i f i cant o f facts wean l d rrccur . The applicant was given an opportunity to address and mitigate 811 Ident 1fIad Impacts. These ara still a number of unresolved issues` remaining'. For al 1 the reasons Identified i n the i n i t i ial 'Study and subw e, rJuerit letter to the applicant,' an Environmental Impact Report is Strongly 4 IEn M.�. to f� � �- E APPLICATIOWFOR USE PERMIT BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Buffe00,Planning cvmm MAR 0 APPLICANT: Read and follow instructions as set forth on attached sheet, Oroville, C0isfarx!Q Applicant's name MA. Ct i 6 6 A,6 h a y 345- 71 Phone N0 _ --- Applicant's mail Ing address 3549 The E/tpanade, Chico, CA 95926 Applicant's interest In property (Owner, lessee, other) 0,tvneA Owner's name and addre,� Sarne aA app.Yican Contact person for project (if other than applicant) No b�Z e Eng.2e 9 Abb 0 c.iate,6 PO sox 923, Red Bt_u�6, Cil 96060 (527-6810) Assessor's parcel number(s)_,"�,�- 2 9, 2 p, 9, `1 $, 2 1, 2 2., 1 j ' "^ )Present zoning! t Co (si-- hneA o6NoAd Avenue at the -6pZa cC"de p (VOJt�hbUeb , Location and' size of parcel(s) i Street address 3549 The Esptanade Chico --777{ Directions for travel toro err (rural and mountainous areas only):. P P Y (rur _.,t Descriptioncfproposed development and use_Modicat,ion o exp,6tiga u.ae jae:Am,it .to .:a .{.{r.i.nc.2ude .6ewage tnea.tment 'pond .handU. .nAti at.ton p q • pet Z n' Description of existing land usegob.i.ee Home Pa&k w,ith;, h ept.ic tank,5 Com .i? e � e the a. Proposed scheduling/associated projects p p-kev�i.ol zt y app,,L0ved units ; Anticipate' �:ntal development. Az Soda A4 PoAzibZe _ Building cor,.., ,,n (state dimensions,. square footage and mater;ais used) eat, o ft 9 Laundt a, Exfstirg buildings P e_,�W _cA y °'None additiona.t b. Proposed bulldings,.� I Hazardous materials to be used (inflummobles, explosives or strong chemicals) N/A I Deily hours of operation fila _exi?6 t t Number of em-loyaesi!aAi eb Number of off-street parking spares provided„ 0 exi,6 t • Uh '15 0 Sp . Add 2 4 6 Oft 1 2 1 Sp . Ekisting/proposed sewage disposal method: Lnk-6 , hU oA r? d i,6 po nd ikl L, Proximity of power and phone lines: On .6.4 -to and in u6 e, Distalice to natural water course or storm drain' Mud Cheek 1.6 'No,,'. ,h o/ �ne !Ooci Antit>pated on and off-site drainage improvements: Stonm dhainag e t0 -e. hOU ed`_ Water source: PA i.va.te wett-6 6 'eatenU ,mein Proximity of water for fire fighting purposes (hydrants, ponds, etc,) enhanced with new weft 6 hydha ntz , Will excavation or grading be necessary? Cubic yards (estlmate): Site. gAad.,,_ny- 2 0 0 D c y . +- Pond C0)44t a 3000 ey, f - ,b IIpp aapp t, lnal ding those required by List and describo any other related pc.'mita � � 17,tr�l�efLPr6Ua ec yedyf�rntt I�soppl as c�, city, regional, State and Federal agencies,_._-___�,• W--- larnation Board, Dept. ' o6 Fish. 9 Game. 1F R glp��NT8,41., Include the numhgr of units, whetjier units arq jingle gr multi-st ry in he ght, schedule of unit slaes; acid S.c�t �e gam y hey c elti ia� Mob le Ome Paula. type pf It uGehold size expeoied. 9 c 1: 'addit i_o na.2 unit -6 242 jr ?e&.6 d n, iu e•+k ltn Y y y a , d 1p= Cpr,AAq�I�a.IAk-, indicate the type, whether n oborhood, cit or regionally arientrd, square. footage of sales area an eigt loading facilitlZs, IFINDUSTRIAL, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loprihng facilities.'facilities IF INSTITUTIONAL, Indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, nstimatad ocrupency ,loading ' rtn(l community benefits to be derived from the project. p V1F1CkNN9u NTAI~ pjnr :MTS AND MITIGATION MEAwUKES* Identify patcntially eproject design features or special � idenign(t(r>:�.nt enviranm�'rrknt'mpacis associated with the use permit, What conditionsdenfypof approval (Mitigation Measures) are proposed to alleviate potential environmental Impacts? 6a=: � on on �NVI{'�ONME��"SAL SETTING* topography, phy, sail stability, plants and ani - Describe the Prale�•t site as it exists before the Proleo, including iniormatlstructures on the site, and the use of the structures. m�als,.and Any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, Descnbe aly existing @~ properties, including information an plants and animals and any ou lural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe the surrounding p � ailments, shops, depart- ' Indicate the type of ;and use (residential, commercial, etc.) intensity of land use (single-family, apartments, yard, etc.). C Ment stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear ar *Ilse separate sheet for longer responses. I hereby declare under penalty of perjury lliat I have read and tnderstand the instructions and that the foregoing statements are true, complete arj°.f correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, Applicant's signature ---- ?'b Date -�.�.._ (aal]12 a,.6 APpt�i..Cal4 ) Date Property twner's signature Use Permit Number �- ------ Request. Use permit to allow Locatlon and size of, parcel(s)------------ VERIFY: t rojec'd Description U.1_ A,l', Number(s) Zoning and Requlperne)ta nwner6hip � f.otfatian GeScriation Proof of Agency (if needed) _�. 20'0opfes!.,f Plot Man �/�j/�/'"�`�n Reoeipt Number U- Data Received - Application taken by 1 IviSTR;UCTIONS To USE PERMITAPPLICANTS 1; 'It applicrint is not the owlicr, written authorization by ':lie owner or other proof of agency nowt be subm,ittud in order fere the applicant to lagnlly sign the application. Application` shall be considered void if not signed by the owner or legal agent, 2, All i,,unis on application shall lie fillvd in as coniphitely as possiblc. if an item is not appli- ctiblt., `plea e'indicate hi 1,110 tarn` "NA it 3. It irk important that^[hc applirrnnt suliply an accurate description of the location of the proposed project, including the folloi+ir:f;. a, ,;assessor's parcel number(s) (from the tax bills or Assessor's ,ups), b. street addresses (if avuclnble). c: Distances and direction,-, named streets, bodies of water or raiPran�ltr, 4. `f'iventy (20) copies of a dcttilcd plot plan of adequate sc,de to clearly show proposed build- ings anti improvements, folded to W2 x tri inches, shall accompany and bit -mado part of the "Application for Use Permit'. If the use permit is approved, the plot plari 'becomes the ap- l.rt,ved development plan for tite property,'['he plot plan shall include Ole following information: a. A sealed draitin;: of the pnreel(s;) boundaries, b, Location and dimensions of all e�isting and proposed improvements on the property, including buildin;,s, drivewa e, parking; nrt:ca;' tells septic tanks end leach fiends. r.. Location and tuinie of bordering stre ts, uc'ccss roads, n�:+�ub�r crossroads, streams, bodies of tater and railroads. d. North arrOw wad`sculo of dratviog. b. The "Applicstinn for 1'se Permit" is subject to ptiblic hrarings and approval by the Planning Cornmis,:ion. Any spacial conditions of upprov,il :shall be made a hart of die approved "Use. Permit'' -and shall hr hireling r n'thti applicant. Thepr;octduros fnr Cnunty action on use per- mit applications tire statvd in Clntpttr'2 4 of the Hutto C'nnntr Code. 6. '1'Ite Planning Ctitnniisbi„n, on the bods nl' the, raidenrr suhrrritted at tliapublic hearin ,may grant use permits ,clear, it -finds that the propu:,ed usd s of the Iiroperty «ill not impair the integrity and character of tIlV were in ichich iho land lies and that the use would not be un,, reasonably ines�+trootibl; r,Wi or injurious to siu•roundinp, properties our detrimental to the health and general welfare of Ili, per.,on., resi litre or N. or•king in the neighborhood nor to the general health. safety and v,elfurt, of the comm" n; " ENGLE & ASSOCIA'T'ES �41(`rIiNEBYkiI� G - PLANNING SLII�'t� IN I'{ °ffe Co. Pienning CcgyM t� P,(J. BOX 923—(916) 527-6810 PED BLUFF, CA, 96080 FEB 26 108'16 FE1,4R,Ufll 'Y :1,9156 Orov"i)o, ca!iforshi l;,cU1 1 r; C;t:�tJi�.l`'C`,r N'l..�ihl4�la;l�li� DISC ftil=t'1'I`1r1+l1° 7' G,CIiJ{ •11 (�iwi�41 i a�; Dt ; �: tJl_ P( -r., R I hClC;fi f'i is l*It"",ar;..r(-1 OF, C I-IT.(:;t t } f f11= F'LANI'••fl r -G rh(1 y LETTM ;I: 'i"l t 1�4_„t.?UE'Mi-I' `; ojr,' t=,,l (-'4��;OVAL- OF OUR t�ff.'1D f k r.1) J)EVFLOr i�1Gi•1`T PLAN FOR� I -I•.: E R �I 1C(I :IU E flPL,AN (-',DE t T U f�F�l i(yC If tlaf ,F !� (Ill C�i-rl J�4Y z' AT TI ,E NOPTI 114EST i.,Clr 11L1 � O t� � W „r 99 1=,, THE RANCHO `M5('`(�.F-1haADE r'1(�;r-ILL_ {-'r47ME t -',t( I:: IS A -p i�(tX'fr�IF-r1"G�t..', X514 DEVELOPED UNDER THE EXISTING USE PERMIT ,AI�aL, DEVELOF,mf cr J.150 r`t-1CCS HAVE BEEN+(Ja.l_"i r�raSJ Fir,E 1!t4 U9''i: AT THIST11�(rw". �I{l(: 0a ,jj I T S OF TKE r Ar� k' WISH TO DU LD C1ul`' THE PARK fsc; r�r F'�.C'E T EXCEPT Uda;'I'I-! i}irJS IC=a: t�7'lf�N Oj= Ti -(C (�f�WAQE ) ie,[--t7SAL (�IHICH :Ct3 t,Rj'7wir°IaI I_Y SEPTIC C'Ai"11 F',(yli� LE 11I Fa { I_.D5 BY THE- ADDITION Cif= Ai'•1' AC'i�;iriT�Ca1 FilfaJ HCJLDII1ia 1='t'�C�:I)1 Ahab' THE i1ZM E O THE TREATED WATER TO PARTIALLY FULFILL.;' THE 7,r;F IGATTCihI r;F�GttJIRE.l1ENTS Cat` c I1L Atil�I.r ULl la;r;,�L f~'AI�'C• I TOrHC t`"iCl!"t'TI� or, THE ~ PAkI':.. THE, PAf CEL ON WHICH ;I:C.H WE f i �Ctf-'(taC TO AP L'I THE .1 RR TGATION WATE r; Cl7s'1,"�3:N D,F13'f]l*1 THE PAr i'S" TREATED L.F L..L�NT WILL Lsl•.�f,ll`r"1= I: T BY THE PARTIAL PROVISION OF I j' -,p; GAT I ON t ATEF.; AT NO COST TO THE ACEI l t i.Fl. T lJf r^�I . USE" = TI�-1 I; s W a:l, l- ALSO ALLOWUS TO DISPOSE OF THE TREATED {Il"Ll_I(I.}T i�j',C1C( 1`114. hit-IC{1:i_i� i1CIi'11` i�'A("'1j:. Sh+l tt 1<iA.r 1�1i-IT(�,11 tr'REATLY CONT1 ' I DUTLK:a TO THC C.' I NT`cEN CARRIED B,V rHl-� ACTION I 'LA,N lril-I I tw.l 4 IS 1 �+1 I i I I�1 l I til -14%., r t4 t�A Tc Y THE lel 7 r'i a; f iwTl. Ct11 OF THE Li=t"1CH F:l:i LD 1t%L��11f`,r'G,r� ot-- U1, 41 r,E 1 � x:.1:1 LFFL.'UC14 i Fl ClC1 Cir„1i„;-14f.-!•1DF;Lkt-f,h1)7 i 1_I�i t' ftir;�aa�t�, 1. UNITS WHICH, rrl rF?r CtF TI IIF=llalr,i r ri -jr, T'l lt. U` or. �1L-r'1`I.0 TAN, -`.S AND rj..i-LD5 WITI-1111•.i 1"11L (..:1 t.,1`Ti'Jl t l'k( EW L. L_ '1 -MME lL1F FCl�L�il,rrhlCi Ihdr''t�i'i�r,'t1G 1,,:U 'rL_:f{:�j t=�k� �r LI( Gr�l'iliCrlL� 71�1Fi�r�`IATa Cth.t (ri(l.f( t-1 Lc, Iw:i i�.1`.(t Tri rl.t •Ti it I 13 T1:1 `(: f`AI�I r�tiC6 �c Cl��r": THC r 1 t Oil t,, Tr l� 1 fi+ wrr t i' I N 1 l 11 C., ,C 4 )l(rStll C” rl,tlff�� i rrl ,� r �it:;i�AND I I (1,7r ( i t+JrH,+ rir F'(`i(:1'✓I , t •� r-. , t (�11i1 r•�'•I � {:rit r' �:'�r ; IS L r Y;,, t41 1, 1... 3 r.hlf,t7r L I" I y 1:1 J�I I r V rpt t�dl "'f l : i Tr°IFti�;C1'JIW. I' 1 `1"'lr Ir�: 'FiL;!•. TI1 SEVE �',AI.. Irtr"s'r a trl�I'Gr I"LI I itta: 11 t 'I"1,1L�' I ,LaMA,L C•I I: f�"16 (_�r•.0 OF THE 101,101','r L:(`tTUFiF I O T1-1 E (I1�1F'i._i: 1'I t�l'.l (II Tl fC UCVEL7r�l`�il NT- OF' THE f='r r'i'. TS THE Ur'('r.Ar�Ik1cI OF11,1C_ i��;T1 1 Ch1t7�' Sirl+l�t�r D T }"'C1 AIw l ii Tl liaTa FIzL11�1- Jf r' T;I C '1" �f"Ir Ah� D LEACH r T f LDS � O A L"til LF GT a Cl'�.I Yri7 iw r•I l�(a' "I'I 1 A 1�Ar�CC Cr-IAI1Et R, FOR' TIE i'r 1°1(�',JFtL i ir" (�I�; �' 1' f`i{�lT3 (�r;L f15 :., AN Ar:.r•�AT ION r'ClhaD FOR THE S`Tt�f;fl,t�� AhlU rr;r"Cw I I�II�("I1 I•`r" THIS AND a; "i' a EA 'f= Ll?' ��II'� I .I 1"i 1r",i(u H A r;ATor,,S, Aio THE : US�i OF ' T1 Ifr' f'1:1'-%.UEN T AS A � c V4.0 E OF l'r,i ; C3 iT Clh"I WATER FOR ; THEi'Ar;CC Lu WHt 0711 Nrjt0 H ERL. Y U1.. TI -{r. PA; 1' it t ,t11r �r two: r y BUTTE COUrIT'y SAI If l I(J C:SPLAr•.IAD Lar.ArcD ' I`4(jr�jjq (JP-- cI I rCrJ IOR1, 114 ORD -:R TO lyf ,i I: U ,I` til" ' (=tl� T C`I I I � t rr r' COATI C7Ia iti(t^ii�{Y' 1 �1f hl t,�i�l } I;ryPICI"If•S 17 i ]: G_ al LlF�ly 'I lw�Ct� r i'AI"iTIa�Ul Alm; t"1�8 (i( ; T'{ -IC lta I I`('i' ("L1lJI lJ tt�: APP -L' ( E >~`11 0,1x:`r'H f�haLYla1::l tl''ir"�I�.'�' TI;I at1 ii t 1 ; i'1 E Rril''i(JV rel tJP 0131:1•' AND 07RI `F SE) A1,41), � I 1i».i-, R t !4Jrfi� ol'ylCl�lT r t�Jr" "i I -(E (?�A I � I�; 0U( L. 7; I"Y t t il�a'T r;Cli BOARD raf� l AI'�1)mt GOLfr�l r F iC,^ti._TH o r'r"si"4TI�fE NT, ri lw� �'C-Ji�• D 1 S („'I•,Q�'Ci�s r) '1 o Mara` --r1 ", A"i`fCllJ c�i 1'I 1C L'1=I i lil I.I'1` A' rl i41`'rA`i":C(J1�1 I Wiw 'rEAr, (41-11:t:hd Slib�'] ;T E, LilVi�at l_Fat'tFti1�7r t1L.I�Ft I�.CCii�! I _ w,1OI Atr,l 1�UrtLl�i(i r:ciyli , Cih, t~tlltilliWllL Cii7Cll r�lhl%� leTi I :t"I�lC7 WILL rUl'Tl�f::ir' t'�I�'IC1l�Fw �t1L ", Tr law .1)PP 1, I r �(»11> Clt al";) TO L.1t Al"1oIm wll- 1`I 1t (� ty,'L�)` T a fi�;IC1R To A5), THE OWNERS a ALSO PLAN Tt1 UPGRADE. Tti• E. HE PAR I-�:: TO THt— TYP I AL 8LECT r o(',J � r " � IC" L � .l' � 1 7 hdG, STI;:EE:TS W lTHIN �i t tlJ(a ATTACHED 0Et, ELr PI lEI 1T WE 'i"1 if I�,Ef=llRl �,(- THAT `,"Citi A I R(-- fC 7"I"•11.;� ,I;CC?lIE �T' I` fylUL x 1 i"�'T'1 Ciba (fit= TI"1'L_ rw 7 ril" 3 h.h; l i aic Pl=- . r1 r C oryir'L r� t�i<;; 1 IVrfANC r1 ra+'r iU " 7"WC r;( hirl»It s,l`'f A'i'~IA I' Cil Lel»h I1tJIyIC i'ry7� rota AI'M C CifVT� C i Lla rr "HCC21z. ` pFF E.- Ahdl' C1 ir'i,.I Ati,I 11-lAIU} "JU 1"1"J {'DV �1GwS'7IC�I'i�, r",EI..ATtt�'r TO TI°!I� iy1LTTL,i"ti'N ADVANCE V. `r`ol1R trail�.IS I: 'til�l. VE-r<Y T RUL' , Cit i=;p ry I NClk`:ti..'r (=` El. 4 i lyll ., MIKE 11:1<:E AGhlisy lylt �, l�lAiw 1(::C=� Cll...t:3�lr,l MR. AL. I'll DDLi sj-r r)T +'tA�t"�I•.„ "I'i+,+(.1 tlrw' `I"laJta , 6-17-31 Alk Stepsten W Hughes v. wood Box 529` 479 East "S'hird 'Ave,. Rt: -4 Chico, CA 95926 Chico, CA 95926 06-02-256-17-29 6-17.�1 1 Cliff Ashby i Mic}zael John G. Sob-ill p.0. Box 737 5549 Esplanade Chico, CA 95926 x 4Young Rt. Box 4',74 Ii" Chicol, CA 95926 Chico, CA 95926 6-17-29 06-02--23 6 -.17��7 Z3 Noble Engle & Assoc. !. t. Galen Johnson 'e, Robert W. Allen `Box 1560 p.0 Box 923 Reel Bluff, CA 900$0 1136 Stewart Ave,.O. Chico, CA 95926 _Ch.ico,, CA 9592r 06-02-74,75,76 6-17-19 Donald L. 'Harned Royal. Hawkley Rt. 1' Box 475 Chico, CA 95926 Rt.,l BOX 474 L . Chico, CA 959e,,r k 06-02-80 6-17-20 James A. I�en't Mary C. Cinquini 4 209 Biller Rt. 1 Box 475 C 95926 Belmont, CA 94002 ; Chico, CA 006-02-163 6--17-21 0ohii M. Vlasoff Robert E. Allen F.O. Box-,1560 Rt. 1 Boy. 474 G Chico, CA 95927 Chico, CA 95926 6-17-22 + 006-02-169 Sundance Enterprises E. Smith Rt. 1 Box 526 2449 Valine Lane Chico( CA 95926 Chaco, CA 95926 006--02-172 6-7.Z-'28 Edward C. Cadjew William A. Retz;e- Rt. 4 Box t 2 8 H 2801 .Ashbourne Ave. 95821 CJ-tico, CA 95926 Sacramento, CA 6-17-29_ 6-�40-54' Clifford "y'• Ashby �' Mary Belle Coulter 2608 Noxih Atiertue 131. Oak Ave. #15 Redwood, City, CA 94061 Chirot CA 95926 6-17-30 640--58 Richard Nelson Jay M. Garner Rt . 1 Box 4�8 '� ,' Rt . 1 Box 437 Chico, CA 95926 Chico, _CA 9, 6 ' WOMM FA U. n u, w u m (l m t� 4 W U d U ' �1 d W n ' J W W 0 my a ,W LL' Lt. d IL 0 IL QU >- IL 0 h_� i FLO Oa LL D r a hW, r Wo K , NEW M-4 r� r; ,� I 1 r �r �ANU OF r4AruRta1 w{ n�rli AND A CEPR7MEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH • .�M �� DIVISION OF ENVIROCJMEN TAL, HEALTH Ll Y47 Clliott Rodd 196 Memorial Play ❑ 7 County Canter Drive Paradino, California 95969 Addrass oroville,.California 959b5 folophona: 416/872.2941, Ext, 50 Reply to Chico, CoMornia X6926 Telephone: 916/53 -4281 Tolaphono: 916/01 2727 March 1.9,, 1 • Cliff Ash1 5549 Esplanade Chic, CA ew 9992Q' Re: Pre Applica.4��.Orr� Revs t�Modificati.onn O Use Pett' to include a sew etrtment �Ond said 1arid irrigation RranchTi Espl rdetal. ehcme Park Esplanade, Chico AP 6-i7-29 Dear Mr. ,AshbY: licat3on. This department k1 s trade an it tia1 review of the abovep a use �,rrrmit appl.icati-on, tho Plat�rli Ce,rmi• ,4ion normally � In order to act , � this 'd•epattment to detexl p if i��>~tt:e County ,u.ffici:ent iY�ormation -rte r regulations can be met- He ., r Cozxtrc��. �a� Health and Regional dater Qualm Regional earliest cohveni.ence, p,L,*ase contact: thio department by letter to the, At your e , l i;cati on. This deparbn,ent ti�-� l l reply formation is tm Board regarding , Your app plea nin ; Gorlazn3 jai on when euffic eats c be met. � T sed rtr meat review fee file to dete=iner isr of dcpxi ent -time. idl.l: log $38«00 p sincerely, Torn Rf3id Stz �er~rising Sa jitariz Divl.si eh taf v$ to>�ainental Health TR/bjP, ccc job, 14erw 1 n. w+..� M, « .... w ,w,,,x.�.l,,« ra r..wa n .n.M..twµw...MM++iw•u""•'•.' � I I �-, r I a Bt, !AU= PLANNINC DEPARTMENT PR.E,7APPLIC„ATION REVIEW FORM To Lynn W'anhart :',' Date: March 10 1986 Environmental Heal h' r RE: Pre-Application Review Information for; b, Cliff Ashby Phone' 5549 'Esplanade 345-4071 Chico, CA 95926 Enclosed is prelimina'ry,jdata our office has received or:generated concern%, ng the followin,4 p ect: AP 6�1?-29'�,' ,caa#86- 03 Q7--03 Moyoi£icat.aon of Use` Pe' i b'inclu ;r? sewage treatment gond and land iriiaation, loi:;R eco oia``the northwest' corner of Esplanade and No;�d Rgadj' Chico. Plea-ge indicate yoga: iisponse' by checking the appropriate box No requirements for this project. Mv The project as proposed, can meet. this Departments requirementa,',,;`.Sufficient prboL has been given that the' ao licantl pan meet the following conditions approved:The project as'l,p"'ropo'sed requirements of Ithis not meet the department. :� revision of the project.will be hecessary. The applicant has been contacted with this information. l� i DEPARTMENT OF PUIILI(C Hr:ALTH DIVISION OP ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Addr»ss 0 196 Monauial'Via y 07 County Cantor Drivo Roply to Chico, California 95926Cl 70 Elliott Road Oro•fllq, California 95965 ParadlSa, Crlifornic 95969 Tolophonc:916/891.2727 Tolephono:916/534.42x1 Tolaphona: 916/972.2961, Ext. 'd May 5, 1986 Engle & .Associates RE: Rancho Esplanade Mohilahome Park; P.O. Box 923 Esplanade, Chico , Red Bluff, C.A 96080 Proposed_ Sewage treatment facilities for a 270 space mobiloboms pari: Gentlemen: q review,of the above proposed A5 requested, � rnade an initial rr�v' sewage disposal facilities. Clearance by this department` 4v�.11 require completion of oris'plan review and a clearance by the California stateY Regional Water Qua;i.iir Corltxol .hoard, Central, Valley Region. T recommend that you contact that agency at once concerning the project. The area Engineer is Nr. Henao (916-322-1592). Please submit to this 'department the required review fee of :Additional billing will be made at the rate' of $38.00 per hour for tiitte required in excess of four (4) hours. Please submit soils information relative to the disposal site. Please also review the waiver balance calculations you, submitted considering rhe followings 1. Please- Itandarclize units of measurements; possibly figures could }, -� converted to ft. of pond dept.i 2. Please revise the expected wastewater flocs Per day. The usual design flow for a ntobi.l.ehome is 2 �j 5 gal:lransp er da- , not 150 gallons per stay. �' T3. Groandwater e.lpv�,rtion :i.nformatio l Will be required note that YOU plan an excavated pond 4. Please review the ex pected annual rainfall. The averacie rainfall, is 110t adequate for design piArposes 'fl�xrty six' (36� at rto7:e inches of annual ra'infa,ll ;ins 'not uncommon for this�a. M 5. The water balance figures indicate a da;i.lt, volume a1 wastewater: Other figures are on a monthly basis. Viet waste- water as e—water 'volume should be the monthly total. For example, rho monthly volume of wastewater could be indicated as fis. `oi Mind depth S , Is the pond to be evaporation and storage o�� also a ZC p ' "EVAP" 4 J , orchard poratio. , N percolation and: E17Ar as noted as prchard eva ` p n ration included in she design? pond eva . o 7. The use of wa�3tewater for irrigalien may require additional treatment depending on the type of irrigation. Please review California .State 'Wastewate'rRec lamation Criteria, California Administrative Code Title 22 Division 4. B. The proposed pond size does not appear to be adequate to g 5) or the when Chore is little store wastewater during ul�e five (5) ttton or no irrigation and rainfall equals exceeds evaperation. thus Please contact me if you have any questions concerning n que t' g letter have Yours trulyr Thomas Reid, R.S. Supervi silig Sanitarian Division of Environmental Thea l.th, ai Iwe Joe lienao P ; ,•�-:' �,11�� �,�.. � �., ,. r , . PLANNING COMMISSION i 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - O20VILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965.3397 PHONE-. 538.7601 �.' April. 17, 198 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL Cliff Ashby 5549 '.The Esplanade 1- � Chlcry, CA 9592 Re: Use permit, -A.P OG-77AP 4 77 Dear ,fir. Ashby: ',lourresponse to the initial study prepared March 20, 1987 on the proposed -aeration plant and sewage' disposal ponds at: ? anchc The mita at�onlmeassres that has been reviewed by' this o_.�:,Lce. thfat you submitted have on-en summarized and are listed as an &ttachment to this letter. A number of potentially significant impacts, however, were not adequately These } ar3.addressed..Chew impacts are as fol lows d 1. The potential to deg fide agri cultttral. soils anus nroc3uction capabilities on adjo riing properties. L,ecliEing production wcuid result in a comm"' ity-wide im�ac�t to the'�ac�r cultural econom of Chico. 2. The project has the potential to u .derrnine pie C�►i.co Urlaan r Area land use policies designed topresex1yaricul„ "= soils s 'west of the Greenline in agricultural produc- tion. v, A i if adjoining properties become unsuitable for agricultural use, neighbors have indicated-that they will. apply dor x General Man Amendments to urban uses The project"would r» theeforz be _fow� th`induoi�ti g berm or >lond failure has the potent 'a1, to hood z�e� i_ ahaaor:�,' �--- �� Y n Yie 1 d:g for that rn�air c, o � causing a health hazard and season. o close to the Mud Creek levee could s 5., placement of a pond yventu,asly, cause excnss'�ve soy-1 saturat X01 and, levee f a i- lure POUNIMMM cl.iff Ashby APri.I 17, 19$7 Page 2. 6. Reclaimed irrigation water will contain more thall twice the recommended ni,trUgen contend: for fertilization pi��.rposes, and'. potentially Iiigh levels, OT salts and phosphorus, impairing irooundwatex unlit _and the suitability c." the water for irrigation purposes 7. The ?ands may collect spray drift 4rom adjoining orchards, become: rxi c, and slo��ly seep inter _the roundwator table. 3. Acyurdi.ng to Bill Olson of 'the Fai.m Advisor's Office, S rri- a�ion in April may cause root rot or b1i�ht. September ir,,cigation may impair harvest �f early I arieties. 21—Inina of ir.ri. agation application haS the potential to, im not.-. ad'oifi .n `perties 9. The Board of Supervisors has determined that sewage d.L pOs�al o� nds are an incoyi title use in the A-20 zone. 10. The sewage pond will be 8 to 9 meet high, poltent,ial.ly vi,;si,ble from The,Esplanade and surrounding properties. 11. Approval, of the aeration plant and pond system has the poten-, tial to tae growth inducing to adjoining properties designated for agricultural use, properties not currently serviced by sewers , and may undermine community support for seweo ' main extensions. ,AIlowing ,projects on sewage ponds, may thwart the implementation of the 14itrate action Plan, which calls for extension of newer lines —id drainage facilities throughout ttie commu..nity 12. specific: measures to promote and provide for, pedestrian safetyalong N3rd `Highway and,across and s sidewalk should cross The Fsplarb�ad be identified. Offering curb, '' s k along the frontage ignores the large, not -a -part parcel in the center of the mobile home park,. 13. The mechanism which ensures sewa e would be in the aeration 1� ant for 24 hours and thea a further 30 days in 'the pond should be ,identified. A plan should be submitted for disposal` of solids and sediment: and other items not broken down by aeration. Because of potentially significant environmental impacts, aft Environmental impact Report (SJR) is i,equired pur�uant to the rer�ti cements of the California Environmental ;,Quality Act and the Butte County Environmental Review Guidelines. If you, as the applicant, wish to pursue the project,'the Environ- mental Review Coordinator (ERC) shall prepare or shall contract: Cliff Ashby April 17, 1987 Page 3 to have the ETR prepared. The ERC of the County Planning Department will send Requests for Proposal (RFPs) to three or more consultants with expertise on your: particulaz; type or project, and choose the responsible bidder who mbet.s all the specifications listed in the RFP, pursuant; to the attached information. Prior to an agreement being entered into for the preparation of a Draft EIR by the County and,a consultant, the aplplicant shall deposit the total amount of ' the compensationfor tlae consultant. 1f the County administration casts are c,,,reater than the deposit, you will be notified to y ^ exceeding $ 200 within ten (10) days bioC e-•t fiedtM When the $ y Y ail project is completed, we will refund any i.:nusetl remai.n6er of the deposit y wish to appeal. the requirement for preparation preparas ion of an' EIR, If you with the Planning ve art�:ment. This must you may file a writ.-en protest specifying g p � be done within f.i.fteon (15) days from the ' date of this notice. If your written protjest is not timely 'filed, an EIR. will be required. The FIR will fully address all the impacts identified on the checklist and summarized in this letter. Project;alteYnacive will be fully explored in an EIR. Also, the EIR wili discuss feasible project design' features of future land uses that would reduce environmental imp&cts. We w-111 continue processing your p;Loject upon receiving the RFP fee of $1,325. If you have any questions, please contact this office.; Sircerelyr B.A. KIAC'HER Director of Planning Laura N3. Tuttle Associate Planner LMT Attachment cc: Noble Engle & Associates, P.O. Box 923, Red Bluff, CA 96080 a MITIGATION MEASURES SUBMITTED 1. Cup and fill in pond construction to be balanced. 2. Extra soil, if any, to be used to construct a 3-Z'oot berm along the west property line. 3. Monthly mtedEnvironmental reports on the plant will al 'Health. 4 Install ;full urban and drainage improvements under, permit and inspection by the Department of Public Works, 5. Prov d3E a permanent solution to drainage. , upgrade,as necessary �o adjacent have adequate capacity or 6. Prove downstream facilities u Y properties :ill not 'bo, impacted. 7. Meet the regV rements of Fish & Game, Reclamation Board, Dgpartment of Nater Resources and other responsible State, agencies for work in the channel. 8. The pond 4nd berm shall be designed by an erigineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and Department of Water _ Re jources 9. Placement of the -and and design to be approved by The Reclamation beard and Department of Water Resources 10. The sewer line will be installed ina double -sleeve, double -lined pipe for containment in the event of a pipe break. 11. Ponds to m;ainLain two (2) feet of freeboard at all times 12.. Improve the Nord Avenue frontage to full urban standards. 3. Provide safepedestrian access across The Esplanade. 14� Install a left. -turn pocket at Esplanade and Nord.' 1.5. Install hydrants through the entire project area 1.6. Fence irrigation pond and past the potential hazards. 17. Post the orchard as irrigated with reclaimed selaage. 18. Have prepared an archaeological records search from the California State University,Ch:i.co, 19. Abandon, the existing septic 'tailks under.• permit by Environmental Health,: NW dISTFtICT OFFICE AT 5117 LARKIN ROAD WWI I IAIA'r,,, HAIKLTINE, PN,O, MANi(A@N. r 1ft4YJRONMENT0,L tiY H• F. CORNER OF oniUVILLE AIRPORT OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 ON LARKIN H-wPIQ PHONH 1916) 53=-e�"!3 March 3'1, :1987 Hu�l ao.C sAa-z�Sti pie nning CvMr, Laura m. Tuttle, Assoc. Planner APR 2 1987 Butte 0,ounty Planning Commission Gaov�lie, �laforr� 7 County Center Drive or'ov':;'lle, CA 95965 He: Cliff Ashby AP 06-17-29 _ Modification of Use Permit to include sewage treatment pond and land irrigation. Dear Laura: We have several concerns regarding the propos_d project. In the past we have had a mosquito problem in the summer drainage water from this park that was allowed to stand in an uncrtai:ntained ditch. Another concern is the cz`eatio,n of a se%Tage treatment pond and lard irrigation of the effluent. This method oL Sewage -ajsposal,can become a serious mosquito problem if it is not carefully planned and intensely managed. As a caitigat.i on to these problems we request that we the to review the proposed sewage system plan andth have an ohe park drainage plan and include our recommendations for mosquito control in these systems. Thefinal responsibility for insv ring, that a mosr,u to problem is not created will he with the owners of the property who would be subject to abatement proceedings under the Health & Safety Code if a problem is created.- Tease call if you have any questions regarding these comfnent s Sincerely, W �r Jim Catay Assistant Manager JC/db ccs Noble L. Engle & Assoc. " But -,e Co DIN. of C -n; I Ioulth IAAR 10 1986 BUTTE COUNTY pUNNING DEPARTMENT orovtlle, C`„ellfornln PSS -APPLICATION REVIEW FORM March 10, ],996 Lynn Vanhart lng�" Date: Tri. Environmen'-.al Idea jAN RE: pre -Application Review Information for ; Phone Cliff Cliff' Ashby 345-40171 5549 Esplanade " Chicar CA 95926 m data out office has recei�veg ora gee 3 ted Enclosed is prelinar y . r® act. Ai' -17x29 ► T,og# ' concerns ng the foll()Wing p j .-- l'' a sewage treatmen..t pond and o ,I _Se �'. rMi }' M_ o� dficaiion'd r M norhw v est corner of Es_ planad_. lana ix'x�� anon'---�'=�--- and. Nord Road ChicOz ' the appropriate box. Please indicate our response by checking No requirements for this project. r artments The project as propos3ed cin Meet this Lep eSufficient proof has been given that requirements.' equire ments. leant can meet the following conditions f apprtheo edw The project as, proposed can/does not meed: the 4 ��----{{ artment. A revision requirements of ,this dep The applicant project will be necessary. of file � .-� �� ata-t��'�. has been contacted With thi's inform Memovandufri re: Planning Department Environmental 'FROM; tal Health Ashby Use Permit Application, Esplanade, Chii�.s; SUSJECr. Cliff A Y AP# 6-17-29 1987 DATE' January 16� application and are department has 'reviewed the above app This dep rots providing the following comments and recommendation# to be r prov g ermit review and hearing p utilized for the use p Se�_Disnosal aeration treatment The applicant proposes to install a packaged the soutr,erly side of Mud Creek sa.de��ofhtkreccxePk� water facility on on the northerly . storage and irrigationpossible General Plan questi,olts, but applicant is aware of p " to ror 3t this time and Provide his conformance wishes p information. , ark is served by indi.viaual sewage Tre existing mobile home ais aging and repairs are becoming disposal systems • The systems facilities will serve more frequent. We understand the proposed, The California State the existing park and the, addition provided concep`�onal r Quality Control Board has satTn until complete Regional Water Q roval will not be g uirements are approval• Final app e Req an ineeri ng is submitted and Waste Discltarg anon purposes will. g Usage of reclaimed water for in engineering report adopted. approval of an require the submission a d app, Cale fornia Regional Water by the State Health Depand the health officer. Quality control Board, object to the proposed facility pro- This department does not obj enation and usage of reclaimed th vided final approval for plant operation to comply water a,.e obtained; and the Facility all Land Use requirements. �7_ aster Su 1. the existing mobile home p'arkermit Domestic. vrater is supplied by er.atcs under a permit pressure tank system that ap aired water well and p permit Will lie required iasued by the department. A revised p department for. a system expansion. When the total number of services exceeds Division of Sanitary Engineering permitting authority �5ill be' transferred from this 20G, perm g Da:va.s to the Stale Health Department, a� �1tai1;�: Planning DcPCI rtmL"It Ashby Use Permit Pkige 2 ifthe project is approved, this department rOcOIMIWnrl�; the falluwine cc)nditions of apla.,Qvall' 7. Provide a domestic wt"ter supply system in compliance with the California date Safe Drinking Wvater kcty including; cpmpl- iance with per!,lit requirements of the Gounty of Butte and/or State of California. 2. Provide sewage collection, treatment, and dl,8posal facilities in compliance with Waste Discharge Requirements of the California State Regional Water Quality Control. Board, t1le State stealth Department, the Health officer, and State of California Department of gousir:g :end Community Development, Division of Codes and Standards. 3. Provide compliance with California .Administration Code Title 22, Wastewater 1•t,ecl.amaLior_ Criteria including thdpreparation and app~oval of an engineering report by'California a Regio'tiDI Water Quality Control Board, St'aLe Health Department and the Health Officer. 4, Obt,? n all required approval for a pipeline crossing of Mud Creek. 5, Record documeiAs adequate to insure 'usage of the reclaimed waste water storage ,and disposal area for the lifetime of the mobile glome park or until public sewers are provided, ti. Provide for connection of all inoperative or. ;failing ,septic tank systems to the community sewage facilities. Connect other systems as may y q �y enforcing agenci°es required 1w 7. Comply with all mcbilehome park operations permit require- ments of State of California Department of Rousing and Community Development, Division of Codes and Standards. k tion;, foz�nerly filed wil-h the Secretary of Notice of E�eeanp Resources is now filed with OPhe notices at OPR now c35 �y�yistatute dof� i>nitating � , tions period. 15063. laattiaa. Study Fol lowing prel lial.nary r• evi g, the Lead Agency, shaJ.l Cject MY conduct an Initial Study tri if the p ri c?if the Lead Have a significant effect ren thenvironmAro nto determine that an EIR w=ill clearly be required for t project a ' Study is trot requaLred but may an ipitial still be desirable. (1) All phases ;sf project planning, implementation, and operation mustbc. considered i i st al udy of the. po n the Initial project. (2) To s tet the requiremeats 'Of thiscti ion,r,the 1,6 d.s Agency raay use sn Initial. Studg r preparEA, Pursuant to the Na,. ional Environmental policy Act. (b) Results. !� deterraine�> that there is Substantial (1) if the agency in- evidence that any aspeut�of� causerojeCa, signhficant k4 di:vidually or cumulative yp may d Bless of whether the effect on the 'environment, g overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the Lead Agency shal.1 either (A) Prepare an EIR, or EIR which the Lead (E) Use a previously prepared ,Agency determines would ,adequately analyze the project at hand,, (,! The Lead Agency shall preps,re a Negative Decl.am, t3r•�ai if the agency perceives no substantial ecausera that: the project a or any of its'aspects may significant effect on the anvironmc,'nt (C) Pmnnases. ' The purposes of an Injj,,,ial st7ady are to: (1) provide the Lead Agencywith infox°tone an EI or the basis for deciding whether to prep �, tOn; Ne�'���.ive L�eclarat , (2) Enable' an app li,cant or Lead Agency to modify , a pro, ect , mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, ,thereby enabling the project to qualify far a Negative Declaration; 1, (3) Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is re- guired, by 99 (A) Focusing the EIR'on the effects determined to be significant �,. (B) Identifying the effects determined:` not to be significant,and (C) Explaining the, reasons for, det:armining potentially significant effects would not be signi- ficant. (4) . Facilitate environmental assessmotit early in the design of a project; (5) Provide documentation ;of the factual ba.sisi for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; (6) Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; (7) Determine whether a,previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. (d) Contents. An Initial Study ''shall contain iA brief.' form: (1) A description of the project including the location) Of the project (2) An identification of the environmental.' setting; ) identification �ral effects by use of a checklist, matrix,orothermethod, (4) A discussion Of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified, if any; (5) An examination of w wether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other ap- plicable land use controls] (6) The name of the parson or persons who prepared or participated in the Initial Study. (e) Submission of Data. If the project ,is to be caioried out by a private person or private organization, the Lead Agency may requiresuch person or organization to .submit data and information which gill enable the Load Agency to prepare the Initial. Study. Any person may sixbm•lt any information in any ' form to assist a Lead Agency in; prepar- ing an Initial Study. (f) Format. mat. Sample farms for ar. applicant's project description and a review farm for use by the Lead Agency are contained in Appendices H and I. When used together, {� these forms would meet the requirements for an Initial. Study. 'These forms are only suggested, and public agencies are free to devise their, own format for an initial StudV. A previously prepared. EIR may also be as the Initial Study for a later project. (g) Consultation. As soon as'a Lead Agency has determdned that an 'Initial Study will be required for the project, t'te Lead Agency shall consult informally with all Responsible Agencies and all Trustee Agencies responsible for resources affected by the project to obtain the recomendations of those agencies as to whether an EIR or a Negative Declara- tion should he prepared. During or immediately after preparation of an, Initial Study for a private project, the Lead Agency may consult with the applicant to, determine if the applicant is willing to modify the project to reduce or avoid the significant effects identified in the Initial, study. Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code; Reference,, Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3 21082.1a 21100, and 21151, Public ic ResourCeS Code. Foimer ,y 'Section 15080. Discussions The purpose of this section is to describe the process, contents, and use of the Initial. Study. , This is a device not: mentioned in the statute itself. The Initial Study is necessary in order to provide the factual aid analytical ° basis for a Negative Declaration or to focus an EIR on the sigmi.ficant effectsof a project. This section is also necessary to authorize,and encourage the use of a number of efficiencies including using a'Negativei Declaration when the project proponent has changed his proposal in order to mitigate or avoid the significant effects Identified in an Initial Study. 7'he section also makes the point that the Ini.ti.al Study can be used to determine whether a previously re ,gyred EIR aro eq y apply e project, at hand. p p� would ad taatel a, l° to tla Determining 15084. Siggifit (a) Determining whether a project may, have a, significant Effect effect plays a critical role in the CEQA process. (1) When a Lead Agency, dJ ermines that theme is sub- stantial evidence that'a project may have a significant of feet' on the environment, the agency shall prepare'a draft M. (2) When a final.' EIR ideatifies one or more significant effects, the Lead Agency and each Responsible Agency shall make a finding under Section 15091 for each sig- nificant effect and may need to make a statement of overriding considerations under Section 15093 for the project 91 (b) The determination of whether a project ►na,y have'a significant effect on the envie-oiunent calls for careful Judgment on the Bart of the public agency involved., based to'_the extent possible on scientific and foatual data. An ironclad definition of sigluificant effect; is not passible because; the significance, of an activity may vary setting. Forexample,example, an activity which moray not be sige nificantin an area may be significant in a rural ifi (c) In. determining; whether an effect will be adverse or beneficial, the Lead Agency ,whall consider the views held by members of the g public in all areas" affected. If the Lead Agency expects that there w3.11 baa a substat� tial body Of opinion that considers or will consideV the efft�ct to be ad�rel•se, the Y�ead Agency shall regard the effect as ad- verse. 'Before requiring the preparation of an Blkt the Lead Agency must still determine whether env change 1,tself might be substantial.iranmentaL (d) In evaluating'the significance of the envie"onanerltal effect of a project, the Lead Agency slt,gll consider 'both prin 7 or direct anis seccandaa^'y or 4.ndi may be U.Sed as the basis for determining that the PbYsical change is significant. For example, if a project would cause overcrowding of a public facility and the overcrowd- ing causes an adverse effect on people, the overcrowding would be regarded as a significant effect. (g) The decision as, to whether a project may have one or more significant effects shall be based on information in ' the record of ilif, Lead Agency 1) if the Lead Agency finds there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the 'environment, the Lead Agency sba i"1 prepare an, reBaEIR (Friends of E Street V. City of , Ea.yward, (' 106 dal. App. 3d 3F3$ Said another way, if. fk Lead Agency is presented with a fair argument that a Project may have a significant effect on the 1 prepare axe BIR even ;. enc steal, p p e Lead ,Agency environment, th Ag y en though � t may also be presented with other substantial evidence that the project Will not have a significant effect (No `Oil, Inc. V. City of Los Angeles, (1970 13 Cal. 3d 68)a (2) If the Lead Agency finds there is no substantial, Pvidence that the project may have a sign ficant effect on the environment, the. Lead Agency shall prepare' a Negative Declaration (Friends of B Street v. City of �. _. Hayward, ('1980) 106 C.,a.l. App. 3d 988). (h)' In marginal cases where it is not clear whether there is substantial evidence that a project may have a sig - nificaut effect on the environment, the mead Agency shall be guided by the following factors: (1) If there is serious public controversy over the environmental effects of a project, the lead Agency shall consider the effect or effects subject to the controversy to be significant and shall prepare an EM, Controversy unrelated to an environmental issue does not require preparation of an EIR. (2) if there is disagreeinent between experts over the sigtlficance of an effect on the environment, the Leap Agency shall treat the effect as significant and shall prep�txe an EM. (i} If an air emission or water discharge Leets the exist- ing standard for a particular pollutant, tLe Lead Agency may presume that the emission or discharge of the pollutant will not be a significant effect on the environment. If other information is presented su,gssting that the emission or discharge may cause a significant effect, the Lead Agency sba.11 evaluate the effect and decide Ykether it may beg s�. 'nif ican t• r 93 Nate: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public 'Resources Code; Reference: Sections 21068, 21083, and 2110 1, Public Resources Code; No oil, Tnov, v. City of Los Angeles, (1974) 13 Cal. 3d 68. Formerl.�%;3��;t,I.on: 15081. Discussion: This section provides general criteria to gt.tide agencies in datermi.ning the significance of enviro=en.tal effects of their project as required by Section 21083« ' This section is necessary becauser the determination o,� significance is one of the key decisions in the CEQA process. This deci.•- si.on _leads to the preparation of either a Negative Declaration or an EZR which involves the additional re- quirements to investigate the significant effects, to propose mitigation measures and alternatives, to respond to public comments, and to make findinga on -the feasibility of t changing the project to reduce or avoid the significant. effect,. Subsection (f) is necessary for providing va interpretation of bow economic ,and social effects can ' be used in determi.n c ing the significance of physical c1^ianges. This interpreta- tion is needed to resolve a number of potentially conflict- I ing provisions in CEQA as explained in the discussion. of, Section 15130. Subsection (i) is added to allow use of a presiLnption that the emission or discharge of a pollutant will not be a,W_ sualificatandar c tifit is in compliance with air or water q y applying, to that pollutant. The presump- tion resume-tion would be eliminated if other information showed that the ezai.ssion or discharge would cause a problem. This approach is necessary, for promoting compatabi i,ty among state laws and programs. CVQA would, use air and water quality standards as'at least presumptively valid standards of significance. In the absence of unusual problems, agencies would be able to use +tAhe analysis of the project's compliance with air and water pol iution control laws in the place of a,separate analysis under CEQA. This approach should, help reduce the costs of the ,C QA process. Mandatory Findings 15065. of Significance, A Lead Agency shall, find that a project may have a sig nificant effect on the envi,rou.nent end thereby require an EXR to be prepared for thj project wherry anf of the foll,nw- ing conditions occur: (a) The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantiaily reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,,cause a "ish or wildlife population to ,drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or, anitral community, reduce the number or restrict the range of, a rare or endangered i plant or animal,, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. (b) the project has as the potential to achiov short-term environmental � ng-term en-- Ilse disadvantage of long-term vironmental'goals. (c) The projecthas possible ,environmental effects which are in Uvidually limited but cumulatively considerable. L9 Lised in t'be subsection, "C-umulativelq conNiderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are � considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past, projects, the effects of other mrrent projects, and the effects of probable future projects. (d) The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human °beings, either directly or indirectly. wote Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code; Reference: Section 210B3, `Public Resources Code. Formerly Section 15082. Discussion: __. This section _ nal: explanation' of the man- signif . datory findings of cane required by the Legislature in Section 21083. These mandatory findings control not only the decision of whether to prepare an EIR blit also the identification of effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR, the requirement to make detailed <findings on the feasibility of alternatives or mitigation measures to reduce or avoid the significant effects, and when found to be feasible, the making of changes in the project to lessen the adverse' environmental. impacts. This section is neces- sary to insure that public agencies follow the concerns of the Legislature i_n determining 'that certain effects 'shall be found significant and then take the actions at the different stages of the process than are required with significant effects, Article BN Negative Declargtion Process Decision to '' 50120. Prepare 9, Negative A proposed negative Declaration shall be prepared for a' project subject to MQA when either: Declaration (a) The Initi-al Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on t1iie environment, or (b) The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: 95 (1) Revisions in the project plans,or proposals rmde by or 'agreed to by the applicant before the proposed N'ega- tive Deciaxation is rel'eased for public review ew would avoidthe effects or mitigate the eftoots to a point where clearly no significant effects would aocur, and (2) There is: no `substantial evidence 'bo: ore the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. Note: Authority cited: sections 21083 and 21087, Public'. Resources Code; Reference: S( ction 21080 (c) , Public.. 3d _988; "itr , Resources Code; Friends of L ,street of Hayward v. (1980) 106 Cal., App Running Tease Corp. v. Superior Court, (1975) 51 Cal. g pp• 3d400. Formerly Sectons;1508(a) and 15080(d)(2)• Discussion: - Section 15070 su.,tantia7.ly mirroirs the languaf&e of public Resources Code section 21080(c). Under subsection (a) a N , - Live Declaration shall ' be ia,dopted, when the Initial .eta �' Study shows that the project maY not have a significant ref feet on -,the environment,, Subsection (b),; states that the Negative Declaration call be adopted when two conditions are met: (1) the project or plan or proposals as agreed to by the applicant prior to public review of tie proposed Negative Declaration has been revised to avoid significant effects or the effects have been mitigated down to a point where the effects are clearly insignificant and (2), there is no substantial evidence before the agency that thLe project as revised may have a significant effect. Subsection (b) reflects the concept of the zo--called "mitigated Negative Declaration." A kjtigated Negative Declaration is°not intended tobei a new kind of document . ...� it is merely a Negative Declaration' prepare in a slslightly different;<;ituation. The Guidelines would continue to give Lead Agencies the option of al.3,cowing applicants to modifY their projects ,so that the Lead Iqgency could make a finding that the `project would not haNre tx, significant effect on the environment as proposed. The pored tion of this section dealingwith the Miti€�at Negative Declaration provide of f it�3.encies in the process es:� where an kt)plica.nt can discovrer envjjvnm'ntal problems with his project atter submitting his application . T f the applicant can dify his pro,jeclt -to 9,,,roidthese significant effects, he can avoid the time and casts involved in preparing an E1R and qualify for a Negative T�eclaration the instead. At the saw time, he can avoid. the o gzc significant , r ects on as QUA would se0k Eto through' the F.IR environprocess otherwise d The public would still be given an opportunity p to det+sr%Lne .� rtuzaity t,o review the �'t�posal tar r I?, Yy � � Y6`t,- * k' ' f���, �'�,�r. �;���6 R�"„-'3ct� Ain, T•14��,ru+�r ,i,''r i. tp t. +�Jla. ,; �'' �e t, � oa ,� t)nc- aslivO of beet armyworm behav nfesta infesta- jot that call lic, exploited to curb tions is adult flight activity Pheromone tions traps, an effective way to monitor bcet- arniyworrrt populations, have shown that population density fluctuates with season- I al temperature patterns; infestations are more prevalent during the summer, when. temperatures are high. Pheromone traps may also provide early warning of an in a� festation, preventing an outbreak if' con troi is successful; Laboratory assays indicated that the beet armyworm can develop resistance to a ! Lannate, A Florida (I• L) strain was shown to be moderately resistant to Lannate,: and evidence indicates that resistance,~ to may still be increasing Resistance Lannate in the California strain (GR),� however, could not be detected. Several steps can be taken to suppress the devel- opment of resistance: (1) insecticide rota -Activated sludge, secondary treatment of municipal wastewater, tion, (2) localized treatment of infesta- tions, and (3) use of microbial agents. There are presently several insecti• for use against the beet MIGe reclaimed municipal cider registered armyworm on ornamentals in California, Including Dursban, Lannate, and Pounce.: �� � 1 I� for fJiii f1 8 �9i n Each may be incorporated Into the pre- sent chemical control program and used on a stational basis. A rotation scheme of � G. Stu7rt Takashi Asante Pettygrc,ve this nature will prevent the beet armyworm from being repeatedly ex- Th �r a proportional to the degree of human posed to a single insecticide, a situation conducive to the rapid development of in -contact risks and the adequacy and, reliability of treatment. secticide resistance, Another measure that may deter de- of resistance is localized treat- Land application of municipal (1) the lathof wastewater„ including he the �iclopment meat of infestations. Beet armyworm m- are often' clumped or wastewater is aswell-established pvactice in and and semiarid regions of the fresh water ;at a competrttve price; (2) potential use ,of plant nutrients in re- festations ” aggregated, apparently because of the many* world. In Sortie regions, 70 to 85 percent of claimed municipal wastewater, (3) the of high-quality effluents; (4) a egg -laying patterns of the adult female, Treatments confined to these areas re- such water is Bused for agricultural and landscape irrigation. ,As demand for wa- availability need to establish comprehensive water duce the amount of insecticide needed and ter increases in this country, irrigation resource planning, including water con- and reuse; an5 the avoidance d ( ) preserve natural enemies, as well as re:- preserve- w reclaimed municipal wastpwater _ servation of rnore stringent water pollution control ducing resistance development. thuringiensis compounds hold has become a logical and important com- - of total water resource planning requirements, including advanced ,Bacillus great potential for control of lepidopter- ponent and development: wastewater treatment facilities at mu- ous pests. In addition to the conventional In California, about 220,000 acre-feet nicipalities. Although irrigation with municipal broad-spectrum insecticides used .against the beet armyworm, the inclusion of BT of municipal wastewater from 240 cities and towns are used each year, principally wastewater is in itself an effective form compounds in a control program may de- for agrzdirltural and lairidscape irrigation. of wastewater treatment, some additional treatment must be made before suchwa- lay the occurrence of resistance. 13T has a different mode of action, which ri,,ay help In addition, about 610,1000 acre-feet per year of treated wastewater is incidentally ter, can be used for agricultural or land - to decrease the, probability of ttesistance development. Furthermore, BT is virturl- reused after it is discharged and enters surface or ground w,iters. Over half of the scape irrigation. The degree of treatment is art importai t factor in the planning, de- ly nontoxic to mammals, very compatible intentionally reclaimed municipal sign, and management of wastewater rri- systems. Preapplication treatment with most natural enemies, and relatively harmless to BT is registered for wastewater (57 perl2ent) is used to irrigate fodder, fiber, and seed crops, a use not gation is necessary to protect, public health, to plants. this use on ornamentals, Thut",ngienstn, requiring a high degree of treatment. prevent nuisance conditions during appli- cation and storage, and to prevent dam- however, is not currently registered. a stud,. shida issograduate about 7 percent is used to irrigate or- vine, andl other food age to crops, soils, and groundwater. ,rad cfta 1 � Par ro otEof o Unira5ity Call- tianrof g cou�:ses and landscape arias Reclaimed water quality ogy, Department of Entomology, forala, Riverside, This research was supported, in part, by the American Florists );ndowment The CloecknerFoundation, the California Assoel- makes use of about 14 percent of re - claimed wastewater each year, and these The quality of reclaimed water die to a great extent on the quality of Fred C. nion ofNurserymen, and Statewide Crflical Applied Funds UC nivervde, The authors uses are Increasing, There are several reasons for the pends the municipal water supply, the nature of Rena;,lrch ,from thank i~ : Joe fieglcy YodtrBrotheM Alva, Florida, for supply!ng beet armyworm, g rowing use of reclaimed municipal tie - the wastes added during use, and the de CALIFORNIA AQRICt! LTi, fiC, MARCH -APRIL 199 15 � 7IN Secondary Advanced gree of treatment the wastewater re Preliminary Primary secondary i 1 Wastewater quality Effluent Enrount CCIVEs (See' f g ) Low Rata Processes data routinely measured and reported at staodizationponds 0,Ontacuun tllslnlcpllon treatment plants mostly pertain to: bio- oi.lntaatldn aerated mgaans - n demand and suspended chemical D)Cy^� _ _ � Nltrogon Nomovnl solids that are of interest in water pollu- nllnhGauan.dandnhcntlon Lion Control. In Contrast, the water quality s«-eatpg H1g , Nat- Proaabaef „larliwe ion oxcnpngu greatest importance in GommtnuUen scalm.ntat-n -` t reak point chlonnauon C1SaraCterlStlC5 of p Gnt Remo aclva!-d sijdge tnrkheg Lltars i gas land O irrigation USE ng lite Salt Content and Con' i rotating biocontsctrrs I ovartand IIaW i i centration of specific chemical elements i I Soil errne sacanda y Phosphorua'Nemuvvd tit or p that affect., plant grow i � 1 g�d,m,n,.a-n i ability — are not routinely measured. I L _ _ _ i -"' cham,cot prampu„Lon Consequently, it is often necessary to Isoap„ „dad smlaa Nnmbval sample and analyze the wastewater for j s�ge_Proc In�s_� nhanvaRraoagotanan ,,,,�, a tilUSe constituents to determine its suit- I Biological Non 6lotoglcal l abillty for agricultural and 'landscape ir- thlakemng I otpanlee and�Miateta Namoval } thickening condlhaning i carbon adsorption rigation (table 1). d+gis on dowatunng b ClUah# t dewatering filter i — Evaitf!0011 of quality filter: centrifuge l tltsaolvalA Seds Removal 'I Centrifuge mcinerauon t11E' gllallty-of- irrigation' i drying ids reverse osmocrs historically, ' I wactrodialysla water has- been determined by the quantiv I l distillation ty and hind of salt; present; As salinity in- Disposal the reclaimed- wastewater increases also gallon. ems sheet rrlUrnci al wastewater treatment a above a certain level, -the p obi bility of- Fig. 1. Generalized flow she • •p , an use for Irrigation, soil, Water, and cropping- p increases- Potential problems are related alio salt below the root none Lon -termer Soil permeabes itsility, effect on the plant, to the total salt content, to the types of and salt, or to excessive concentrations of one use of reclaimed wastewater for qua W� struc ture, in reducing the rate at which wa- errients. These problems are no I tion is not possible without adequate sodium in irrigation we may hickect wa- or more el ter can move into the soil as vvel i as soil different from those cat',sed by salinity or drainage. aeration capacity. If the infiltration rate specific ions in fresh water and are of con Specific ion toxicity impossible cern only if they restrict the use of the Toxicity Occurs when a specific ion is is grt�a ly decreased, it the plant with n ugh water for water or .require special management to rowth. In addition, reclaimed maintain acceptable crap growth and 'taken up by the plant and accumulates in to supe y yields, ;t or irrigation ablwith reclaimed amounts that result in damage or reduced la , ion systems are fre- tewater, there, the suitability of a yield. The tons of most concern in v> astewater ss deet and man - water wastewater are sodium, chloride, and bo- quently t n less desirable soils or those al - water, is judged against the level of mannecessaary use of reclaimed municipal wastewater is agemen aproblems p atm dify s it p cfiles by ex- pected agement needed to cope' successfully with ron. The most prevalent toxicity frau the ready having soil permeabili y g problems that are ex- the water -related p caused by boron originating from ills• c- this of household and or lanalong and rearranging the affected Co develop during use. � The approach often used is to present charges permeability problem ttsually oc- water quality guidelines that stress the industrial plant”, management needed to successfu.ly nse also increase during domestic use r wa A :p surface layer of the soil and is certain quality, Such ter, especially where wafer softeners nes �(tfi� ma ��y the to a relatively higli sodium irrigation water: of a i .i . or very low calcium content in the Ayers and D. W. �yestcat (F d used. With sensitive out c, toxicity even sodium f� ra � 0 cult: to correct pwtth The hanging.tlle crop a applied water.- At a g' deltnes are given m table 2, avelo by R. S. Ay problem is usual- to tb Irrigation and Drainage Paper 29, Water or the water supply. p p tion • 'culture," 1985) and West ly accentuated b hot and dry weather. r, adsor tion ratio (SAR). the. tnfiitra Anality for Agriculture, ——prRoaengg cot and Ayers ("Irrigation Water Quality common irrigation water quality Criteria n in Irrigation with Reclaimed TABLE 1. Laboratory analyses needed to evaluate in Municipal Wastewater -- A_'Guidance--------�— --' Unit irrigation Water Manual , G, S, Pettygrove and T, Asano symbol , (editors], Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, FrtaPsurement Salinityo,t - a Michigan, 1985), salt conteintt sow mL al o/cm or dS/m 10 -2,000 Electrical conductivity TDS Salinity Total dissolved solids 0,2- 20 Salinity, measured by electrical con- Cations and anions: 10,2+ megf L 0,1- 5 Calcium M92+ ntttglL 0•l. 40 ductivity, is the single most important Magnesium Nn z meq/L o " oil + trieq/L factor in determining the suitability of a sodium cos oil - io water for irrigation. Plant damage from carbonate 111003- mog1L a,t - 0 both salinity and specific ion Concentra- 6icarbnnate meq/L20 Chloride of - meq/L Lion is usually tied closely to an increase Sulfate in salinity.- Establishing a net downward 0,1 . 2,0 movement of water and salt through the FAisceiloneous B mglL 5,5. s.5 m unit root sane is the only practical way to noron N o.l - 15 manage a salinity problem• Under such p (hydrogen ion h ratio gA p or Rria °- Hdsorption ratio conditions, good drainage is essential to Sodium 16 CALIFOSNIA AGRICULTURr-. MARCH' -APRIL 1987 rslte increases or decreases with the salin- tailed irrigation water quality criteria land with a 56 -inch depth of water, Crops ity level. Therefore„ SAR 'and electrical presented in table 2. Table 3 contains grown include cotton, .corn, Alfalfa, sor- I_onductivity' of applied water (EC µ;) chemical analyses of representative wa- gltum rice and `,-,rigated pasture, EfPucnt should be used in combination to evaluate ters in California; relatively unpolluted is blended with luw-nitrogen water to con - the potential permeability problem (see waiter from the Sacramento River at Kes- trotgrowth of nitrogen -sensitive crops table 2). wink; a moderately saline groundwater such as cotton, RpTeiaimed municipal wastewaters are from Vernalis in San Joaquin County; and The quality of reclaimed water from normally high enough in iboth salt and cal- two treated municipal wastewater ef- Fresno and 1$akersfield can be evaluated cium, and there is little concern for the fluents from Fresno and Bakersfield, by followlnf, the guidelines in table 2. Al - water dissolving and leaching too much The Fresno municipal 'wastewater though the; Water quality is -ttuch -that calcium from the soil surface. Sometimes treatment plant is designed for 60 million "slight" to "Moderate" permeability, tox- reclaimed wastewaters ' are relatively gallons per, day (mgd) and is now pperat- icity, and M Weellaneous problems can be high in sodium; the resulting high SA.R is a 'ing at 38 mgd., Land treatment of effluent expected h om use of the3e ' two major concern in planning wastewater ir- r t include., both percolation ponds (9DD (4 wastewaters, e ,dyers and Tanji concluded tri aEian rn'ects, g projects. acres) with 21 recove pumps for export recovery p that odd normal farming practices used of recovered water, and a 60D acre on-site in the,area fihould allow frill production of Nutrients farm using efflUent directly for irrigation. . adapted eropa; Table;', summarizes their The nutrients in reciahned',t•ltunicipal Crops grown with both direct effluent de- evaluation df the suitability of reclaimed wastewater -p,Uvide ' fortilize5r value to livery,and perediated-recovered water in- wastewater for irrigation. crops, or' lands --apes ,but in- certtiin in-„ elude cotton, conn, alfalflq, almonds, sor- Health and regulatory stances are in, excess of plant nee4s and ghum, beans for seed, wine grapes, and eau, -,e excessive ,vegetative growth„ de -,r winter cereals. considerations layed- or, uneven,maturity, or reduced The gakersfield treatment plant #2 is „There is some risk of human exposure --quality. Nutrients occurring in significant designees for 19 mgd and hi now operating to pathogens in every 'wastemter recta- quantities include nitrogen and phosplho-, at 7 to 16 mgd. It provides pi•lmary treat- mati:on,and.sreuse operation, but the. i rus, and occasionally potassium, z-tnc, bo- ment followed by ,aerated lagoons cover- . health concern is in proportion to the de -- ran, and sulfur• ing Si acrts and reservoirs to up - gree of huinancontact with the reclaimed' The most beneficial and the most frEw. to 90 days sof storage if needed, The efflu- water and the adequacy and reliability of - s' quently excessive nutrient, in reclaimed ent is used to sup.aly S,IliO acres of crop- < the treatment processes (fig. 1). municipal wastewater is nitrogen, Treat- TABLE2. tauldoHnea fnr ftrierprotation of water quality for Irrlgotlon (slier Woataat and Ayers) ed wa.atewater -typically contains 90 --_ --- begroa of restriction on use pounds,per ache -font (33 mgl'L) of total Potential irrigation slight to r nitrogen. Most of this is in the ammonium problem Unita None �.� moderato savors or uickl 3 r availallle organic .form with quickly Satinih fAN,r is little present as nitrate, The actual eco- crop water nomic value of the nitrogen depends on avallab,lityl Eb'w dS/M or < 0.7 w 0,7- 3,0 > 3.0 amount of water applied, crop' require- mmho/cm menta and other factors; in many situa- tos mg1L <459 450 -2,000 >2,000 tions, the recl;,med water contains at Permsability(A41ecti, lnfiitt,aoonrateor least the total crop requirement' for nitro- water into tndi son. gen as well as for several other elements. Evaluate us ng ECw ar`ct SA'R ii�l.�cdflaneotis s problems' SARR U -;l andEC,y =>0,7 03.0.2 < 0,2 Clogging problems with sprinkler and p a>1.2 - 6-12 3- a ->1.9 1.9.0,3 < 0.3 1.9.0.5 0.5 drip irrigation systems have been report- e 12-2o a>z,s ^ s 1 -1,3 < 1,33 ed. Slimes and bacteria in the sprinkler -20-40 b>5.o 5,0.9.9 < 2.9 head, emitter orifice, or supply line cause 'Specific ton toxfOi ,r plugging, as do heavy concentrations of (Affects sensitive algae and suspended soli,!k u. The most fre- g p amps) Sodium (No) quent clogging problems occur" with drip Sudece lrrmganon 8,0 < a 3 - o > s irrigation systems. From the standpoint Sprinkler irrigation nnSgLL < To > 7ti of public health, however., such systems chloride (Cl) are often considered ideal, because they Surface irrigation moq,'L < a 4 - 10 > 10 are totally closed and, avoid the problems mg/L <140 Sprinkler 1trigalfon moq/L <3 140 -350 > 360 of worker safety and spray drift. mg/L < p , ton Excessive residual chlorine in treated Boron (B) m9/L e0.7 U:7 • 3.0 > 3.0 effluent due to chlorine dWnfection causes plant damage when sp..Aa tlers are Miofteel anen'tq used, and the effluent is 'sprinkled on fo- (Affects l.iage.'Residual chlorine at less that 1 mg/ libie should. not affect dant foliage, but when ' ..suscep crops)L Nitro en (total•N) m L' < 5 9 9/ 5 30' > 30 it exceeds 5 mg/L, Severe plant damage Bicarbonate (HCO3) Can Ocl 11r. (overhead sprinkling only) meq/L < 1.5 14.,, 6.5 > 0.5 Water quality Case Studies' mg/l. < 90 Pit unit go • 500 500 ---•normu(range 6.6 -B:4 ---- WO have used a brief report of case Residual chlorine mg/L 1.0 to- 6,0 > 6.0 studies by Ayers and Tatiji (see'table 3) to (overhead guide the raader through some of t11e de- gPrin411ngonly) CALI�CRNIA AGRICULTURE, MARCH --APRIL 1987 17 - . tj I ��'�En° r) � S" �o.M �`. �r,M1r I,y ` 1� 1•i Y� a� �. '" s f rr �`L�il l" � i a fiK ���r 'v �° � � ' 3fV; Sha . ti c,p s n ik r.t �µ r it F i r� Rl "{i sr. ;x� •rii rK�LV4.j Tho contaminants In reC'almed water I f f a� that ►arc of' health significance may be I rlahslflvij as biolaglt�aL and chemical p i ✓•r ,kY rr I1t pa�H .r •L:S 'r ! ur�,i �y� r e i;+� � :a'� k f♦i.� r �r7wc 51y ': I or most ot the uses of reclai %Y%t1, Pathogen mmed pose the IN" irroateit health r1S)fs, and, water squality standfli' is For pollution control are prop- erly dlf'(icted at these agents. Bacterial patlloilviis, helminths, protozoa, and vir- uses APO removed in wastewater treat- anent processes in varying degrees'. The most 11'11portant treatment process from the strilidpoint of pathogen destruction is chlorine disinfection, The inactivation of viruses by chlorine is, however; highly rf variable, To ProtiVA public health without bm necessarily discouraging wastewater rec l lamation and reuse, many regulations in - elude water quality standards and A seconds clarifier requirements, for,, treatment, sampling and- monitoring,,-treatment-plant.;oper- ry arifier in which sludge settles before effluent undergoes dual -media filtration, ations,. and.,,treafinent process •reliability TABLE 3. Analyses oraepreaentativewaters in CaliforniaTo minimize health risks and aesthetic problems, tight controls are imposed on Surface water Groundwater '-" "' the delivery and use of reclaimed mater Sacramento tien,Sa area Wastowater effluent after it leaves the treatment facility, Reg- Rlver son Fresno l3akersaela uhitions for a specific irrigation use are Cometh -- Keswick Joaquin Co. May May ts7s (dale basad on the exrected degree of contact -------__ �_. June 1979 1976` unknown) EtkdScir/ alronauctivity 0.11 r• with the recLaimed_water and the Intend - PH 1.2, o.69 0.77 ed use of the irrigated crops. , pli 7,1 7 7 Calcium(meq/L) 7.0 Conclusions 8,6 Magnesium (may/L) 0.410 5.0 ! t P.35 sadaum(meq/L) 0.28 2.72 1. ' .74 Land application of municipal ' PgCa�U0 stum (meq/L) .0.04 4. ' 3.4848 4.74 Sodium adsorption 0.10 0.35 0.66 wastewater i5 common in matey regions calla (n o.4 of the world. According to a 1984 Califor- Bicarbottate(meq/L) 0.69 2.0 3.3 4.0 nia_State Department of health Services Sulfate (meq/L) 0.15 3.11 3.87 3.5` survey, approximately 220,000 acre-feet Chloride ate+ m mon 0.06 2.29 1 9y 1•z; of municipal wastewater are reclaimed Nitrate + ammonia -N (mg/L) 0.08 5.63 3.01 Boron (mg/L) 5.9 14 (TKN)• d,5(NO3-N) annually in California by 240 wastewater L) solfds (mg/ 1.4 0.4a 0,36 treatment plants that supply water to Totatdissolved more than 380 users. (From EC x 640 TDs) 72 Arsanic(mg/L) 800 442 477 One approach to evaluating 'the st .- Cadmium (mg/L) <0.002 ,ability of reclaimed Wastewater is to con- chromium(mg/L) ,o.00z c0.01 sider it the same as any other, freshwater Lead (r,fg/L) 0= source and appraise its suitability for irrj: ' FOURCS: Ayers, and K,ianJi.1981.'AgronomtcAiioectsuIrNgtflonwith <0.05 ga¢lOn using elle CKjt@Cla in table 2. These 1^:a5tawater,` Proceedings of the specialty Conference, Water Forum. 81. American. aclety Of Civil Engineers, criteria, when applic�i, to the reclaimed TKN total Kleadahl nitrogen, water quality of Fresno and Bakersfield, suggest that there will be no serious po- TABLEA, Evaluation for the Suitability ofrecfuirhedVrestowaldrfor irrigatfon (after Ayers and TanJl) lemyain�the nuse lOf reclaimedc or eYadlUYtiblpa Problem Brae R ���DogreL of nroLlibm Friar, Wastewater from those cities. in fact, s4alnrty sekerorlata both projects have been operated for Permeability, ►1c;t,rcx a�, No proble- - m many years •'ith few problems stemming ' SIIgiI' from poor water quality. Slight Toxicity (Ta sensitive crops only) Takashi Asano Is-Yate------- r,eclam specfallst, Sodium California Slate {eater Resources L'antroi Buara r Sprinkle r irrigation Sacratnehto Sprinkler Irrigation Slight No Problem Civil Engfntern g Uni erslyfOf Calilfdrnla, Department Chloride Surface slight to mojbrdle, Slfght to moderate and G. Stuart petlygro'e is Coo 5urtece rctigaban Soils 5 Perallve E.rtenslan Sprinkler irrigation No prc' Item peClallst, lyeparhnenl of Land, Air and (rater Boron No prove n No prab(om Resources, UC Da Vis, fiedvymetals No probter, , No problem Most of the .material ciledfit this papier Is from Noprobaerr Nopreblem the State of Callfienria technical report, Irrigation lmiscellaneous (Suscephble crops only) No problem tyith Reclaimed Alunicipal wastewater - A Guld- Nitrogen ante Manual, The authors gratefully acknowledge Bicarbonate slight tomoeorato the help of J. D, Oster and oft), lI: ilestcot R. S. Slight to moderate Ayers, and t,, C4'rook for allowing liberal use of their Si lbtil to moderate nlatarlals 111 thls paf�Ort Thanks are also due to til -�M- - 7:1nit and 11, G. smlrb for ma10t'la1 conCrlbution. 18 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE, MARCH -APRIL 1987 s � d N,niter-Dep'artmenfal error andel" TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Planning SUBJECT Compatibility of Sewage Treatment Ponds in an A-20 zone i.n, conjunction with Rancho Esplanade Mobile EtoE» Park OATEt January 6 1986 On November 23, 1.971, the Planning Commission approved a Use ,Permit to allow a 271 space mobile home park, located at the 'northwest corner of N rd Highway and the Esplanade.The original plan proposed septic tanks and leachfelds for sewage disposal. Currently 150 mobile' home sites have been developed using .this 'method. However, undercurrent Health Department regulations, full bei ldout or the 'park can not be reached using septic tanks and leachfields. The current owner is proposing a sewage disposal pond system'for,effluent treatment. The sewage pond treatment facility will consist of a collection system with a; large ,chamber for the removal of grit and, grease, a 2 acre (approximate) pond with aerator and a pump and ,irrigation system. This facility will be designed to serve all 271 spaces and will replace all septic tanks and leachfi.elds. Because irrigation is not needed ,year round, it is that the, pond be designed, with adequate capacity for 100% containment of waste water during y non -irrigation months. Since this is a modification of the ori ,gina:l plan, the Use Permit will have to be revised. En�_e & Associates, g Engineers for'' -the project, have submitted preliminary plans showing the sewage displ,sal pond located in an orchard on the parcel to the [forth. Waste water from the sewage pond will be 'used to irrigate the orchard, This parcel is zoned A--20 and under the current zoning definition, a sewage "treatment facility it not listed as'. an allowed use. Engle ,& Associates is requesting that the Board review the proposed use -3nd determine if it is 'allowed in the A-20 'zone CS:jmc ENGINEERING PLANNING - 61jY�1/hYINi� P.O, 6OX 823 u RED BLUFF, CALII"OMNIA 000130 PHONE (_c I6) 527.6810 I,4/,26 /1 5 BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISOl:S 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVIL_E, CALIFORNIA, 95965 �tu�oco, Plaoi»�nq, COMM, � RANCHO ESPLANADE I10BILI" PARK 0 E 0 2, 7 1,9 8. S LOCATED NORTH OF CHICO DEAR SUPERVISORS,, THIS LETTER; IS TO RE-DUESI' YOUR DETERMINATION ,TWAq � Qu ' POND � ` WH101i IS PROPOSED 1-0SEP:�"f: A COMBINED PURPOSE Cif' ,CRF i GAT I ON WATER �. STORA.GE AMID EXTRA TREIAf MENT 'i ACILITY FOR ,RESIr)i`NI'rX i.' AFFLUENT FROM THE RANCHG ESP LANARE MOB LE, HOME PAG�I�; IS PkOPOSED USE AND THE FART''. CULAR ° clRCWMs-rAfxC,ES TNVOLVEDo. THIS: WILL ALLOW US 'I`O ENHANCE THE ECONOMIC, VIABILITY OF THE AGRICULTURAL PARCEL ON i=IFIICH Wr= P5.- POSE TO llPPLy THE IRRIGATION WATER ODTAINED FROM THE PARI,? EFFLUENT BY PROVTOING IRRIGATION "E WATER AT NO COST TO HE AGRICIILTURAL USE. THIS WILL PtLSO ALLOW US 1"0 DISPOSE OF THE WASTEWATER EFFLUENT FROM THE MOBILE HOME PAR IN A WAY WHICH GREATLY CONTRIBUTES TO,THE ENACTI-1ENT OF THE INTENT CARRIED BY THE NITRATE ACTION PLAN WHICH 12 IN IW FFECT FOR THE AREA BY THE ELIMINATION OF THE LEACH 'FIE .LD DISCHARGE O UNTREATED EFFLUENT FROM ONE-HUNDRLED-F' ND—FIFTY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WHICH ARE PRESENTLY DISPOSING OF THEIR SEWAGE THROUGH THE USE OF SEPTIC TANKS AND LEACH FIELDS WITHIN THE EXISTING MOBILE HOME PARK. THE FOL.LOtj I NG INFORMATION I S SUPPLIED AS , BAC[ --'Gs= ojjNnI INFORMATION WHICH IS PERTH 5_NT TO TIME EXISTING' PA(�>4; ANIS ,OUR F'Ki PosAL FOi, COMPLETION OF THF; FIROJECT. IN THE EARLY 197018 THE PROJECT WAS 'APPROVED TO XNC LUDO l 2 11 1`+10t3I LE HOME PARK 'd:r`"JiACES AND THE; ACCOMPANYINQ DEVELOPMENT Or RECREATION ROOM ANT) LrNUINDI R'Y FAC I L I TI ES AS WELL AS THFi OTHER TYPICAL FEATURES SUCH AS STREET AND WATER AND SEWAGE FACILITIES„ iso CIF THE SPACES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND HAVE BEEN IN USE: FOR SOMETIME_ THE PRESENT T OWNERS WISH TO IMPROVE THE EXISTING PARK IN SEVE�`AL� WAYS AND TO FINISH THE REMAINING i` 1 SPACES. 011E OF THE MAJOR FEATURES OF TIME COMPLETION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF .THE PARE; IS THI" U,PGRAD I NG OF THE' EXISTING SEWAGE DISPOSAL MIST HOD FROM SGPT I C TANKS AND LEACH FIELDS TCI A COLLECTION SYSTEM WITH A LARGE- CHAMBER FOR THE, NEMOVAL OF CRIT AND GREASE, AN AERATION POND FOR THE 8TOR, '1G C, ` AND TREATMENT BY THE ADDITION 01 OXYGEN THROUGH AE-RATORS, AND THE USE CSF THE TREATED EFFLUENT A(,3 A SOURCE OF IRRIOATION WATER .FOR THE AGGRO ULTU AL., PARCEL WHICH LIES NORTHERLY OF THE IE I ST I ISG PAFI:. WAGE GINE CIF TWO IiiiC►,®I r h4flo Co. Planning Comm, Dk. CtbVtlit�i Gallpl'rti0 BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RANCHO ESPLANADE MOBILE HOME PARI.,: LOCATED NORTH OF CHICq I!�I ORDER TO MAKE USE OF 'WATER WHICH IS AtJAI AU1, i F"(::R IRRIGATION MANY FARMS AND RANCHES UTILIZE. S O(`,AfaE-VC IN THI-S PARTICULAR CASE THE WATERCoUt_ta BE AP'P'LIED WITH C. Y I='F '1AR%' TREATMENT ('THE. REMOVAL OF GRIT AND GREASEAND ST:CLL MEET THE 'T REQUIREMENTS OF THE' WRTE,R QUALITY CONTROL. BOARD FIND THE )-BUTTE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMEINT. THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN MEETINGS ETWEEN ENGLE AND ASSOCIATES AND MR. 'TOM RIEla OF THE BUTTE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. THE FOND IS PROPOSED TO ENHANCE THE POTENTIAL 3 FOR THE UT I L I ZA`I' I ON OF THE EFFLUENT AS IRRIGATION WATER. THE: POND r IS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE STORAGE DUftiIh1G TIMES OF THE YF,AE WHEN IRRIGATION 19 UNNECESSARY. AERATION IS nFOPOSED TO MINIMIZE ��- ODORS AND FURT HER REMOVE SOLJ D'5 Pk T OFt TO THE APPLICATION AS IRRIGATION! WATER. SASED'ON ALL. A'VAI1.ABLE INFORMATION WE THEREFORE E RSP`; THAT YOU DETERMINE THIS 'REQUEST FOR Ai=PRO�JAL qF A ' COMES INED UGE PON�ID 'T Q BE AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION) TO A NUMBER OF FACETS OF THE !-*iROBLEM, WITI-I WHICH WE ARE FACED RELATT'JE TO l-HE COMPLETION I AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE RANCHOG ESPLANADE MOBILE (TOME PARK, THAM YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YQUR CONSIDERATION i VERY TRULY YOUR$, N- - NOBLE L. LNGLEy P. E. CIVIL ENGINEER NLE/APL„ _ PAGE TWO OF TWO Y. rA,;q Buf a co. Ran ntrig Oomrm Apr! 1 3, 1987 APR l 1987 orovills Califur�ai �N�O�••,,�n�VII�ONMi"1\61' a RL� EVALlJ i TON AP 06'-17-29 �?r•r� e�ci: bescrip��on The project "ect cc, fi i si s of the' completion of the e Permit Which is for Mobile Horny Park, a fatal of 277 spaces for the xrsting use required because UfMchanges 't in Of the tese' Rancho' Ls Permit has p 1 anade sewage. Th E` owner add 7egtaletions been existingproposes to 1�1'Mobile for the disposal of 1.50,,unit t rnob d 1e Mame, park for home, spacee to 271 spaces. 5"ewQ th� a, e crJ11ec1 ion, treatment ar�idpdisposalis total of to be provided fr e,r7stin r both the'new pried g 150 units which are ,Portion of the pro leach fields as the Presently usinag septic and tile sewers fiat the me of sewage p p tanks and 4 collection Of lual+J 5W Park an for' the;pro proposed � dis osal. Installation of p addition wage from both the existing a package aeratio t° the importar.r n p1'arlt forrw�,s`eWatep,ark clre propo-,d as -to that the trealtment. well as required under 7i eated_wate, holding Pond' "All .'attached,f le 22, Qiv,sioh 4 s not r,eclamaian o,°f the California ,fid -Section 60305b 1 teria ttinistrat.ive Cvcietsee Exhibit holding pond is propo,edntorb� ental Hea1th). An irri�Wa,stewai:er residences and across ioceted awi gut on water for, the Mud Creek from the �'�'froin the existing r Ss water so Pane to during the winter months thr�t'is 'does not have provide Stara'ge when it is not needed to be wasted This' holding' for irrigation, Prov Thi g pond aiso wiil have is g. extended aerati°0 " hP added benefit; of water from residences, and the he removal o po+ration of the reclaimed poll, from the g source water "lvitrate a large of wet 1 is Action ZGrte".' of the water, supply for the project to e A sutplplema4htal 'Water to uppl'y to the park and c enhance the reliability the proposed fire hydrants which, will greater fire flow and the neighboring ' residences, as well serve both `the grass land, fires, as tank tl^L,eck re park fiil water Both the existing proposed to b�� co g and the new interior a3:rphalt concre��e construct with t park streets are pavinglass II aggregate s Nor with a center crown base,, and gkltter, -r Avenue is wn section acid curb and. acid sidewalk is Proposed proposed to be err widened' and curb and , additional safetyf g the north f " side gutta O r i r Pedestrians, de 't° provide Page one of seven • -- - - April 3, 19V ENVIRONMENTAL EVAT,UATION AP 06-1.7-29 DxSCUSSLQN OF , pro'ieL't Descr%�tian, , The project consists of the completion o,,_ the ex,,,kiting use permit which is for a total of 271 spaces for the Ranoho Esplanade Mobile ,dome Park. Modification of the use permit has. been required because of changes in the regulations for this ,disposal of sewage. The owner proposes to add 121 mobile home spa(r;os 'to 150 -unit mobile home park for the approved total of osl existing ed 271spaces. Sewage collection, treatment and disposal ,Ls prop to be provided for both the now "portion of the park end the existing 150 units which are presently using septic tanks and leach fields as the means of sewage disposal.. Installation of sewers fcr the collection of raw sewage from both the existing park and the proposed addition to the park are proposed as well as a package aeration,, plant for wastewater treatment. It is important to mote that the treated water holding pond is not required under Title 22, Division 4 Section 60305b (see Exhibit nAIIattached) 'of the California Administrative Code ("Wastewater reclamation criteria - Vnvironm.enta.l Health).,An irrigation water holdii..i,g pond is proposed to be 'located away from the existing residences and across Mud Creek from the Park to provide storage for the recla med water so that 'is does not have to be wasted during the winter months when it is not needed for irrigation. This holding pond also will have the added benefit of providing extended aeration as well as separation of the reclaimed water from residences, and the removal of a large source of nitrate pollution from, the "Nitrate Action Zone". A supplemental water well is proposed for the project to enhance the reliability of the water supply to the park and to provide greater fire flow water to the proposed, fire hydrants which will serve both the park and the ne.aghboring rwesi.dences# as ,well as tank truck refill water for wild land and grass land fires. Both the existing and the new interior Park streets are proposed to be constrixcted with Class IT, aggregate base ander asphalt concrete paving nti sect cin? cu7cr with a gutter. Nord Avenue ss proposed Vic?' be w�den�ed and ctau�cb�aT�� ci'ut�er _ . provide :and sidewalk i s proposed a ong the north side t o �.. .� w additional sa -ety `for pedestrians . Page one, of seven . I -2agee two of seven Discussion of Checklist Items lbs it ;is anticipated that: the earthworkfor both the grading and - the abandonment of°'the,septic tanks will be done in a manner which will not generate excess earth.,The septic tanks whioj presently discharge sewage directly into the ground south of Mad Creek will be properly abandoned in accordance: with all applicable xegtxlat;ians and not removed" as originally stated. The earth removed from the site of the proposed irrigation water holding y k' hol.pond w:il be used�to construct the embankments t comprisedapproximately 0o 4 feet Of excavation "which will be nkments to a site. This meansfthat no "disposal earthwork owill balanced on "disposalplan"beyond, this height is necessary I because there will be no excess excavation for the po d. ler "Soils on site inolude Viva; Clay Loam and Farwell Clay Adobe, neither of which have a high erosion' potentia.], . Erosion is thereforenot a concern at this time." Dust control during construction will be provided by`the application of water as required. 1g: This proposed project involves as balance 'of tradeoffs which can remove a substantial number of dischargesofnitrate, rich :sewage from tr.e area designated in the Chico Area Nitrate Action, Flan but will result in some impact to the area north of the Chico Area Green Line by the placement of the required aeration and irrigation water holding pond on the north side of Mud Greek". By constructing the proposed facilities In accordance with the appro21 ved plans'and,accepted common practice the addition of the pp approved new spaces would not be expected to have an adverse impact on groundwater; By using realistic quantities of sewage which would actually be, generated by the project; and recognizing that much of the Nitrogen compounds rema3.nirig after the holding period in the pond will be in the form of algae a substantial reduction in nitrates is anticipated by the proposed project. This means that Even though 45% more spaces will be present than now exist there will be a substantial reduction in the potential for water gttality degradation over what is now existing. According the Bill Olson of the Butte County Agriwulture Department the application rate for nitrogen to walnut `trees is Aw'' normally 200 to 250 pc -rods per acre Howe%.rer, the 400# of Nitrogen per acre which might be produced'' under tull design flows''`y �� f would not harm, :the trees, but would actually accelerate growth., Also, 80-90% of the roots in waltiut trees are located within the first six feet "of soil, which would mean no chance of damage to the roots due to the use of the reclaimed' water for irrigation. AOL 2�': zn Y�ge three of seven the event the plant is not maintained there r l.rl generated. Xt i8 -1 a Potential pPro�� y operated t' h t r� h e e e r r Park to assure efore In the'bes�mporary odors tri be operated i that khe interest of ------� n such a manner.w"1 an—is - erl tle or�rx�ers r� Sb; that no odors noble mainair)r�d and The addatioval ^ a. ms wall be ore mud creek, b stozm<._. a Y the runoff water ked. ful1 potential development of oontribu'ced to to mud creek, No 11 add less than lxzstin5 use'perm.ihe flows of the mud ci,,:e'Construction percent o f th to its ate k un less minor work is e flood f abatement dstr ; cleanout is ro a -sed for jaws aCIVallce fr°m thee"' wY re wired ec�uired`b h most c4` Il nngx.,d � and other re declamation ?ermits rn!i11 bs gni o gulatory e9encics$°`�rd and De o,'t inedry in as necessary. r'tment OF�isiy .and 3c: The 'increase in �, Game very 'small unoff flows will b drainage f Potential for e --•--M_, , Potential impacting negligible and w 11 downat, c'i i i11stalled wi l g °wnstream ne neighbors Al haves ------t1es to acc �,-a . �emonta^ate Flood'--,-----�c�ramodate caAacxt r or.'-- irr.xgation of the -------,the,a.racrease i neighboring properties due chard 're _.e n waters constructed to heill�not generate r prevent this to t -�'xmi°ter be unaff into 3d. frown happenxGig. which will be The done A floodwa existing levees, Y -'along Mud Creek accordance with the pond shall be �s confined De ai^tment Properly by the of Public Plans. The y ucted in the ins er. kion Wa ks and State Viand wi 11 re ui xe `---- and an rova,l ryf the LP 3e: as?: oval as well Surface water b`ti.1nt+ructon. as In' crease flows into Mud Creek as result r1 11 on1 this devo Sf:` In,the event r of lopment, fA1soY marginally Creek fall, that the s see 3b 3c) discharthere will be' ewer line under e into mud c a sleeve the ,bridge at Mud Transportation e peed' e� °.event accidental s -----_—____i a ek a , and ac e regtlixed by the Stat.,. �`�"�,��dental 3h; The existin common practice for .0epartment:of aPProximaexl g 150 such'cressings, Y �7, septic home signs of age, andneed ptic systems Park is now served have failed raee ei c fi2'ze c- b increased �, a�stem�s are no Y time, and the h T)e rrt�;i�.tenance w showing Construction of ' t partment ex number °, 4� wi11 also include, l►ects more aY "ems he treatment Plant to fail homes to t hook n u the and collection over _••�--cte he nlint',with s existing s expected to enhancra -ewer lines, g androposec system of nitrates ` groundwater ---«, xn this wa mobile nitrates into the gro'undwatery. the pro and are o quality by el xtnanatin posa l is area one source Septic systems g• one' source gr°uridwater, of the nitrate do n.ot UsingBy Pnpirg< the contanrinatonremove be removed.; ixz^3gakion on the , recl .1med water to t in Chico rchad, much Of the he north ,and nitrates will ',age four of seven Ask 3h: (Continued) By applying ire i gatio2 water to the soil surface, plants`havre an opportunity to remove nitrates The estimated nitrate level in the sewage is equivalent 'to 400 lbs./acre. According to Bill Olson of the Butte County Agriculture Department the application � rate for nitrogen to walnut trees is normally 200 to 250 pounds per acre. However, the 400# of Nitrogen per acre which might be produced 'under full design flows would not harm the trees, but would actua:1y accelerate growth. Ponds will be provided w1th all construction features re uired is accordance with a plicable scato waterlity-a.nd health department requfements and st,axidards. 14-r��sal.uuble salts will be tame- are of as required. the orchard. 3,1 The Ponds skull be constructed in accor natce with the approved plane to prevent flooding of adjace lands. Thc., Health Department will require that the.ponds'be maintained at desi n ca,�acit' ith ade uate freeboard t�-- ensure against flooding. 4a, d: Information shall be suk.ted by tkie'� a]2pl Icant as .tol the salt and phosphorus content of`t.ie reclaimed water. The Salts pr�odticed' are not expected `to *'acme a. problem ` to the orGhard . The applicant is' propoein.g to appy a maximum of 54" of reclaimed' irrigation water on 14 acres/year. . The proposedwater holding pond will he several hundred feet west c -,-L' the highway ,end hidden by the orchard and is not expected to provide a Taegat ice .viskta'l impact on the park, the highwayor the neighborhood. Vo Irrigation water will be applied until it is needed. The application rate of 54 inches per year was obtained from the Butte' County Agriculture Department. The well :Log; shows the depth to grou,,,11 water of 38 feet through red clayey soil,' There .should, be - no grovind water problem due to the pond itself. Ga, Installation of the mobile y omes and construction work an the property,will result in a temporary increase in noise on site', 'Long' ter�,�1 noise increases will result from the installation of 121 new mobiles or the addition of 2901 persons on the property. Because, the mobile home park site is designated for urban 'uses, this impact is not significant. 8: The mobile home park ,property is designated for Medium Density, Ili . . General Residential uses on the C�e,neral, Plan and zoned Unclassified. The adjoining orchard is desigJnated Orchard and Field Civps and zoned A-20, The expaniyiori of the mobile home park property on lands desiqnated,for ua r - c consistent with the General Plan. n instaallat onofanairrigat.ionWater holding, pond. ov lands designated for intensive agricultural as`es is believed to be, , consistent with the general plan due to the particalar circumstances involved in this case, Page five of ,s'even When the .irrigation water holding pond was first proposed on thel C p P the y, Board of Supervisors was requested -to makrt aninterpretation as to whether oxl , nat it was a permitted use, in the A-20 Zone without being gig°ent all the facts of this project and without the benefit of the re~pre,:,entation of the .property owner. It is important to note that the treated water holding pond is not required under Title 22, Division. 4 Section,60305b (see Exhibit "A" attached) of the California Administrative Cede (''Wastewater reclamation crite: .a - Environmental Health)'. This deans ths° ^ could be used as irrigation water the reclaimed water for the orchard without the benefit of the holding pond which ir,; propos Ied as a project enhancerant. Approval of this ;proposal will.nut necessarily be growth induoi;ng because st solves many existing problems, associated with the earl: and the existing methods or seweage disposal. 'ihe ,Dark discharge pi e its planned to be connected, to possible fut :tre sewer ;lanes at the Esplanade if and when such lines are availabl- to*r connection 11: 'Approval of: the Use permit r the mocl.�fication will allowfo of the remaininga '121 mobiles . installationtinstallation roved pp homes.,, 12: Existing housing may be affected by the increase in the size: of the mobile home park and the installation of the pond. Primary • edestx ian safer Traffic from an adult ark is expected to , impacts are traffic, potential water quality enhancements and A, R y, p p be •�" 2, � cted to bo enhanced by the minimal.- Pedestrian safety , �.,s. ex e addition of sidewalks and the widening - of Nord Ave nkue 13a The frontage along Nord Avenue will be upgraded to handle, the 'increasein traffic. Roads will be also upgraded in the existing park. Nord avenue will still be adequate for the traffic served with the addition of t;tte proposed remaining 121 units of the 'approved; permit. According 'to the City ,of Chico Department of Public Works, it will 'lik^ely be a nti limum of 20 to 25 years before, sewers are available to this project site. Nonetheless the project is designed so that it can )be hooked up as soon as the severe are made available, 13b Lach motile home space a hall be sized to accommodate a dn, :ale-wa de mobile home and two off-street pavking 'spaces 13f V;ie br dga over. Mud Creek impairs ,sight distance. This is why, the widening of Nord av6nne and the addition of a sidewalk is ; a part of the development plan.' Sidewalks will be installed, along' Nord Avenue to keep the pedestrians_ out of the streets. A safe crur_: i.nc,�` will; be provided across Esplanade to Shasta School. Turn pockets in. Esplanade will be aidedif they are determined to be n.ecessa.ry to accommodate turninv movements IV ?gage six of seven I 14a The property is located within. the West Side Fire station benefit area, This is the proposed service arse- for a now fjro station to be located on -the west side of Chloc In ;.lieu o9; any contribution of a fire stati(,n tun.d the developerproposes to install fire b.ydranis aad to place them so they can be used by the neighborhood and water, 'tank trunks which need to be filled. Five standpipes now 1,ocated within t1ie existing park will be eliminated. Fu ommunit'y hydrants was". be, installed throughout, the existing androposed park, This will substantially enhance the leve. of 'fire porotectiora available to the pa�^k and the surrounding neighborhood„ � 14c The installation of new mobile homes will be subject to Vhn .FaYrnent'oof school fees to the Chico Unified School "gi.,'tri.ot, '1"h1re, �r. should create a net positive benef*it�i"0' the d" Is'tric t qin e thf4,!' park as planned as an adult park. 14d: An adult park is not expected '+:o add a sign-) i i.c:ant numbc"T, of people under eighteen years of .age. < It can be e4 pecwed that a i number of these will attempt to play in the Shasta union' School grounds If,saf access acrosNsEzp_anad.e is this should not be a_ signifi, uit impact. 16c: A new ;well will, be drilled to service the p:�trk. As the number of hookups increases, the permit 'aut.bority w113. be traxi feared from; the Covxity to the stats The a:ppli�,ant will meet all of the State's qu.i.deKIin.es for water pressure and qua.lit1a , 16d: Numerous failing septic systems will be removed and replaced with sawer lines, and an aerated package plant 16,i: Full urban titormdraina e a iroi ,«m; eets G111 be as required. I 16f,17a:,b: Use of reclaimed water is not expected to result in health hazards to neighboring reoidents who depend on wells for their water source. The well log attached shows that there is at least 36 feet of 'clay separating the goru.ndwater .from; the applied reclaimed irrigation water, The pond has the potoritial to he an "attractive nuisance," and will be Posts, and feeiced to prevent it fr6m being a hazard to neighborhood children, The orchard will be posted as irrigated with reclaimed water. - e EMIM WOR, DATA _SHEET A. Pro iect Descri tion 1• Type of Project: Modification of Use Permit, 2. Brief Description: Use Permitto allow installation of a Packaged aeration plant and sewage pont., 3. Location: At'' the -nor thwest corner of Esplanade and Nord Highway, north of Chico, 4. Proposed Density of Development: Buildout densit d . u.y off 5.09 _yac « 5. 'Amount of Impervious Sttrfaeing: Extensive, 6, Accesss and Nearest Public Road(s): Fronts e Qn Nord, J ;1s;planade aid 7. Method of Sewage Disposal: Pack<�ged aeration pls,Int , 8. Source of Water Supply To parcel. 10. Potential for further land divisions and develoriznent: Use Permit will allow installation of 1.21 mobiles, B . EnvironmaII!—a . Setting Ph sical Environment:: 1. Terrain a . General Topographic Character: Le've.l 'valley land. b. Slopes: 0-2%. c. Elevation 167 to 172 feet above Seas Leval. d. Limitix19 Factors: None, 2, Soils a« Types and Characteristics: istics: Drina Clay Loam, southwest :corner is Farwell Clay Adobe, 2 �3 trapsoil, retain$ MOiSture well., sniuoth surface, well suited to irrigation. b, Limiting Factors: Poor to very' ,door surfr��,ce-subsurface drainage, moderate li.que.fact-iori, potential, subsidence: 3. Natural Hazards sof the Land' a.'. Earthquake Zone: Moderate. b. EVos: on Potential. None, c. 'Landslide Potential: Nene d. r re Hazard.: Unclassified, e. Expensive Soil Patent al: Moderate 4. Hydrology a• Surface Water: Mud C'reok at north boundary, b Groundwater: Available, withzn, area of na,tra°fie concern. C.. Drainagt, Characteristics: Surface drainage to ��outhwest Corner. d. Annual Ilainf all (normal) 20-2, 1t. e, Limiting Factors: Paor drainage of Broils 5'. �risual/Soenic Quality: Orchards :r.,, the north are scenic. 6, Acoustic Quality: pa.i,�, impacted by tra;ffa.c, 7 Air Quality. Fair. �io�lo ical` Bnv�.ronmerdt: $• Vegetation 9,. Ua^laari ornamentals Wildlife Ijabitat: ,No rare , walnut orchard; to area.jp he north. Cultural and e ndangered species ►ttopd in a Bnvixonrnen'c 10• Archaeologicral and Historical Re Potentially high. soullces in thre I.T.Butte Count areae Residential; Y area: Plan Designation: 12'• Bxistirig K�orin Medium Density 13 • sting sand Use Unclassified. 14, Surrounding on 1,90 -un t mobile home , a. Laiid uses: Area: park . Union School Naead, south and PV Read' West : o1rcha:rds . has t i�. Zoning., Y Mid field. Shasta C, g• North and ares&: Gen. Plan designition4; : A-20. East : m.�1 , Greonline. Orc=hard acid 1�ielt� CraSouth U. d� Parcel Sizes pa gest of the 2, 58 North: 25 acres. East: acres, West: 80 a.creS. x--20 e. Population: South., acres, SoL sparse 15, Character of Site surrounding park, 16. Nearest Urban an�� Area: Fringe of Ca'xir , Urban Area. 17. Relevant Sphp Area. gnat of ares Of , approx. 2 miles sautIh. 18, zm r r fluence: City of Cl'�iico, P oaements standards Urban Area. Pursi:ia. CUSD, 1140 Ordinance, CARD. 19, Pire Frotection Serv�lce: to Sttbd,ivision a• Nearest County (State) Fire Statiairz: Mies; ,?, b. Water Availability: X42, miles; _x#41, 2 20. Schools in Area: ChiEngine caPacit co 3l only Unified , • `Schr]ol j I 1 Ii . MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a: A re4 OX,ds search has been ordered to determine' w at, if, any, g .� whether . archaeological resources may 1�E .�,n the area, ono. v,hethez� car not survey shall be prepared. b Long -germ environmental goals this project may'confict with , ncl,ude ''the allowing of an urban use on prime agricultural soil,s designated for intensive agricultural: production. A second and tx,tore far-reaching impact is the potential for water qiaality' degr, ade�tioxa and. the impact it may have on surrounding domest=it;, wells and the health and productivity of neighboring orchaw:ds. The third ,�tnd most significant impact is one of policy, The Board of Supervisors has determined. that sewers should be ,installed tkiroughout the entire uar'aan area. By allowing developm„en.t to utilize prs--package plants and ponds, the support and. backing for installing - _ � { _n,t . is allowed with�sewers i,reduced. T.1 de�relr�7ma plants andpsewers, the' sewers may never be extendedthroughouttthe urban area and the nitrate problem solved. The impacts of this are far :reaching and cannot be fully addressed' at this time. Apj?lican.t: Cliff Ashby .A,ssessor t s Parcel # Log ,# 86-03-07-03: i I t @ i ON _. •r'p�l -�'��`r�%i5�^p--�.._.� ate,—i �u '' �.. .�,-.�� �`.�y� " £ ,+ar°��.*�'' ,csi�iufiort No. 87-108 A TION SETTING FORTH POLICY REGARDING SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS 1,fitiICH INCLUDE SURFACE PONDS AS PART OF THIE TREATMENT OR P.ETENTION PROCESS RESOLU urage ItizgEREAS, it ° is the intent of the Board of Supervisors to enco development within those areas where public_ infrastructure exists or can be provided; and WHEREAS, the future plans of urban areas are dependent upon public infrastructure development cccurring; and � I`u.REAS, the -Board of Supervisors does not believe that sewage t , or-individual development projects which disposal systems serving small area- or retention process, include surface ponds as part of the sewage treatment, encourage public infrastructure development; and WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors finds it in the public interest to limit sewage disposal systems which include surface ponds for either treatment area-wide faci- or retention to larger, lities_ �, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Butte County Board of;f sors finds thatthesewage disposal systems which include surface ponds Superv'� for treatment or retention to be an unacceptable method of sewage disposal for small area, or individual development projects in Butte County• BE IT rURTIIER RESOLVED that it is the policy of the Butte County Board of Supervisors that sewage disposal systems which include surface ponds are not allowed in small area, or individual development projects in the urban , I areas of Butte County, as identified by the current spheres of influence adopted by LAFCo, or the areas immediately contiguous to said spheres. z I��, T�� � �' R.�-'". I NF1 C141EF A � COUNTY OF BUI-�iU, ` 95cJ65'3380/(916) S.BA-af301 25,COUNTY CENTER DR- OROV11_LE, OALIFOR'NIA 0t1YP o MEMBERS OR THE BOARD HA5K1'sl A. McIH7)URF o c JANB DOLAN Hf4.DA WHEELER �0tlHZy ED 1dcLAUGHLI11 MARTIN J NICHOLS LEN FUL7oN CHIEF ADMINISfRA71VB OFFICCR ,lune 25, 1987 Cliff A-101bY Esplanade 5549 The asp Chico ► C1, 95926 CERT1r, IED MAIL RE„ Use Permit Ap46-17-29 Dear Mr, Ashby: srvisors held me of the Butte County Board of Sup the regular m ,71 of the requirement dor of an nusePermitntol At 1987► your apF June 23, zest for modifieation�sal pond on property Impact Report on your req e lisp sewage great anent plant and sell lanade and Nord e Esp allow a the northwest corner of th zoned , 10 Chicatecor'was denied. Road, environmental impacts otentia3 for significantaoReport (ETR) will be As there exists the p Act and our project► an Environmental IMPto from Yes. The EIR will need act to the California Envixcxlmental Qua111 required pursuantEnvironmental Guideline �:ffeC.ts of the project Butte county potential environmentaltate and local address a17 of ended ,to this latter I well as those a all appli cab listed on Attachment tobeAaa appended by issues required :Lawn and g a initiated by filing` tkx�:' following re axation Of the EIS may b4 1 T.he p p Planning De�,artme�tit: with the for the Pte, owners of. reement Form . all owners of One Authorization and Agorts dated and signed by l , act Rep z vire -'their 'Imp agents (COPY ,enclosed) r,acor of five 4 5) con- d o, th .ir ag nests ixi' �rriting On Attachment B ► roest 2 « Your selection► i V7 nty�-approv0d consultant o f�the Ccs tymappr ed sultants from theCOU be send (a COPY selectioxfs oafs (APs) h this letter said fox prop ) ► consultants 1i.st as well as ��,erd�v>iitnt n on which, are to be indicated are enOl�'tract Adm3nistratian Fee of $1i0(�.aQ'r 3. A g.equest for. Props^�sal and Con =tea ' t Cl --f .:f Ashby Page Two June 25, 1087 4. An EIR ,administration Fee of $225.00. Upon .receipt of the above, the Planning, Department will prepare and mail an RFP to the five consultants shown on Attachment B. The Planning Departmont will review all responses to the R: -,P, choose a consultant, and notify you of the firm selected. Upon receipt of a letter from you indicating concurrence with the environmental consultant selected, ,and funds sufficient to cover, the consultant's fee, the planning Department shall execute a contract with the selected consultant. A full: copy of the County's EIR Consultant and Contracting Procedures is enclosed for your use. We strongly encourage you to read it i," its citirety to familiarize yourself with the ,process and the costs invo-ed• ifl ou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the P g Department at 538-7601. between the ,hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 P.M. very truly yours, Martin J. Nic cls t 1 Chief Administrative Officer MJN:jmr rc: Planning Department Noble Engle & Associates Enclosures: Appendix F (1) Attachment A (1.) Attachment B (1) Authorization and Agreement Form for the Preparation of ,VxRs (1) List (1) County= -approved Consultants County EIR Consultant Selection and Contracting Procedures (1) • c �i'II '„iti'I' , t'llit", i 1' til I;II I';I.I' 1,�;1:' I Iztt;.:P11'.til I'•\I,_ III a:f;l I'C'I' I•c)it9t ( by Ire Dual Ic tct�l Ito i,G,t�l A+t'i1cy7 Lp? H 86-03-07-0-3 AP 11 06•--17-29 1 , l�,iCFvt�(tc"�ll::it proponent CLIFF ABBY ___--- 1. Naiiie o I _ ---- Address of proponent and ropresUntntive (if applicable) �"liff NOW e Erlg.JQ. & 5549 The Esplanade _P.10. BOX -523 Ciico, CA 9596® Red Blu; f, 'CA 96080 Project description Moc_f1Ct1-Qn�o lJse,?Gxlri' I I No YIYS lIANDATnRY i 1N[1_ 1NC0 S.iGNTPCCANdCV rtAYIITi a, floes the project have the potent%al to degrade the quality or th<< environment, substantially reduce tact habitat or 11 Cash or wildlife species, cause a 1` e ab to lire population to dTop below, Self- fish ea f - su .tai n ing 1 ovel s , threaten to eliminate a plal)t or animal community, reduce the number or 1­,;t-,l�orthe, n rima ' a•rt t o r a ,� 1 range or 'rl rare or endangered p eIimineto Im1)ortant e:;amp les or tl',C m a J 0 r pniriods of Cal i rem a history or prehist0r'y? •' b Does' the rrojecthave the Petentiatl to achie�'< short-term benerits to the detriment, of long-lthe cnvironmental 'goals? (A short-term infract on the ent,ronment is vne which occurs in a relatively brief' period or time while long-terM impacts will endure into the ruture.) c, Uc�WS the proiect have impacts whicia are individu- r,ily 1 invited„ but cumulatively considerable? (A projec, may imp,.:t on two or more separate resources where the imprac.t oat each rusource is relatively small, but whcoe the efi'ect of the ;t:Ital or those 3rtiiaacts on the: eAvironment is si19niricant -) r"l" eri`ect., which d, imca the project hnVe onvironmOndverse e feiets tan human INill Cause substantial ol. in�irectl ? hei'�t s, cithen diroctl) I)i'iT:f�l"i� a'h1r�w (,'I'ra, be canlplcted by the J oad Agency) (ln the h,a:ig or this, initial evalutltion: 1p : i nd the proposed Pt n ;ec-t COULD t,;OT 1 `t f'a+ t t� ,. e ( re+ t. ; and ,t NhGAT1Vi: i)h("1 AIZA'I' I ON Will ..._ - c,n ti•A � �„lti, i rrtnmc n t t71 i t r,il�ni ri- IIlii. ; i itid t i)n't '11 though tale p) const rc j er: t'- c t d Iln, r10 no a11t effect ,norl the cnvironm nt the P1�1'I 'ON <W,ASUiZIiS dcs ril)O ) n th i :, ruse, becxlT. 1' added t a,.lt Ili ct j u'er. A Nr.(„1T1 V1' the is t:lc' hod ,he0t hi1VV 7rc i l'c'n 1 fail 1w I payed. ItI.0 i • r .., l , f),. 1 prop a 1 1wVQ n slgIli rivntit 0,rfect alt f, I. Ind the tiro �otir, project PIAT ' "1 I kt CrPCi.h11'A) 1AII"At'I lila'( 1' is t'��kItla rc�wl. _ tilt' ".4 11'hf)Iht,"11t, rind E I'i' I�. (;(lli�i 1'1' O1 lill'I"I'l: y P I,ANN I NO DOW('I ill.^i"1 DA'II I4arch, 2o,w.19$7. a Laura Nl. "�tal, ASSocze�l�la�lallt kite tc�>r�l I,ti�. ':... ,.. „, ...�• a HNIMMAIR faanswers ar-eIV. NUx� Jri��'nd mayberequired 7-on-s-c� T-Z11' '�x�ailat_ ,jej CT -1 S on attached sheet(s)) YES MAYBE NO usignificant:. �.. EARTH- �'�aJl the proposal c nditiansox in chnges1 d— Unstable earl geologic substrur,tures? displacements, cnmrtction or b, Disruptions, OVercovering of the soil`? in topog?aphy or ground surface ' c. Change relief features. d Destruction, covering or mociifi.o.atian of any v _Zt .features'?--�- unique geologic' or physical in wind or water erosion of 'soilw x � e. ' Increase either on or off-site? beach f, ��hanges in deposition or,erosi.oxl oil in sfi�tati.on, deposition a G, or changes s -and,»• , which may modify, •the channel o� of erosion` a river or stream o� the -bed_.�f the ocean car r any bay, inlet, or- lake? Loss •ag�ri.c>ultuially' productive - r w g, of prime• auts'i,de designated urban area geologic i1. Eixposure of peopl{ or property 'hazards such as earthquakes,,• landslides, mud- Y;azards2 .---- slides, ground failure 'or similar .� 2; AIR. Will the prop1Jal result in deteriora-ionsofsambient� _ a, Air emissions c -air quality? b. The creation `of objectionable odors, smoke . .� or fumes? c, Altercation of air movement, moisture, ox Change ' ill climate, Q/ temperature, or any .-�» locally Or regionally? -. - -•" ,ER lVill the proposal .-result in substantial: 3. -_ r-- a. Changes in current;;, or the course or in either direction of water movements fresh waters? marine o1: drainage patterns, b. Changes in absorption rates, surface runoff?o r the rate and amount of rjr t for off-site surf=ace drainage improve-• C. ments, including vegetation removal, chan,nel- installation? iza.ti.on or culvert d.Alt, erations to the course or flow of flood , waters?' in any Change i.n the amount of sr,�r£ace water � Cha , e. water body? f. Discharge Into surfsurfa�e�tivat��rcualit)TOr , including —. alteration but not lam iced to temperate e dis'sol�red _ _ oxygen or tuxbi.d.ty7 ate; of flow of the direction ox r __-JL g, Alteration - of ground waters? round waters, in the quantity or �udl t. ith- 11. Change ro� either through direct addit ons dravtals , Or, 'through interception of an aquifer by nuts Or excatiations,? in the amount of wator at hervrise i; Reduction available for public water supplies? water ,t osu: kz b£ people or property t0 +j' xp" rel ted ha,-- rds such as flooding. YES MAYBE NO 4 .' PLANT Lii :.' A WI ll the proposal res,.ilt in substantial'* a�. r~_G�iange in the diversity of species, or. number of an`• species of plants including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction oz the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species,oi plants? Introduction of ;new species of plants into an C. area or in a barrier to the normal replenish - mens of existinu species? , d. Reduction in acreage of any a Tictiltural crop?AL 5. ANIMAL L' pE. will the proposal result in substantial: a:n tinge in the diversity of species, or,numl�ers of animals (birds, land animals of any species il.1cluding, re tiles, fish and shell fish) benthic. organisms or ins-ects)? --- b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of .animals? of animals into -- c, Introduction of new species an area, or result in a barrier to the migrationAL or movement of animals?— to existing fish or wildlife ~ r Deterioration • habitat? G. lqG. 1V ill the proposal result in substantial: levels`?_ \� a, Increases in existing noise b; Exposure of people to severe noise levels`? 7„ LIGHT AND GLARE. will -the proposal produce nif� car ght and glare? t in a . 1trs �_antialj�al.teratiil.1 the on of he preosal lsent or planned su st.a -- land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: will the proposal result 'in substantial: a. Increase in the rage of use of any natural � b . Depletion of any non-renewa'b'•le riatura resources? 10. RISK OP UPSET. tti`il1 the pr�.posaj involve" the release of hazard - ar`?d Y. A riskof explosion or J, ous substances (including, but not 'limited tr �'Lt he oil, pesticides, chemicals or, ra.,oaion) upset :onaitions7 eventoftan accide, t or b, possible interference with an emergency , � response plan Or emergency 'Va'clzati►ln plan ""._.�. 11. POPULATION'. 1ii1.1 the proposal al-cer tllir 10ca.tion, xa.te human r 3-1-5tribution, density, or growth population" lZ. HOUSIN�1, Gill the proposal affect existing }:ou sing, housing? or create a, demand for additional r • YES MAY1 E NO , 13. TRANSPORT..%T_� ??CULA'TIC�N. will the proposal result in: vehicle a;' Generation of substantial additional , movembn't b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking?' c, Substantial impact on existing trwasportation p — -'— - systems? d. Significant alterations to present patterns and/or -� -- -- I of circulation or movement of people goods? e, to waterborne, rail or ai,r traffic? .Alterations f, Increase in traffic hazards to motor vohicl;es o bicyclis.s or pedestrians? --- 1•4. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an eff6Ct ' for or altered upon, or resin in, a need new governmental se,rvi,,ces -- a. Fire prote,ct:ioit? - b. Police protection'? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational farilities? 'including -- e . Ma•inten.ance of p'ulalic facilities, roads? -� f„ Other governmental servi`:es? - 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: substantia . amounts of fuel .or energy'. _ a. Us`e of b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing the development sources of energy, or require ,- of new sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for - substantial alteratioT,s to the H systems, or following,., a. Romer or natural gas?- b. Communisations systeTks? --- c. Water availability: --- JL d. Sewer or septic tank? e. Storin water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17 , kiMAN HEALTH Will, the proposal result in: CearH_0_T1 of any health hazard or potential a. health hazard (excluding mental 'health)? - - b. Exposure of people to potential heal th hazards lg, AESTHETICS. Will :the proposal result in the j open to ion of an scenic vista or vitt p o s �.ruct result the will the proposal K.he public, or w p e si.te otien creation 'of ar aesthetically ofyensz, J o public. vier.- 1 • YES MY111 NO 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal res»lt in an 'impact M upon the quality or quantity of existing s•ecreat onal opportunities? N _ 204 CULTURAL' RESOURCES: ; E—.Will she proposal result in the altetation 'of. or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site?, b. Will .he proposal result in adverse physical >. or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? �r C, Does the proposal have the potential to cause' r h would affect unique a physical change. which cultural values. ethnic `� y d. Will -the proposal restrict existing„ religious or sacred uses tcythin the potential, impact area? DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL; MiU'AriIGN AP 06-17•-29 See attached. r _D.. �` �• 0 s� ' ft is t �,,.� ; 'I' •,STI,...,ii,,i DI SCUSSI OtV CiF LNV I HUNMEN I AL (�V, ALUgI g QN AP Pro. jest Descr i 2 ion I nsta 1 1 at i on o f a pack age aerat i on p l ant for salr4age cJ i 3pos l ,, holding tank and 4 -acre ,aeration pond i tt order to! allow the oxp,�jis i on of an existing 150 -unit mobile, home park for a total OF 271 spaces. D o sci;s i on c f Q eak 7 i st itentis lb: A significant amount ;of earthwork will be required to remove the t existing se tic„ Systems now serving ne' theproperty, p Y new sewage es and install an additional '1 2;1 mobile homes. Up to 71,000 cub i c Yards of earth will be removed if the pond is dug down the entire 11 feet. A di sposa l Plan for the excl-ava•t;,ed soil mu_t oe submitted. 1 c: The ground surface is fairly smoot1h with a Slight s l Pe to thesouthwest . No large grading acf4-ivities are proposed. 1e: Bolls on site include Vins Clay Loam and Farwell Clay Adobe, ne 1 then of wh i ch have a h i gh eras i Edi°j potent i a 1 . Erosion Is therefore not a concern at thj i s time. 10: An aeration and oxidatior pond is proposed to be located on the north erudCreek. property rpp Y 'nr re -d, is des i gnatedOrc harc'andEieldCo szonedh.2pandoci�tednorth and west as of whatisrehiine. Construction of the oxidation pond will result In a direct; loss Of 4 ac;"es in prod'Act i on , with the potential for more. In the event th,,e pond and Use of the reclaimed wastewater for g Irri ot1on''resuIts 1n water qua Iity iMPFiCts, the loss of agr, i cru 1 tura 1 so i 1 S wetst and, s;ou reaching. thrdest of this Property may be far 2a: According tr1 the fBLitte County Health Department, a properly c,perated aerat i ot-, Plant and pond System should odor. An . aerat i en plant~, makes, sewage aerobic by Pumping n no rdiscernible The all- is an oxidizer which breaks Y pumping air into it. d+awn the sewage faster than a conventional ?;ept i c system. Anar;^r^ob i a, treatment systems do not utilize air. The most common anaerobic system is a septic system, which does have a discernible odor. 2b. In the event the Plant i s; not there i s ,e properly, o egenerate<�mai i nta i ned, potential for temporary odors to be q'b: Expansion of the existing mobile home parr wi11 generate e large increase in surface dater runoff. Full urban drainage will have to bE� Improvements instal pursuant to the requirements of Public W©r1vs. Any drainage p ements requ i red within Mud,Creek will require SL -ate permits from the Rec 1 amat i on Board and Department cf F i sh and Gai'ne. 3c: Off-site facilities will be require d as needed to m i n i m i zt3 Potential for impacting down'stre� facilities the neighbors. ran�Ige fay.. i 1 i t'i es installed will have to ,demonstrate capacity of downstreami facilities to accommodate the',6ncrease Inwaters» -6- "'`" F I o'od i r•r i gat i on of .1 -re nrc hard may, generate runoff ot,i`1 o ne i gl,,Ibor i n proper t i es A sewer 1 i ne 1 s proposed from the aera't i on p l ant at the southwest corner north and eases along the toe of the Mud Creek levee and across 11t.id Creek, under ti ie ex i st i ng br 1 dga at Bsp l anade . After crossing the cheek; the line trends westerly to the 4 -acre holding pond north of the mobile home park 3d: The zone A f1oodway along Mud Creek is con f1ned by the existing,; levees. In the event the pond is improperly constructed, there is a slight potential for the rel ease of waters onto neighboring agricultural lands. Placemen,7 of the pond immediately adjacent' to Mud Creek's levee may lead to slumping and levee failure caused by soil saturat'jon and loss of support. The pored will require Department of Public Works and State agency approve'. 3e: Surface water flows into'Mud Creek will ,only marginally increase as a result of this development. _ 3f In the, everit i hat the sewer line under the bridge at Mud Creed severs or the pond fails, there is a;p. -1tial for discharge of pre-treated sewage to Mud Creek. Heal-, ­,,_ards may result from this release: 3h The ex i si-, ing 150 -unit mobile hone dark is now served by approximately 38 septic systems. The systems are now showing signs of age, and need increased maintenance.A number of systems have failed, and the Health Department expects more to fail over, time. Construction of the aeration plant will entail -hooking up the existing and proposed mobile homes to the plant with sewer lines. In this way' the proposal may increase groundwater qua Iity by eliminating one source of nitrates into the groundwater. Septic, systems do not remove nitrates, and are one source of the nitrate contamination in Chico area groundwater. By pumping t`N-e' sewage to the north and us l ng it as irrigation Igater on the orchard, sure. nitrates will be removed prior~ to It entering the groU'"ldwater. By applying Irrigation ''water to the soil surface-, pianos have an opportunity to absorb the nitrogen, thereby remo'vinG ni,rates. Whether this Impact Is beneficial or s a n ne;_g at i ve depc�rld � i n r art' on the rat i onsFi i p o f the nitrate level 1 1 the sewage re l at -I ye to the normal nitrogen application rate on the orchard. The estimated nitrate level In the sewaoe is 'eqL' I va l ent to' 400 lbs./acre. The orchards to the south-nnd west ,may 'be subject to , excessive n i triogen loads,,, If ad,,jo i n i ng orchardists do not take this Into account;, trine growth can, be uneven or abnorilin] Reclaimed sewage may ' be h i 0h in sa i t.s ;and Phosp torus . Bothof these elements can be detrimental to the groundwater quai'ity. A th i rd and 'f i nal source of grounduoater dao 11 l ut i an wh 1 r) may result f1^0111 th i s project i s the ponds themse i ves. These ponds ,w i 1 1 not 'be c-overed, and w i l l therefore to 11 ect any fest i 1 i zers or peso c 1 des sPr yed in tiie vicinity. Pond water could become toxic. ;fonds wi i l re i m�1c�'r�r i ous 1' i'n i ng, Applicant to submit finished pand depthr eqi i . tAnd depth to groundwater. -7- i 3Ti 4 In the evert tr,e ponds are not proper I y constructed rW,jo i n i ng Orchards may be SUbjisci. to peri od i c f 1 ood i ng. The Hea I th (::Jordart:ment w I I i requ i re that the ponds be me 1 nta i ned at des 1 gn capac i l;,y w I th adequate freeboard to ensure against flooding. 4a,d.: In the event that the r^eclai,med sewage is high in sW is or hos horus, it could have an adverse impact on neighborin�o orchards. phosphorus, This impact would be significant, given the 'fact :that the lands are S: located for intensive agriculture, located west of the 'Green line and zoned A-20 Information shall be submitted by the applicant as to the salt and phosphorus content of the 'reclaimed sewage. The applicant;, is proposing to apply 54" of reclaimed irrigation water on 14 acres/year. Irrigation Is proposed in April and September April irrigation' may -cause root'rot or blight. A September irrigation will impair harvest. 6a: Installation of the mobi1'e homes and construction work on the property Will result in a temporary increase in noise on site. Long-term noise increases will result-from,the installation of 121 new mobiles or the addition of 290 persons on the property. Because the mobile home par•K Site is designated for urban uses, this impact is not significant. B. The mobile home park property fs designated for Medium DensltY Residential uses on the general Plan and zoned Unclassified. The r adjoining orchard is, designated Orchard and Field Crops and';zoned A-20 The expansion 1 of the mobile home park property 1 on sands desigta n ted,at I aforil urban usesisconsistent with the General Plan. treatment pond on lands designated for Intensive agricultural uses is not. When the sewage disposal pond was property, the Board of Supervisors was first proposed on the orchard requested to make an interpretation as -to whether or not'it was a permitted use in the A-20 Zone. The Board unerimously found that sewage treatment ponds Were'not'a ,compatible use in the A-20 Zone. Sewage disposal ponds have not yet been constructed anywhere within tile Chico Urban Area. Approval of this proposal will be growth inducing, signaling to developers that sewage disposal ponds are an acceptable alternative to extension of community sewer fines. 11: Approval of the Use Permit will allow for the installation of 121 mobile homes. This will increase the density of the park and thre feeling of urbanization experienced by -residents. 12: Existing housing may be affected by the increase in the size of the mobile home park and the installation of the pond. Primary Impacts are -traffic, 'potentia1 water quality reductions, and pedestrian safety. 13a: Installation fo 121 mobile homes w11'1 increase traffic- onto Nord Avenue and through the 1 Nord/Esplanade Intersection br 1,210 0 c ars daily. Traffic on Nord Avenue moving toward the Esplanade Intersection , w i 1''1 increase by approxi mately 40.6%, The frontage along Nord Avenue may need,. to be upgraded to; handle tihe increase in traffic. Roads wl l I ,be upgradad i n the ex i st i rig park . W8- :1 a.. ! itis Escir moll i i e r+ome doub 1 e-�vi de mot, i lspace Shat 1 be s !zed to ar romrno,odata e borne and tvio off-street park i ng spaces. 13fr h'lud Creel nimpairs sight distance. this " Tfic bridge over children walking along the road in a hazardous Places should be instailed along Nord Avenue to keep the schlldren�outwoflthe streets. A safe crossing should be provided across Esplanade to Shasta School. Add,tional vehicles will be feeding through the Nord.r intersection. As horning movements increase the fe tial fo traffic conflicts in creases as well. ' potential for required to accommodate turning movementsn pockets'i n Esplanade May 14a: The property is located Within the West Side Fire Station benefit area This lis: the proposed service area f ` been station to be 1 ocai`. aor a new fire n the west side ,cif Chico. co. A 1 1 developers ha,,e contributing s75.per unit toward this fund. Five standpipes now located within the existing will 1l be eliminated. Full mmunity hydrants will be installed throughout the existingandproposed park„ 14bto,f: Residential development will increase demands for all goverrmental services As a property Ni'chin the-, adapted Sphere of, Inf1u,.:nce and Urban Area, these impacts are not significant.) 14c: The installation of new mobile homes will be subject to the payment of school fees to the Chico Unified School District 14d: Children residing in the mobile home park will need a place to Play. It can be expected that a number of these children will 'attempt to Play in the Shasta Union School Esplanade grounds. If safe access across is provided,' this should not be a significant impact. 16c: A new well will be drilled to service the of hookups increases!, the park. As the number the County to the State, permi authority 1l be transferred' from State's County Guideline to Star The applicant r will will have to meet 'ail of the water Pressure and quality. 16d: Numerous falling septic systems will be removed and replaced with sewer, lines, an aerated package Plant and oxidation reclaimed sewage for irrigation water has the o:im Use of water y nd violate adopted Board Potentialto quills s policy. The applicant has stated that sewage will.,be treated for one cla aeration and 30 days in the y with mechanism to ensure -the timing rrNil! Hbeecompliedrwith.e is n�T critical during the irrigation season': PPagrent min is only 16e: Full urban storm water improvements will be required. 16f,17a,b: Use of reclaimed sews e hazards to neighboring resident; g may or, may not result in health who d ..sour. � depend source. The bdwaterof proof will be onpthe ap wells fot" their water that the 1 not be plicant to demonstrate wil polluted with the irrigation waters. PJca r,'l an hes been submitted for d i sPosa l Pond.df sr, l ids i rl t hr-s rank andandPon. Many i terns common I y pressni; i ri 5ew by aeration. 1=10w �� ; 1 1 they be disposed of? g l w i I I rrr,;,i; be br0k e:,,1 dovin An 11-foot pond has the potential to be an "'attractiyr Posing a hazard to ne i-ghborhood children. It shall l�r� nU i sauce, and posted. The orchard should be u securely fenced sewage, postsed as irrlg-jI„r„d with reclaimed The pond will provide mosquito breeding habitat and tii- mosquito population levely Increase's. ihosquitoes are a nuisance to humans. _Oae The site is considered to have a high sensitivity for archaeological resources. A records search shal3 be r"quested from California State On i vers i ty,- Chico, at the, Norrtheast Information Center, to determine whether ot^ not an archaeological prepared. In the ,event the records search recommend survey shall be survey, it wi1'1 not be required by the Count against such a records search shall be' sent to the County. y, The results of the r» I�'Y FINDINQc; OF- 4ZLCNT=TCA6!!CE I h'IANDATD a. A records search will be required to determ,?ne what, if any9 archaeological rsesources may be in the area, and whether or not a survey shall be prepared. b Long-term environmental goals this pi May Conflict Withinclude the,allowing of an urban use on Prime agricultural soilsdesignated or intensive agricultural production. A second and more, far-reaching impact is the potential for water quality degradat'ion and and ,Productivityof neighboring riding domestic weirs and thP, health it ma have on surrounding do significant he.. impact s. The third i gr7 i f i cant; impact f s one ot` and mast y• The Board of Supervisors has policy. determined that sepk:ers should be installed throughout the.entire'urban' area. By allowing development to `utilize ponds, the su pre-package plants and PPort and backing for installing sewers is reduced. If development is allowed with plants and ponds rather an the sewers may never be extended throu houtthe urbanh4r can sewers, a anth nitrate problem solved. The impacts og this are far reachi gdande cannot "be fully addressed at this time. Cliff i F f ASI -)by A06-17-29 ssessor's Parcel di App l i c:ai'jt: 06- 1 7-2.9 Log 3t 86 -G3' -0'i' -U DATA SHEET A. p�^n,iect Descrion 1 Type of Project: Modification of use Permit . 2. Brief Description; use Permit to allow installation of a psckaged aeration plant and sewage pond. 3« Location: At the northwest corner of Esplanado and Nord Highway, north of Chico. 'lopment: Buildout i rout dente: l ty of 5.09 4,. Proposed Dens itY of DeveU. Amount Of Impervious i ous Su. -facing: Extens i ve. t E--,. Access and i�dezirest Public Roads 7: Frontage on Esol anade and NordNord. 7 « od of Set•aaga� Disposal; Packaged aeration plant. g. Source o£ water SuPp1Y: Groundwater, well system. 9. Proximity of Powier Lines. To parcel . er►t: Use10.. -Potential For further nand d'avtsions and developm Permit will al'l orw installation of 121 mobiles. B. Env i ror nenta l Sett i n�a Pl1v s i ca l En � i ronman;�,�. 1. Terrain s. General TopographicCharacter: Level valley land. b. Slopes: 0-29. c„ Elevation: 167 to 17,2 feet above Sea Level. cf. Limiting Factors, None.. 2. Soils a. T}. as anG ,htiar.acterr 1 st i Adobe,' 2a3C 1 mopsoaM v Atai� n sst corner i s Farrwe 1 l C Jay _ suited to irrigation. "o istore well, smooth surface, well b.ui i't i ng Factors: Prior, to very, poor surf ar✓e-subsrur face drainage, moderate liquefaction, potential subsidence. 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate. b. Erosion Potential: None. co Landsl i de.Potential. None... d. Fire Hazard Unclassified. e. Expansive So,11, Potential: Moderate 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water t Mud Creek at north boundary. n . b. Groundwater- ,Available, within area of nitrate eonh c . Ezra � nage Cha r•acter i st ic,s: Surface dra i nage to southwest corner. ,pry... d. Annual Rainfall (normal:): 2p��� A e. Limiting f=actors: Poor drainage of soils, O. Visual /Scen'i c Quality: & shards to the north are seen i c. 6. Acoustic Quality Fair, impacted by traffic. 7. Air Quality: Fair. Biological Environment: 3. 'Vegetation: Urban ornamentals, walnut orchard to the north. 9. W i 1 dl i fe Habitat: No rare ,and endangered species main . d 01 area. Cultural Environment: 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area Potentially highs 1 1 . Butte County General P l art designation". Med o 'yam Density Residential. 12. Existing Zoning: Unc'lLssifiedn 13. Existing Land Use on-p'i to 150-unit mobile -home park. 14. S.urroundino Area: a. Land Uses: ;North, South and west: orchards. East: Shasta Union School, PV Ready Mix, field. b. Zoning: North ` rid rryest A-20.East: M-1,. South: U. e. Gen. , Plan des i ",, Orchard and Field Crops west o F the G;reen,line d Parcel Sizes: North: '15 - acres. East-, 6-20 arses. South: 20 58 _acres. West: 50 acres„ e. Popul at a on: Sparse surr6und i ng', park � _ 15. r:haracter of Site an'd Area: Fr i r je of Chico Urban Area. 16. Nearest Urban Area: City of Chico°approx. 2 miles south. 17. _Relevant Spheres of Influence: City of , Chico, CUSD , CARD. 18. ImproveRments Standards Urban Area: Pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance. 19. Fire Pro tact i'o�n Service: a. Nearest County, (State) F i re3 Station: #42, 2* miles; 1#41, 2 miles. b. Water Availability,. Engine .apac Y ty 20. Schools in Area: Chico Unified School D J s tr i ct ..1 y r y ;`ice %•M', die z.- PLANNING COMlNISSION � 7 Cg1�N1'Y CEN,TI.iR DRIVE - DROYILL[, CALIFORNIA 95965.3347. fj .. PHONE. FiS.7601 April 17, 1987 VIA CERTIFIED 14AIL .r Cliff Ashby 5549 The Esplanade Chico, CA 95926 Re: Use PE.rm? t,, AP 06-1.7-29 Dear -Mr. :Ashby: Your response to the initial study prepared, March'' Za 1987 on the proposed aeration plan; andsewage di fiposal ponds at Rancho Esplarkade Mobile Home Park �iasQ�eeubmi4tecl�have (been a reviewed this �fummari.zed The mitigation measures that y and are listed as an att��chment to `this letter. A number of and ar ally aigni t cp.nt impacts, however, were not, adequately addressed. These impacts are as follows:' i 1. 12he potential to degrade ate:-cultuxal soilss anc roatact on eerties. Declining productiL�n capabili..ties ori adjoining pro,, l i de impact to_ -the ac�z icultr. al wou ° d >r �sult in s: community-, econom > of Chico. Z. The project has the potential to underviine the, Chico Vrban r� ed to preserve r2� mp a�r�eul A,,rea lama use policies desi..gn tur,M • so is went of the Gxeenline in agricultural produc- tion. 3, if adjoining properties became unsuitable for g,ricultux'al use, neighbors have :indicated that theyes. Willprajectfwoul3 L General Plan Amendments to urbanthereforeaegrow,t'h inducing. 4. A berm or Pend failure has tim airecroal aids, orflood nthat ei bors, ti' causing a health hazard and „� season;, ld a . Placement of a pond so close to the t'i�dentuall�evievee cause ox::ess�.ve soi��saturation and, failure. C 11 f w,shblr A p r a I Paci4 2. 6. Reclaimed irrigation. w ' er will contain more than twice the recommendzd nitrogen content f.or fertilizationpurposes, and potentially high levels of salts and phosphorus; impairing grciundwater c[uality and the suitab' l it of the water for irr. i.gation purposes. 7. The ponds may c,olect spray drift from adjoining archards;y become toxic, and slowly seep into the groundwater table 8. According to Bill Olson of the Farm Advisor's office, irri- gation in April may cause root. rot or blight, September irrigatirn may impair harvest of early varieties. Timing, of irrigation 'apply cation has the potential to impact. adjoining' properties. 9. The Board of Supervi.'Iors has determined that sewa e 'disosk.1 ponds are an inc:oTn r 1,�ble use in the A-20 zone. 10. The sewage pond will. be 8 to 9 feet, hi.gh', potentially visible from The Esplanade and surrounding properties 11 Approval of the aeration plant and pond system has the poten- tial to be growth inducvin to adjoining properties designated'. for agricultural use, properties not currently serviced by sewers, and may undermine community support for sewer main_ extensions Allowing projects on sewage ponds may, thwart the implementation of the Nitrate Action Plan, which: calls for extension of sewer lines and drainage facilities throughout the comiiunity. 12. Specific measures to promote and provide for 22dest.rian safety along Nord 'Highway and across The Esplanade should be identified. offering curb, gutter and, sidewalk, along the frontage ignores the large, note -a-part parcel in the 'center of the mobile home park. 1:3. m c� � �e_a��ratiun talant for; 24 hours n a rfurth:er 30 ^days int' the pored s s.wa e would be. The 'mechanism ours and the should be su,brtiatted fox disposal, should be identified. A plan sho � — of solids and°sediments and other items not broken down by aeration. �---,----- i Because. of potentially significant environmental. ;impacts r an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is regUired pursuant to the requirements of the California tnvironmdntal. Quality ,ict and the Butte County Environmental Review Guidelines, If you, as th,e applicant, wish to pursue the prc>j'ect, the Environ- mental Review Coordi natcr (ERC)' shall prepare o -r shall contract 1 Cliff Ashby April 17, ]:1,87 Pagc 3. to 't-ia; e the ESR prepal:ed. The;CERC�Of to la;lC(unty)Ptronthree or Department will .lend Req mare consyr i tan{ts with expez: tise cyz your ,articular type of project, and choose the i:eS °R�'Pbl.eubsdder arit totheet-S all attachedr1e specifications listed in tale P v Prj.ax� to an agreement being entered arthethe ap�eant shall. a, Draft I*I:u by, the county and a r onsul.tatit deposit the total amount of the co�nparPsaiion cea� erothraY�nethendeposit, a f the county' administration costs g Yo totill be notified to pa,y the additional amounts e:coeeding !p200 within ten (10) , days of notice by Cer.ofied Mail when the project is c:ompl,eted, we will refkind any unused remainder of the depo-Sit . If yc)u wish t o ap��ca1. the requirement iaag thepreasons ' therefoof an r � you, may file a written protest. p Y Frith the P1."nning� Department. Ais must' be done `within fifteenf 15}) days from the the of this notice. if your written protest is not timely filed, an EI:R will be required. The E1:R w11 fully address a1'1 the impacts identified on, the 1ec�klist and 'summarized .gin this letter. project alterrhativs;s a ill be full.y explored in an ETR. All the EIR efti ll d 1 arwuSs 1-asible prOject design features crr future land uses that would re„duce envlro.rymental impacs. We will crantin.u.e processing your project upon receiving the RFP fee of $1,325, If You have any, question s , please co this office sincerely, B.A. KIRCHER Director of planning Laura M. Tuttle Associate planner DMT%sjs ,Attachment cc: Noble Engle & Associates, ` p.0. Box 923, Red 31uf.f, CA 96080 i 'U ff Ashby U � Pcrmit; 7=.P 0G..1-49 "--TIGATYON' MEASURES a_ IJBMILq ED 1. cut and fill in pond coi ��truction to be balanced . 2, Extra soil, if any, to bused to construct a 3-foot bermea along the west property ;Line. Monthly monitoring and maintenance on the plant Will 3„ be submitted to Environm�e:ntal Heal 4, install full urban and drainage irtprovementr under permit Public Works-. and Inspectionby the. Department. of 5 Provide a permanent solution to drainage.' ,,, prove downa:�t� ea 1 faci.].ities have adequate go ad j a.c.ent prc�L' �esawill�notf+be upgrade as necessary impacted s Reclamation Board, 'Meet the ret��a].re.�+.E3xits of'��,i..�h �c yam,., a.nd other. responsible State ;Department of Water Resources in the, channel agencies for wt,)rk 8. 'The pont: and 'berm, shall be designed by aiy engin; eer and Public Works ar`' `-partment approved by the Depart. of of Water ResolurCes. 9. placement of the pond and design to be approve.w by The De artment,of Wzter Resources. Reclamation Board d and ;10 „ The sewer line will be installed in a double-sl.eeve, in, the event of a pipe d.otz'ble-lined pipe for containment break. 1 Ponds to maintain two (2) feet of 'freeboard at all times �,- 12. improve the Nord Avenue frontage to full,, urban standaz:ds, 13. Provide safe pedestrian access 'across The Esplanade. E 1. insG�1� z left-turn p(')ckpt at' Esplanade and Nord 15. ynstall hydrants tnrc,ugh the entire project Ireaz Fence irrigation pond and past the pra entialhazards. 1"y . T-ted a ; rned sewage. Posh. the orchardr d as irri �tt_d w. ,.�h rec7,aa e n archaeological records search from the d a 1.$ � ,pa, Have pre State C1ri�.vers:�t , Chico,, California ;stat �� 1g . Abandon the :existing septic tanks under pe,,,.-mit by Enviranmenta�l 14ealth , _.:__�. ..��:�.�._awe„��, ;. �� �e ► m a�.���� to sC Attachment "B" ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CONSULTANT'' SELECTION 1 Name: Address 4 Phone: t 2. Name: Address: Phone: C > Address 9 Phone: l 7 it 4. Name Address: Phone: t >' i 5. Name: 1 +' Address. Phone: � > — Project Title: File 'Number : _._----------- I,ti�OICE',FORPROCESSING E.I,R. BY BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DEPT. CODE, HOURS DATE ITEMIZED FEE FUNCTION 4�, _..._ a REPORT WRITING 01 RESEARCH 02 COWERENCE CS' CORRESPONDENCE 04 PUBLIC MEETINGS 05 ADMINISTRATION ° 06 OTHER: 07 CLERICAL 11 DRAFTING 21, COPYING POSTAGE OTIMR TOTAL COSTS MINUS PREPAYMENT TOTAL FEE DUE AUTHORIZATION AND AGREaAENT FORM FOR THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS project Title Project Type and At-i`-' 'cation Number t: ---- 1. t the Butte I hereby authorize and requestalsoforyan t epreparatiOO Of an to prepare and send Regluesrs for PropO Environmental Impact Reportthe atta�chedbove sheetr"itledject app�16catlon to the ,Attachment B. consultants indicated om atiO 2. I understand that the, Environmental ZR► certification ofport �the rfinal Pee is an estimated fee and that prior to Environmental Impact Report for the above project application I' will estimate., I further Ray the County any costs in excess of mak est payment in utnderatand that failure. to Pay, or towithinp3Qvdays nofodemand dor amanner satisfactory to the County, . ,. `• abandonment of the payment, ray be deemed by the County' to be an aband app,lic wtion ,and the ,iroject understand and agree that failure to respond within 30 days of 3, I mailing to any � U=st by Butte County to clarify, amplify: correct r �- nmenta�l infgrmation required by Dutte or otherwise supplermelit enviro the County foo^ this Project may bir deemed to be an abandonment actual �c+ost of application arid the project, I also agree y pay e County any technical studies or reports reaothed expects or the professionals, Departmentplanning and prepared by provided avea'greed to the preparation of such sturlles' or reports nate Signature of Owner of Record or Agelnt —`_ ----------- -7—D,ate Signature of Owlier of Record or Agent rd _caor 'Agent Date - ent f :,,I,-iature of Gwner of R :, Jvriature of of Record or Agent Date (:311 ► k C( UNI Y ';k.tJ�.1�A1� 5E=:i1V1CIES 1 CHc'Pl H i 1 1, Inc .T 57 Park Place l a -1 5. 1 525 Court Street p i c�-imP CA 9171 u P . O . Box 2088 Redding, CA 960'=49 14, Eco -Anal )e-ts venue 1'14 l4est. '/Lh Avenue- 2. 2. Biasystems Analyses, Inc. Chico, CA 95926 Golden Gate Energy Center Bldg. 1065, Ft. Cronkhite 15. Foothill i''lanninn Assoc. Sausalito, CA 94965 183 West Bradford Avenue Sonora, CA'9 5,370 3. Mundie and Associates 4902 California Street 16. E1`gar Hill San Frailc i scc, CA 941113 Post Office Box 690 Penngrove, CA 94951 4, W i i 1 i am R. Sands i10 Valley View Drive 17. an & Jcries Orov i 1 l e, CA 95)66 2161 Shattuck Avenue 5. CommunitY Planning Consultani-s Berkeley, CA 9.4704 ' 303 Potrero Street, 29-105 18, Bendix Environmental Santa. Crus. CA 95061 _ Research,I`nc. Fo,rplaza, Suite 902 6." planning Associates 1 91Ma+^ket Street 662 Azalea Avenue San Francisco; CA 94102 p.0 Box 1 527 Redding, CA 96099 19. Cook Associates George S. Nolte & Associates 2060 Parke Avenue^. Oroville, CA 95966 1700 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814 20. Raymond I Vail & Assoc. g, SedwaY Cooke Associates (RVA) 1410 Ethan Way musto Plaza Sacramento, CA 95825 1150 Pacific Avenue San Francisco, CA 94111 2•(. 'W uoclward-C1 Yde Consultants 9, Jones &Stckes associates, int. One Walnut Creek Center 10G P�ringl;e. Avr✓nue 1725 - 23rd S I . , Suite 100 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Sacramento, CA '95B16 l0. ESA 22. WESCO 1 4 Gall i IJr+i ve suite A. 1 3o,0 (hark et :Street, Su i r :_ 215 No��ato. 'CA 949,47 San Francisco, CA 94102 23. Wagstaff and Brady 1 1 Env i rospf sere CamiaanY 1501-A Fourth Street 444 Castro Streit °Suite 32.0 Berkeley. CA 94710 Mrrunta i n View,; CA 94041, 24 Western P l ann ng and 12« Oscar Larson & Associates . Engine P I J. PC>, 381.16 1 1 71 2 iJuartz Dr i ,/e Eureka, GA Auburn, CA 95603 E'NVI[?LDNJJENTAL. _IMPACT IMPORT CONSULTANT SELECTION AND CONTRACTING PROCEDURES s� + 4' > . I a consultant v tion 1 » y may entalelm�actoRepnrtst/i.EIR;'In the preparation and evalua of eEnvvironm d F arat ion of retained, all co-ts incurred for administration and prep the EIR shall .be borne by the applica2. nt for the projcCt• The Planning Department shall establish a list of qualified Environmental impact report consultants. Thi established lint w111 also indicatethe 'firm's particular field of expertise, Environmental impact 'report consultants wishing to be placed on the list shall submit a resume indicating the firm's principaareas of personnel, work experience,, statement of qualif icatioins, expertise, and any other information deemed necessary by the Planning Department. Selection to the list will be based on , knowl�adge of the County, and available expertise to experience ensure ilia, knolld in-depth and comprehensive environmental impact reports Consultants with a possible conflict of interest with a project, directly or indirectly, shall not bks considered as conagultant for the project. Following the determination that an EIR will be required for a project, a letter shall be sent to the applicant stating that'a p cansultat�t must be retained to prepare the EIR. The letter will also inform the applicant of the issues that will need to be addressed in the EIR, appeal procedures, and a generalizeddes ri,pticsn of the consultant selection process. A list of county -approved consultants, Author!,,ration and Agreement Form for the Prepastl6n .of EIRs and any other pertinent infortnati on will also be attached 4. The applicant may initiate the preparation of the EIR by filing the following with the Planning Department a, One Authorization and Agreement Form for the Preparation of Environmental Impact Reports dated and signed by all owners of "record or their agent(s); b. Appl-3.cant `s selection, in writing, of five (5) C,onsul,tants from the County- approved consultant list to whom ReLit.jests for Fropasal shall be sent; �. p Request forProposal and Contract Administration Fee of 51 1 C10. 'This fee `covers Planning Department costs, including preparation of the Ptotice of Preparation, up through submittal of the Draft EIR by theNan�ti_3]:tan� � and acceptance of; the documet, nby the Planning Department. 1 Adak 0 EIR ad".mLitistration fee ofa25- "his `fee is estimated and rovers the costs incurred b•; the R. Upon completion of the e" county C'uuntY for processing the EI process, and prior to the certification Of the final Elhl the applicant rust `pay the' County any costs in excess of the estimate. The. County shall refund to the applicant any surplus _F 't. 'Che Coun�y shall not certify the final EIR and act on d _posy the project until the applicant has .paid the Ccaunty any casts,i.n as the costs are g� dater• ea..cess of the estimate.' At such time than the estimate, the applicant shall pay the additiona'i.'aanount exceeding .$200:00 within 10 days of notice by the Env:ir•,snmental Review Coo'rdl,natorby registered mail. In the event that payment is not received for, the additional amount in exces's of, $200'.00,` the Environmental. Review Coordinator will icrunediately- cease processing the EIR and notify the collection agency. All required fees may be submitted on one check. Upon receipt of the above, the Planning,Department shall prepare the Request for Proposal and mail i.t to the selected con sultants and the project applicant. 5. Bid proposals will be'submitted to the Planning, Department by the date specified in, the Request for Proposal. The submitted proposals shall at'a minimum' agree with the scope of services and proposal specifications as outlined in the Request for Proposalq'and shall be p valid for'a definite period of time. Incom feteproposats may be rejected. The Planning Department shall review and evaluate the scope, content and completeness of the bid proposals in order to determine the bid which best demonL-trates the ability and qualified staff t.o provide the services required" The Planning Department may hold interviews with .any or all of the selected consultants to help in arriving at a decision. The scope, content, completeness and quality of services provided will be, of equal importance with cost, 6, The Planning Department's'decision shall be contained in a letter to the applicant indicating the date of expirationofthe proposal. Upon` receipt.of a_letter from the applicant indicating concurrence with theenvironmentalconsultant selected" and funds 'sufficient- cover sufficientcover the consultant's fee, the Planning Department shall eXecut10 the contractu i, If Less,than two of the selected consultants submit a bid, or if, following a discussion with the applicant, it is the judgment of the Planning Department that exceptional or f.xtraordinary circumstance: exist that would preclude the use PF the selected consultant, the Planning Department shall., at the request of the applicant, ma..i out up to three additional Requests for Proposals. Prior to the ,planning t g the additional Requests #'Gro,PYoposals', Department send in additional, fee of $150 to -Over, L.he applicant .hall pay an aaministrati.ve costs associated with the distribution Of'the f+c'que::t for Propo,alM and revieb' and evaluation of thO reSpo.•Isive raid F,f_oprosals. A':/� MCDONO GH HOI.T,AXD & ALLEN IRIS A. PROFESSIONAL' CORPORATION MARTIN MCDONOUGH (R( 'P YANG .ATTORNEys V:BARLOWGOFF 0011)S.SALEM JOSEPH E COOKS. JR. VIROINIA A, CAHILL NEWPORT BEAChI OFFICE: DAVIOJ.SPOTTISWOOD HARRIFTA SrEINCR SSS CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 950 4041 MA4AIITHUR ooULCVARD, 5U11k' 101 DENNISD.O'NEIL PATRICIA D. ELLIOTT NEWMOIITOEACH.CALIFORNIA 92000 RICHAR.7W NICHOLS FAMIYPOWERSANTOwE SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 9SSIA t',lal gtll-u!)n DONALD C. POOLE I4IUJAM,A UCHTIG . RICHARD W OSEN SrrH P. URUNNGR444-3900 RICHARD E.BRANDT F.tlWARDJ.QUINN. JR. OAKLAND OFFICE GARY F. LOVERIDGE DON E. GREEN G. RICHARD BROWN NANCMfP.LEE P, 0, 009 3440 DAVID W. POST MARK'LORTON QA114ANO,.CALIFORNIA 04609 SUSAN K.EDLING DEBRA S.MARGOLIs (•11G) 1547-0100BRUCEMCDONOUGH MARY E:OLDEN WILLIAM L OWEN CATHY OFUBELSALENKO DAVID F.BEATTY- ALAND.SCHOSTAG ALFR60 E.HOLLANO ALIr,EA.WOODYARO ANDREANNA KSIDAKISoRUCE F, ALLCN MICHAEL T,FOGARTY ROBERT RNUBIN July 6 / Bls� A , Pla...Inq ARkHUR H. BERNSTEIN. HARRYE.HULLJR. MICHAEL B.EVANS DENNIS W. DE CUIR MLUAMCHILSON.JR, COUN61CL ANNO'CONNELL PAULS.SIMMONS j ROBERT W.O'CONNOR SARBARA L DOTTA J U L to 1987 JV -FRY R.JONCS EDWARD J.WRICAT,JR, T. BRENT HAWKINS MARCUS J. LO DUCA +. BRIAN W. CASSERLY SUIMN R.HAMUN Orovillell, CrhfQm;A STUART L SOMACH m"AELK, IWAHIRO DAWN H. COLE MARK A. WRSSER SHARON D. ROSEME MLWEL J. RAINVILLE SUSAN L SCHOENIG MICHELLE MARCHETTNKENYON JAMES L LEET JON RIESE mARCIASCULLY KENNETH'W:RUTHENSERG,JR. DONALD R. PERSON :Copy VIA TELECOPIER Board of SuperVisors c/o Mr. Martin J. Nichols_ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Butte_ 25 County Center Drive Orov,ille, California 55965-33.73 Re: Policy Sewage Treatment Ponds Dear Members of the Board: Our office has ;just recently been retained to represent Clifford T.' Ashby, owner of Rancho Esplanade Mobile Home Park. It is our understanding that on Tuesday, July 7:1967 the Board of Supervisors will consider adopting a policy regarding private 'sewage trepat.zrtent 'ponds. The proposed policy affects not only Rancho Esplanade but numerous. properties thL'oug out the County. We are unable to attend your Board meeting on July 7. In order to give us an opportunity to personally address your Board on ,this matter, we ask that it be continued until the week of _July 27. in the event the Board does not postpone the matter, we would like to have YOU consider the following prior to adopting any p011CY that would exclude the use ,of sewer ponds. 1. Rancho Esplanade has a use permit permitting 271 mobile home spaces. There is nothing in the use permit Board of Supervisors Judy 6,1 15987 Page 2 which limits the manner in which 'sewage may be treated. The existing 150 spaces were constructed on septic systems. 2. Mr. Ashby is prepared to provide tertiary sewage treatment on site. This treatment facility will not only, handle the sewage from the remaining units to be developed, but will remove the existing units from the septic systems. The septic systems ate considered undesirable under current County standards. 3. Mr. Ashby will agree to hook up to any public sewer facility as `soon' as it becomes available and to waive y assessment an protest of the formation of a sewage district. conceIn rn thattrMr- Ashby is willing to meet the Board's ructure be provided by,agr_eeing to do all that he can do to make that possible He obviously cannot unilaterally create a sewage assessment district and build the necessary infastructure. Mr. Ashby has a right to develop under his existing use a mit. only'a reasonable condition regarding sewage may &., read into that permit. iThe County may not take Mr. Ap. v's development rights by imposing a condition which he cannot satisfy. You may require him to do all that is reasonable `under the circumstances - that 'is, ;agree to a future assessmentdistrict and to hook up to public sewer wk. �n it becomes ava,,Uable. The proposed policy has serious ramifications. We ask that you .6 tpone a hearing' on it.' Ver y Y urs, W' Richard Brown GRBdjc 0298P cc: Clifford T. -Ashby `alter Olson :Bettye A. Kircher 4 (aOI,�I,`CY `f�E Af D I,NG SEvJAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM y Beginning with paragraph 3 of the resolution: 1' WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisoi-5 does not believe that sewage disposal systems serving small area, -or individual. development projects which include surface ponds as part of the seoiage treatmpnL, or retention process, encourage public infrastructure development, and 4i'HEREAS, the Board of -Supervisors finds it i,n the public; interest to limitsewagedisposal systems which include surface ponds,ror either treatment or retention to larger, area -wide facilities, IT RESOLVED that the Butte Gounty hoard of Supervisors NOW, THEREFORE, r finds that the sewage disposal systems wr�rof sewage dch include isposal forurface �sma11 areatment or retention to be an unacceptable metho or 'individual development projects -in Butte County. of BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it is ti,ie policy of the suButte pondsre Supervisors that sewage disposal systems which i allowed in small area, or individual development mhereg ofei' nfluencets in eadoptedurban -byaLAFCo, of Butte County, 'as identified by the c p or the areas immed'ately contiguous to said spheres. PASSED AND ADOPTED ..:� 77777;7777 ; P.02 A PROFFISSI.ONAL COR70RtATION Mdai71NMG04NaUGH IRIS P. YANG ATTORNEYS N&WPOR7 DrAaH OFFICE VAIARLOW10FF DAVID5.SALEM 4041 MACAFITHUR 130ULEVAR0,51JITE 101 JOSEPH E=10MES,JR VIRGINIAA.CAHILL $55 CAPITOL MALL, 5LSITE ®50 NEWPORT 6EAdH, CAI✓FORMA 02600 OA}ADJ SFGTTI5WQOD HARRIETA.STEMER DEHNIS0O'NESL PATRICIADELLIOTT 5ACAAMENTO, CALIFORNIA95614 IT1h)aoI-IIaO RICN,►FC'W. WCHOLS MARY POWERS ANTOINE DONALDC.POOLE IPM ALIC IG (9 16) 444-3900 pA kLANY! 1?PPICIG RIC800 IM ODEN . P SETH I ICHARD E. BRANOT EDWARD 1. QUINN, JR, P, O. 009 3440 GARY F,LOVERIDGE DON E.GREEN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA P4VOO G. RICHARD BROWN NANCY P. LEE (AID) BiT^0106 DAVID W POST MARK GORTON SUSAN K EOLSNG DEBRA S. MARGOLIS BRUCEMcOONOUGH MARY EOLDEN ALFRED L HOLLAA4O WILLIAM LOWEN CATHYDEUDELSALENKO HRUC�- FALLEN DAVID BEATTY AUINO.SCHOSTAG ICE A. EL OOO YARD ANDREANNA KSIDAHIS July 6, 1987 M;THUG H8E4iN67E1N M ROBERT FL RUBIN or co UNOC4 HARRY E HULL JR, MICHAEL d. EVAI4S (WNKASW.DECUIR WILLIAM C. HILSON,JR. ANN owINELL PAUL S.SIMMCHS ROUERTW.O'CONNOR BARBARA L GOTTA JOFRY R JONES EDWARD J, WRIGHT. JR. 7.IJRENT HAWKING MARCUS J. LO DUCA BFIAN W, CASSERLY SUSAN H, HAMLIN STUART LSOMACH MICHAELKIWAHIRO DAWN H COLE MARK A WASSER £4ARON0,ROSEIAE MICHAELJ,RAINVILLE ISUSANL.SCHOENIG MICHELLE MARCHMA KENYON JAMES LLEET JON RIE6E,�y� Cat MARCIASCULLY KENNETH W.RUTHENUERG.JR, Bu"s C�D• D08iALDR PERSON 441' p''j COPY VIA SELECU,PIER PrO4WA ,., Board of Supervisors c, /o Mr. Marten J. Nichols Clerk of, the Board of'Supervisors County of Butte 25 Cunty orovil.le, California 95965-337 Re: Policy - sewage Treatment Ponds Dear" Memb{�rs of the Board:' our office has ;just recently been retained to represent Clifford T. ` ,Ashby, owner of Rancho Esplanade 14ob`rle Home Park It is our understanding that on Tuesday, July 7, 1987 the ,hoard of Supervisors will consider adopting a policy regara,ing private sewage treatment ponds. The proposed policy affects not only, Rancho Esplanade but numerous properties throughout the County. We are unable to attend your Board meeting on July 7 in orderto, give us an opportunity to personally address your Boa.ro on this matter, we ask ,that it be continued until the week of July 27 in the event the Board does not postpone the matter,, we would like ta_hav� you consider the following prior to adopting an policy t e use of sewer p g y hat Would th ponds. 1. Rancho Esplanade has a use permit permitting 271 mobile Name spaces. There is nothing in the use permit 1 Board 6of1superVisors July Page' er in which sewage may be tr ateae which limits the mann, aces wert� constructed on septic systems. The existing 11G sp. tertiary sewage 2. Mt . Ashby is prepared to prav�ide rill, not only e remaining units to be developed? tri atment on 'site e This treatment facilitY ban4lie the sewage from units from the septic but will. remove the existing The septic systems are considered undesirable systems. standards under current county to anypublic 3. Mr. 'Ashby wia.1 agtee to hook uP as soon as it becomes availabessmento ware sewer facility a ass any protest,of the formation of a swag district. is willing to meet the Board' do In short, Mr. Ashby agreeing to gtruc:ture be provided by concern that �nfa. assible. 1 e obv ously all that he can do to make that p Create a sewage as district'and cannot unilaterallycreate ild the necessary under his exi.stinq, bu sewage Mr. Ashby has a right to develop onditiQregarding use permit. ` only a reaso ►ab1e mhe Cour may not take may be read into that permit a condition E s developmenisft rights by imposing Mr r Ashby require him to do all You Me �,, tee which he cannot le etundeto public tdistrict hat is r: eason,able under the circumstances ndtohook�uph to is F g to a future alssessmebecomestavailable sewer when ,,h e r oposicY has serious ramifications- The amications. 7 we ask ed POlf ip one a hearing on it . that you postp y Qursp V e r Z" Richard Brown (3R.B:d7o 0298P cc: Clifford T. Ashby Walter Olson Bettye A. yirchex 4 ,I LILLICK WHOSE & CHARLES A PARTNERSHIP. INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 7W6 EIA0APrA0ERO CEN"EI4 ATTORNEYS AT LAW aAN FPAPICISCO 90.111. p� p� �u_��300 CAPITOL MAIL. SUITE 1590 slei rrg4.62QC TELECOPIER . 9160 44Z!•St7AO rCOiP)L11'tY11flC�.�`..GQ' M SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 ler tiOUTH FI;_UEF90A STRErt D (Sir.) 442 • 6800 WS ANC rLE5 90617 any rn5 r213i �4SH-7100... MAY 4 19.87 IOI WMST BROAOWAV SAID DIEGO 92101 PPtivH10, Cat ,Cls) 230 5000 II rDtDEN SHORE, SUITE GIO P05T OFFICE BOX 1967 LONG BEACH 90801 April 30, 1987 (213) 49I-i2I2 1000 M STREET, N W WASHINGTON D C 20036 f2O2i 785-3286 CERTIFIED MAIL Laura M. Tuttle,,Associate Planner Butte County Planning Commission 7 County Center Drive n rowzlle, California 95965-3397 Re: Use Permit, AP 06-17-29: Notice of Appeal' Dear Ms. Tuttle: This firm represents Cliff Ashby in the above referenced matter. Pursuant to the telephone conversation between Ray C. Thompson of this firm and youz-8elf on April 30, 1987, this letter shall serve as written Notice of Appeal, and protest of the determination by the Planning Commission of Butte County that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required in Mr..' Ashby's proposed modification of use permit, Log Number 86- 03-07-03, AP Number 06-17-29. Reasons for this .appeal 'include the following non- exclusive stateimnt: 1. This project does not materially, conflict with tong-term environmental goals of Butte County. 2.1 This project poses no significant'or material impact for water quality degradation, health and productivity of neighboring orchalyd5., 3. This project is consistent with the policy of Butte Courity's Board of Supervisors to decrease the nitrate concentrations in the soil deposited from existing sept-ic: tank systems. �.Ilf..r01, w Laura M. Tuttle April 30, 1987 Page Two From Our telephone conversation, I understand that this matter will now be set for Public Planning Commission and you Will belProvidinggmeenoticehof that event. I also understand that no fee is required for filing this appeal. I thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter. 1 do look forward to Working with you on this Project. If you have any questions, Please do not; hesitate to contact me at your convenience. Very t:..,Mly yours, \ILLICI( McHOSC & CHARLES, John F. Davis 205:50 cc: Mr. Cliff Ashby is !rc,� AL 563 EAST LINDO AVENUE PHONE (916) 343-5818 CHICO, CALIFORNIA 95926 gU*8 Co. Planning Comm NAME: Rancho Esplanade Mobi1e Home Park APR G 1987 IhiVOICE NO. ADDRESS: 3549 Esplanade#3130 Orovitlo, California LAD NO. CITY: Chico, CA 95926 DATE; 4/6/87 GENERAL MINERAL _ �. INORGANIC CHEMICAL H_ o 7.21, Arsenic (mg/1,,) <0.005 Specific Conductance(micromhos/cm @ 25`'C) 300 Barium (1710/1) •• <0.01 Total Dissolved Solids'(mg/1) ....... 213 Cadmium (mg/1) ... <0.003 1-0tal Hardness (mg/1 as CaCO3)....... 83 Chromium' (mg/1) ,., <0.005 Total Alkalinity (mg/l as CaCO3)..... 99 F'louride ,(mg/1) 0.08 {icarbonate (mg/1) .................. ......... 121 Lead (m9/1) ••• 0,0 Carbonate (mg/l') ..• .. .. <1 Mercury (mg/1) ... <0.001 Chloride (mg/1)...... ............ 26 Nitrate (mg N031). . 6.9 Strlftate (mg SO,/1) •......... 16 Selenium (mg/1) ... <0.003 Calcium (ma/1) ..............,,... . 15.6 Silver '. (mg/1) .. <0 005 Copper (mg/1) ....... .......t,.. <O.01 Iron (mg/1) .......... a ... <0.01 GENERAL_PHYSICIAL Potassium (mg/1) . .... 1.17 Color (units) <5 Magnesium (mg/1) .. . 11.6 Odor (Tonus) (Units).. <1 0.07 hianaanese (mg/1) .................. ........ <0.01 Turbidity .. .. , . 211-7 Aggressive Index 10.8 :.. .... Zinc (mq/1) .,..., 0.06 Foaming Accent (MBAS/.1.)... ........ <0.01 means less than the listed value COMMENTSt, The water is acceptable under guidelines established in the California Health & Safety Code, Title 22. Water hardness is classified as moderately hard. The aggressive index (A '1) indicates the water is no,naggressive to pipes and doposits minimal scale on pipes and fixtures. Ron Brues WGLE & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING - PLANNING - SURVEYING P.U. BOX 923 -1916) 527-6810 /A4\A RED SLUFF, CA; 96080 RANCHO ESPLANADE MOBILE HOME PARK December 3( 1985 Pond requErements foreff'luent pond g units serving 2a1 mobile home Notes 1. Vol = effluent volume from park calculatedat 250 gpd per unit, plus laundry facilities and recreation room fixtures 2. 'Rain Annual design rainfall in feet (of pond depth) 3 Rvap = pond evaporation (feet of pond depth) 4, ;Irr = Irrigation requirements for twenty acre parcel on which effluent is to be used as ,irrigation water (feet of pond depth) based on 14 acres of irrigated land net and 54" per year irr. requirements (data per state DWR and ,farm .ad.vi.sors 'office) . 5. Stor'- Net storage requirements to balance irrigation demands with effluent and rainfall (feet of pond depth) 6. Depth =depth of the proposed 4.0 acre pond incl uding`storage of all wastewater, when no irrigation is required. 7, A total of 271 units could be served by, the proposed ,system. Each un is assumed to generate 250 gpd of effluent. 8.'An aeration chamber and settling (and holding) pond provide adequate treatment far the irrigation of walnut trees in accordance with the provisions of the California StateWastewater Reclamation Criteria, California Administrative Cone Title 2.2, Division 4. Irrigated acreage: 14.00 Irr. wtr. (in.) : 54.00 63.00 Pond size (acres): 3,70 Irr. Water (acre -fit.) ; ( p Irr. 'Wer. ft.af and) 17.03 4.00 acre Month Vol Rain Evap Irr + Star Pond Depth Oct. 1.57 0.17 0.34 0.00 1.41 1.441 Nov, 1.57 0.54 0.13 0.00, 1.98 3.38 Deci 1.`57 0.50 0.09 0.00 1.98 5.36 ,Ian. 1.57 0.56 0.00 2.04 7.40 0.05 0.00 9.24 Feb, 1.57 0.42 1.84. March 1.57 0,42 0.28 0.00 1.71 1'0.95 April 1.57 0.18 0,42 1.99 -0.66 10.30 May 1 57 0.06 0.61 2.62 -1.60' 8.70 June! 1.57 0.05 0.''74 2.47 -1.59 7.11 Jul![ 1.57 0.01 0.86 2,68 -1. 96 , . 15 Aug. 1. 5T, 0.02, 0.7,4;4.,10 X3,25 0.50 Sept 1.57 0.0.6 0.55 3.17 totals 18.84 2.99 5,00 17.03 ,annual Total in ft, of Mond depth -0.20 Note: even' at the anticipated maximum effluent produuci.ton it would be anticitiated that irrAgation water fa other sources would need to be used. ABATEMENT' 'lr' BUTTE COUNTY MOSQUITO DISTRICT OFFICE AT 51 17 LARKIN ROAD mi.OAM E, NAZ,ELTINE, Pfl.M 1AAJA0rR EI•IVLRONLSEN.TA LISP` N. E. CORNER OF OROVILLE AIRPORTOROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95.965 ON LARKIN'ROAD PIHON Elstsf5s3-eo3e'. Burch 31, ly..�7 342-73s6 BvffeCO. -FrinnningC,'Wym, Laura M. Tuttle, Assoc._ planner APR 2 1981 Butte County planning Commission ommile, CaIHfgrna l 7 County Center Drive Orovi'lle, CA 95965 AP 06-17-29 - ModificatiOl'I of Use Vie: Permit toliff �include sewage treatment pond and land .i.rrigat:ion. Dear Laura: a: We have several concerns regarding the proposed project. in the past we have had; a mosq ito problem in the summer drainage water from this park that' vias allowed to stand' in an unmaintained- ditch, concern is the creation of a `sewage treatment Another pond and land irrigai:.ion of the effluent.',Chis method of ser_ioias mosquito problem if it sewage disposal can become a is not carefully planned and intensely rria.naged. As a mitigation to these pi`oblems we request: that we to review 'he proposed sewage system have an opportunity plan and the park drainage plan and include our recoinmendations for mosquito control in these systems. The final.' responsibility for insuring that a mosquito ,problem is note created vi' ll be with the owners of the property who would be subject to abatement prrIceedings under the H6a!th & Safety Code if a problem is crew . ed . 'Tease call if yogi have ,any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, i Jim Cram y. Assistant Manager JC/db ccs Moble Engle & Assoc. , Signatut ", . MBLE L. E UIc, ,f , SO ° P.0. Box, sm,BLUFF, CALPC June s, 1987 B1;SC€ISS,.ONor IROiNM SST<�?L A,NCi10' ESPL. iVAI]E ` `"`--- UATTCN '-r- escr9--ILF3C1ME PAF AP 06-x7--2�3 ption.z:OMPLExJON 0-� k'ER � The Pry",ject concis prnit which is for tot of the rontpl`etian of th Mobile dome al of 271 e e%As�tin rNr Park. Modifica spaces far the g`use c�uirpcl because of tion of tha use Rancho Espl.ahade selvage. changes in the re Fermat has been g The owner proposes t gulatians existing 750-unit me o add '121 rrlobil,e for Lhe disposal of Spaces,, bile hc,me park for `the approeeciptc-S to th total,OV 271 Sewage collection, and, d bath e; new treatm'en,' Portion of are Presentlythe park and isposal is proposed for sewage dis using s-1ptic tanks the existing 150 Posal, arld leach fields units which sewage 'r,om Installation "ax as the the park loath the exist' sewers for t-b,e collection of of P are proposed as existing park and the lection of was tk well, as a Package proposed add tioxz to wastewater Proposed water holdixig bond rt is important to: aeration Plant for iS 110.4 aye (now proposed note -that the E hi'bz` required under Title ,�2 to be located south 'of treated A attached) of the itv'ision 4 Sec Mud Creek) "Wastewa'tex 50305b Fteclmation Criterxfornia see boldin Administrative Code g ponri is Proposed to be - >~rivxonmental' ��f mud creek in order to located' Health) A reclaimed w provide as shown on the south side iter. The reclairnec watert�'ary treatment of Creek to the Mud be used ��s ., will then be ix,r�gaton water; PumPed, across This holding pond also will pxovi g addition have the added reziloval of, al aeration, This benefit of a large source of nitrate Proposal Act; ori Zone'' ; Provides for the Pollution, from the r,Nitrate etahance9upplemental water the reliabilit well is proposed for the Provide greater fire Y of the water Project to These 'facilities proter.tion suPplY' to the ,Park reside will seri- to the vicinity'and to rices, as well as e , bo th the will r�eswa.l,t, gr4�ss tank truck park and the nei land', fires, refill water for ghboring wa.1d lane and Both the existin and the Propasegt to be construct ?d w t)'L ew interior Par, �- aspha,lt concrete ass k streets are gU,tte'r pa�rixrg with a . I aggregate 'base and ,�1o'rd Avenue is center Crown Sect' and ,Gtzrb an and sidewalk is �ropased to be Ni; prc5 jec t to proposed along the clened ',and curb and provide addst,ion saFetnnxth side thoutl.er in front of Y for pedestrians, Page one _ Of three June 0, 1987 P- acie two of three Discussion c5f's1Iact" Ztem^. 1 With the ',tertiary treatment of the water as proposed, and the, elimination of the irrigation water holdin of Mud' Creek the potential for the des soils on adjoining 7arda9.anr�of�thel�agi�cultural 'oinin g properties is minimized. The normal application of fertilizers and other agricultural operations would be no`worse than the Proposed plan. 2. This proposed project involves removal of a substantial'number of discharges of nitrate rich sewage from the area designated the Chico Area Nitrate Action Plan. By constructing the proposed tertian treatment facilities in actor' • ly I .0 plans and accepted comman practice t1�eadd� with the approved F tion of the 121 approved new spaces would not be expected to have an adverse p imp act on groundwater. This will preserve without uncertainties the land :useo,iic' F les. �r designed to ,preserre prime agricultural soils west of the Greenline", 3. This "IF" may be true. However there is no reason to believe that uhat tathe project 'Will cause the adjoinin M g properties to became ble for agriculture wi'ch the elim ,nation ofth_ e north side of Mud Creek as proposed. pond on the 4. The pond has been eliminated from the north side Of mud, .creek. 5. The pond has been eliminated and replaced by a concrete treatment and holding chambered tank in addition to 'the aeration chamber which was originally proposed. `therefore seepage and ^lgible. saturation of thelevee have been eliminated or,made n�gl 6, According the Dill Olson of the Butte County Agriculture Department the application rate for nitrogen to normally 200 to 250 Pounds g walnut trees is Nitrogen p per acme However, the 320#,of g per, acre which might he produced under full design.flows would not harm the trees, butwould actually accelerate growth. Also 80- 90 6 _Of the roots in walnut trees are located within the first six,feet of soil,, which wzould mean no chance of damage to the roots due to the use of the ,,reclaimed water for irrigation. ` 7. The ponds hs,,.e been eliminated from the :north side of Mud Creek. 8. It some years irrigation in april may cattle a ,root rot or blight to some varieties of trees. Therefore it is proposed to Provide holding capacity for enough time so that irrigation in April will not be necessary, Irrigatjon scheduling and holding capacity will be sufficient 'to allow unimpaired ;harvest. Page t,wo of three c Y r t � : ,fir �, �p �� >•r e 1 ( � ' i . ' �i , o; "r ,� � b* s .n G. •r a 4� 1 �I+ I r. b' l� � tl � 1 1 n y y 'til 1�