Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout007-240-066■I �B�I®PIPI�4Y■® 44 89-50 Log No. File, No. Peggy Johnson - Dee Do foxd applicant representative ADDRESSc 3524 Hicks Lane Sam Chico, CA 95926 - PHONE: 894-2866 Same - property owner ADDRESS: 111;-1QJ3—rCT1 K"ESCRS:PTSc T - Use Permit to allow a _day care center F8'2 v,o on property zoned A -"SR located approx. 420' north of Hicks Lane and Eaton. Road, r J_ tersect? an—, on ane east sa-e of Hicks Lane identified as AP 07-234-66 town/area: Chico GRTE1RAL. PLAN DESIGNATION Low Density Residential PRE -APP FEE ?AID: $ 195. 5 0RECEIPT NUP'mm 10751 DATE,� May x',-19 8 5 APPLICATION ACCEPTED,, FINAL.APP'. PAID: : sZS7 $L? -RECEIPT :VtJ�fBER:' REZONI114G PEIT.TION SIGNATURES: CHECKED %a i � IZiG` LIST PRLEP11RED MAIL -OUT NOTICES WMT- MN News _ NOTICES MAILED NUMBER: 18 Public -PREPARED ! C7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN DISPLAY AD PREPARED NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION L (;J P G 8 R DATE OF PUBLICAT19N­- � I141 IAL STUDY P:LPARED 'ENVIRONMENTAL DET�tMiNATION: Categorical Exemption FT Negative, Declaration FILED: V" - Mitigated Negative Declaration FILID: EiivzYonmental Impact Feport CERTIFIED: Other: STATE CLE:ARIINGHOUSE NUMBER: APPLICAN'l'JREPRESENTATTIVE NOTT_.F_TCATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEIERMINAtTIOY PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING : ( q � O � f � /} L fr}7 - - r c!' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' BEARDING(s) : RESOLii'_ION NUMBER (GPAs) ADOPTED: ORDINANCE NiUMB 2 ADOPTED: ` i -110E OF DE XDTATION (appendix H) F y g�aay Jdhnson w prtnposedhT� egative D cl-aratiaLI regarding envirmunenta impact and 1[Jse 'Permit to allow a day cai-e center on property zoned A -SR (Agricultural Suburban Residential) located approximately 420 feet north of wicks Lane and Eaton Road intersection, on the east side of Hicks Lane, identified as A.P 007-240-066, Chico. (Continued open from February 8, 1990) Staff said the Commission requested staff to make a video of the site for this meeting, which staff has provided. Staff played the video. Staff noted that there were 13 letters received in support of this project and the applicant subdiitted a new plot plan and booklet on the project. Staff, passed, pictures of the site to the Commission thM.t were submitted by the applicant. Staff said the off-street parking spaces f delineated on the new plot plan show 4 employee parking spaces, 2 residential spaces, and one visitor space. Staff said it was their understanding that there will be 5 employees. Staff suggested the visitor space be changedto an employee parking space to comply with the code. The hearing was opened to the public. Peggy Johnson discussed the need in Chico for quality day care. She discussed the high cost of day care services and requested approval of thi.4 project. Aaron Doxford addressed the issues in the booklet he submitted to the Commission. He said there will only be a maximum of four employees. He said the circular drive will help with the ingress and egress problems onto Hicks Lane, He asked the Commission to consider a 3 ft. fence on the front of the property that will gradually reach 6 ftp in height towards the back of the pk operty 'to allow the side 'neighbors to be able to see over the fence when leaving theirproperty. He said that most of the new parking area will not' V, seen f rorty the road due to the bushes. He said they want to keep the site &-•esidential looping as possible and will not de=value the neighbors property. He said they lis ire met the requirements for off-street parking. He said children, will not be allowed out froix , —ept to be picked up or dropped off. He said the increase in children will increase the traffic by 160 trips per day. He said there is a garden area at the back of the property that will act as a buffer between the backneighbor and the play area for the children. Commissioner Ostrowski asked Mr. Doxford about the surface of t riew parking spacws, Mr, Doxford said he'' 'ng concrete because it will be'rnore'durable and longer is consxderr lasting. Commissioner Lynch asked the length of the parking spaces, Mr. Doxford said the spaces would, be 9 ft. wide x 19 ft. long. Mr. Doxford said he made a traffic study and there are 166 to 178 vehicle trips an hour on Hicks Lane; Xie said at Level C standards there could be 1500 trips per hour and it would BY�y,����yyj� y�±y� �y y{ j��}m+�T µy+� *�,�,�y : r CO�� T.4+4 P't"ALY�wV, ��\.T I, I.KAN �.} f+.JL` 'i.7.'4..4141..L 1'i W7 r"" 1.'•,'G� k'w1,4 {i �v�,71.! i i 1�r be acceptable. He did not Peal the increase in traffic flow would cause an problems., said the children would be Picked d and dro off at different Y p he business hours would be from '7:00 a.m. to 5:30p n,. and the busiest timeswould said, from '7:30 am. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 m, to, id be fru�i care. He said the expanded day care fac 1 ty would not affect adjacene discussed I the Propertiesinterior plans of the day ns; their neighbors all worked. inasmuch Chairman Forbes asked where the main entrance to the center would be$ i ox#ord said the entrance wouldAbe in the,garafa wbicli i area. Is being converted to day care ke said they are installing a large window in the front of the 'garage for Aght and air. Commissioner Ostrowsid asked if the property was on a sewer system. Mrs-. Doxford said theroe septic system. p P O is on se tic and the Health Department has approved the Staff said that they were told there would be 5 teachers. Staff was concerned with number of parking spaces provided. the Mr. Doxford said that the (director will be a teacher and they wi?l only need the four employee parking spaces. He said they, have also been approved to have a residence on he premises with the day care. Melinda Pickard said that Peggy Johnson runs a quality day care center. She recommended approval of the expansion. She said 19�s. Johnson is an honest person. She said as apanentt she wants her child in a safe environment. Vioi 1VlcQuen. said she had her children at T1s. Johnson's clay care from 19$4 to 1988..She said it is very hard to find qualified day care centers. She said that Ms. Johnson provides a very safe and loving environment.. She reminded the Commission how needed a good day care center was in Chico. Bill Bradshaw said from the parents' point of •ew the . existing y rare center is a good 1 environment for his 3 year old daughter. He said he looked at 2 other day care before Choosing this one. He said Ms. Johnson is a professional and a cari nt ers saidhe feels secure leaving. his daughter in Ms. Johnson's caret g person.l�e Paul Pickard said he and his wife looked fol a long iiirie for a quality care he found Ms. Johnson. He said Ms. Johnson truly loves the children, yle saidenter before day care facilities in the Chico area. they need Daren Weaver said her son goes to the existing day care center. She recommended approval p �iit of her way to tape her son to this day care o€ the permit. She said. she drives 12 miles c center. dally Adams said she is one of the people who works different shifts and would be, at the center at different times during the day. She was in favor of the a ansion' li � Y^ Il, G' i 777 77 i Adkh kaon Schmidt,, the neighbor tipelle south; said he was concerned with, the traffic increase,, He said this is not a good street and the ,«,deed limit is 45 miles 1,per ,hour., felt there would be a backup of cars' trying, to get into the Johnson. property if there is only room ar 7 cars at a iiime to drop off children, He said the fence would make his property feel like a bowling alley. He said his wif6 only works 1/2 time and is off during the summer. He said dais expan;'Plo . would cause more i problems for him getting out of his driveway. He was against lthe expansion. Lane Schmidt said they support day care centers, but oppose the expansion, She said there is the issue of putting a commercial use between 2 residences, She was agaim"I this'permit. Isabelle turd, neighbor to the north, was concerned with the traffic and fumes from' the trunks across the street affecting the childrisn. She said she was not against the present day care center, but was opposed to the expansion. Mike Curd said the new plan was not discussed with hint and he was concerned with the parking area being paved because of the runoff onto his property. He said the proposed fence would. be 3 ft. from his bedroom window. He said his well is next to the property line and he was concerned with contamination. He said Mr. ]Doxfor l's well is going to be under One of the proposed parking spaces. He said also that a wooden fence would not cut down on the noise. LIP said he has no problems with: the present day care center, but was against the expansion. He questioned staff about the proposednew development on Hicks Lane. Staff said there is a proposal in progress south of the creek on the west side of Ricks Lane for 200 units with_ a golf course; but it is just a proposal at this time. Mr. Curd said the proposed development will increase the traffic flow on Hicks bane. He said the people in the rear of this property were concerned with the expansion. He said he has no problems with the existing JZ or possible 18, but ,was ago*, st an increase to 36 children. He felt that this increase would be injurious to neighboring p� operties. asked ;if there is a standard for fencing. Staff said "the applicant would be required to put in a 6 ft. solid fence, Mr. Curd said the sidewalk i� I-Ie did not••••vra t a commercial #��s the three parcels and his children play . y P ay on this e in a residential area. Dave 'Tipton was concerned with the drainage Aitch along the Curd property flooding onto his property. He evas against the permit. lIe said his other concern was fire protection. I-Tt4 i fire. He was opposed toil:tehis incproposal would limit the access to the property yn case of a Commissioner 0strowski asked. if there were hydrants in the area Mr. Tipton said there are no hydrants in this area. ]Cd Hardesty was therm to answer questions. He said he has other development in the area. COUNTY �1TC�, CiSC? t�Tt"1aori:fJ aWmtim�a�cnaarmMrswoawr.�---*^--^ter-^- F 777 Y I'dr. Doxford said there is some commercial uses in the community already. He said the Boat Shop is one. I He said the surface drainage would come down the north side of his property to the rear where there are french drains to take the eater to the drainage ditch. He 'said there will be pipes placed around the well so cars can not park over the well. He said the parking space near the well will be for a compact car. He said, they have never had any fire incident at the daycare center: He saivi he was willing to trim the bushes down to 3 ft. or less, for traffic visibility.. He said he talked to the fire people and the Fire Department approved of the center. He said the building is as fire proof as it can be ; There eras a, brief discussion on the height of the roof of the addition. Mx: Hardesty said there will be an 3 ft, roof on the extension. He said the Commission can cliiange the speed limit on Hicks Lane. He said there were 20 children at the Mobile ]Home Park on Hicks Lane waiting for a bus at 7:30 a.m. and there were no parents with the cblildren. He suggested changing the speed limit on Flicks Lane to 25 or 35 mph. BREAK - 10:36 a.m: to 10:50 a.m. (Mairman Forbes asked Mr. Doxford to come forward to answer questions. I[_'ommissioner Lynch asked for clarification on the well in the parking area. Mr. Doxford said the well is 3 £t. into the parking area and the parking space would be designated for a compact car only. He said his home is 8 years old. Staff said Environmental Health should have a record of how the well was constructed. and checked his water supply."i fir. Doxford said the Health Il�epai�tment was out. Commissioner Lynch was concerned with oils and other vehicle seeapage near the well and if the well was properly grouted. Commissioner Lambert asked if there was a problem with the parking spaces being 'within a setback. 'Staff said the parking spaces are located outside of the setback. Staff said the code does not allow for permanent structures over 12 inches into the setback. Staff said the fence; is a w3ndition of the parking ordinance, Staff said the Commission is not in a position to change the, speed limit on any street, they can only make recommendations to the Department' of Public Works, I Commissioner Lynch said looking at Page 79 of the Zoning Code, Section 24-99 A -SR, and looking at the definition of P -Q Zone on Page 117, Section 24-129, under -uses requiring a use permit in the A -SR zone states "Publics and Quasi -public uses", but on Page 117, were it defines the F -Q (Public/QV.=-Public) Zone, everything is public, i.e., public school, public park, public playground, etc. He said lin the past, the Com.t�ussion has considered churches and other facilities of that nature to be, public -quasi -public as well. NO Comm 8 8 N knrOn. �, :tax 4h 8 a Staff said that the P-Q ;zoning designation is ,limited to public facilities, "otaff said under the use permit category, public/quasi-public is ;iirtherdefined, including churches, school, etc. Staffsaid the Board of. Supervisors nia,de an interpretation 'that schools were, in fact a public quasi-public use. Staff noted the Board discussion on day care facilities on Page 163 of the !coning Ordinance. Commissioner Lambert asked the difference between a, day care center and a nursery' school. She asked if this was done by the numbers. Ms. Johnson said the difference is curriculum, not the number of chiWiren. She said for 12 or more children she has to be licensed by the State, Mr. Doxford. said the garage will be completely finished with sheet rock, etc., and loop, life a regular room of the house. He said tl7 ere are 13 businesses in the community, Paul Pickard discussed the condition of the well and whether it was ;grouted. He said he has a 12" by 12" concrete pad around lois well. Mr. Curd said the french drains at the rear of the property were installed to handle the drainage for the three parcels. He was concerned with oil, transmission fluid, etc. from the vehicles getting into theroundwater and contaminating ontami af' n sng the wells. Alan Adams, a civil engineer, said the frenchdrainage drains and. dre�Ana a ditch are working and would continue to handle the ,runoff. He said there will only be a small area of concrete. Ile said the Health Department approved the project on a septic system for 36 children. He said that additional children will not add that much to the traffic flow. The hearing was closed. Commissioner Lynch suggested the following 12 conditions the added in place of the conditions suggested by staff: 1. Provide 7 off-street parking spaces off of Hicks Lane as indicated on the Plot Plan entitled Exhibit A. (5 employees, 2 residents) 2• Provide for circle drive access as per Exhibit A. Entrance and exit to be clearly marked in a spanner approved by Public Works. Driveway to be clearly marked as a fire lane. 3. Submit plans for approval to the Department of Public; Ifforks for drainage and install theei s usred facilities. No surface drainage to be directed onto neighboring properties. 4. Maintain shrubbery between driveway entrance wid emits stythat it Will not Ataapede visibility for vehicle exiting driveway. 8gTTIE COUNT* tAi�1NXXG co, TS81bN MIL'O ES - iia, h 8, 1556 r 5. Obtain necessary building permits and a. Certificate of Occupancy before operating under this permit. 6. Meet requirements of State Fire MarshAll and the Uniform Fire Code. 7, Obtain permits or licenses from State Department of Social Services. 8. Obtain a clearance frow the County Environmental. Health Department certifying adequacy of water supply and septic system and grouting of ivell as required $y current code. 9, Meet the requirements of Section 24-35 (off-street parking, as it applies to landscaping, irrigation). - I 10. Fencing within 15 feet of edge of right-of-way, but not closer than within 50 feet of the centerline of Hicks Lane, shall not exceed 3 feet in height. Remainder of property shall lie fenced by a m;nimuin 6 ft. solid board and maintained in good repair. 11. Children must be dropped" off and picked up; from the circle driveway. No panting or dropping off shall be allowed on the street between the driveways. 12. Applicant must also comply -with all other applicable State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. Cotninissioner Lambert said she has no concerns with Ms. Johnson or her handling of the chat ,tren. She said she has real concerns with the number of children, traffic, noise, etc. She asked the people in the audience that have come across undesirable day care centers to give the naives and address to staff to investigate. She also askedthe people in the audience to give staff -suggestions on what standards the would like to see for day care centers. Chairman Forbes said there is a'need for day care centers and he said this project was agreeable to hire with the conditions proposed by, Mr. Lynch. It was moved by Commissioner Lynch, seconded by Chairman Forbes, and carried for approval as followsr A. Find that the requirements of CE QA- have been completed and considered in malting this .decision and adopt a Negative Declaration, and B. Find that the proposed use of the property will ilot impair the integrity of the character of the zone in which the land f ies and that the use would not he unreasonably incompatible with or injurious to surrounding properties, or detrimental to the health and general welfare of the persons residing or wonting in the neighborhood, or to the general health, welfare, and safety of the County because it complies with the requirements that are set outin Section 24=99 of the County Zoning Code and this becomes a permitted public/quasi-public use with the Use Permit; and s . Jt a r ir C, Brant the "Use ern -i Vin. allow the operation of a child day care center for, sip to 3 children on AP 007-240-006 (a«egSohnson) subjeef to the following conditions: I., Provide 2 off-street parking spaces off of flicks Lane as indicated on the: Not Flan entitled Exhibit A. (5 employees, 2 residents)' 2. Provide for circle drive access as per Fxhit?it A. Entrance and exit to be clearly marked in a manner approved by Public Works, Driveway to be clearly marked as a fire lane. 3. Subunit plans for approval to the Department of Public Works for drainage and installthe required facilities. No surface dra ri.age to be directed onto neighboring properties, 4. Maintain shrubbery between driveway entrance and exits so that it will not impede visibility for vehicle exiting driveway. 5. Obtain necessary building permits and a Certificate of Occupancy before operating under this permit. 6. Meet requirements of State Fire Marshall, and the Uniform Fire Code. i. Obtain permits or licenses from State Department of Social Services. 8. Obtain; a clearance from the County Environmental health Department certifying adequacy of water supply and septic systetn and grouting of well as required by current code. 9. Meet the requirements of Section 24-35 (off-street parking as it applies to landscaping, irrigation). ]0. Fencing vvithinl5 feet of edge of right-of-way, but net closer than "Within 50 feet of the centerline of Nicks Lane, shall not exceed 3 feet in height. Remainder of property shall be fenced by a minimum 6 ft. solid board and maintained in good repair. 11. Children must be dropped off and picked up from the circle driveway. No parking or dropping off shall be allowed on the street between the driveways. 12. Applicant must also comply with all other applicable State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. AYES. Commissioners Ostrowski Lynch, Matsjn, and Chairman Forbes.. NOES; Commissioner Lazribert ,fie ,,%jLTo nsoa - Proposed d ative Declaration regarding environmental impact and Use Permit to allow a day care centeron property zoned A-SR(Agricultural - Suburban Residential) located approximately 420 feet north of Hicks Lane and Eaton ?3,,oad intersection, on the east side of flicks Lane, identified as APS' 007 240-0660 Chico. Staff: submitted Staff Analysis dated January 24, 1990 into the record. fiJso, staff had no additional comments: Commissioner l ambert asked staff if there was , additional comment from the Fire Department. Staff said there were no additional comments from the Fire Department, and that this project was under the State Fire Marshal. The hearing was opened to the public. Jay Lyman, 33 Santos Way, Chico, representative for Peggy Johnson, stated that he, feels that a Negative Declaration is appropriate and that the dwelling was improved to meet the requirements of the Fire Code of 1588. Chairman Forbes asked Mr. Lyman if he and the applicant had reviewed the five conditions and if they -agreed with them Jay Lyman had reviewed the conditions and agreed with all but condition number` 4, regarding the fencing. He felt that a sixx foot fence to the i,oad would impinge on the neighbor's, and Mrs. Johnson's access to their back. yards. Also, he felt that a fence in front of the property would impinge the view of anyone trying to pull out of the driveway, onto the road, Staff said that the requirement for the fence was from the Off -Street Parking Section of the Code, which states, "A solid fence, at least 6 feet in height shall be required on all the common property lines wherein any parking facility is established abutting a residentially zoned property.", and if the Commission chooses to modify or remove that condition, special findings would have to be made. Commissioner Lynch asked how many feet there was between the two residences and which side of the property Mr: Lyman was talking about. Mr. Lyman stated that there" was eight feet between the properties, and Mrs. Johnson's property was on the south side. He asked the Commission if it was possible to lower the fence as it approaches the setback on the street. Staff stated that in the setback area, the fence height is diminished, Commissioner Lambert askede r Mr. r. Lyman what the maximum number of children would be at the day care and their age p• btIT:TB �POU�TTx Vl`aANV-TXO C9luN:rsS:rbN mmtjn, r y Mr. Lyman stated that the maximum would be 36, children, and they would be pre- schoolers. Commissioner Lambert asked if the day care facility would primarily be in ti,e 11 x 18 foot addition. Mr. Lyman stated that part of the house is being renovated as well as the 11 x t$ foot area, under the Code of the State Fire`Marsbat ind State Licensing Board. Commissioner Lynch asked if the renovation has been done. Mr. Lyman stated that the renovation has not been done; the addition has not been buil . yet. Chairman Forbes asked how many employeest'.iey will have working at the facility.. Peggy Johnson stated that there will be one director, and one teacher for every twelve children and one aid, for, a total of five. Chairman_ Forbes asked if there was, sufficient parking for their vehicles plus an additional five. Jay Lyman stated that there is room in the driveway for six vehicles. Commissioner Lambert was concerned about six vehicles parked in tandem in the two car or doublewidwy driveway. Commissioner Lynch was also concerned about ample room in the driveway for six vehicles and if thrjre was enough Yooin for parents Soing in and out of the driveway delivering and picknig up children. Conimissianer Lynch would like a new plot plan from the applicant specifically showing where the parking for the residents and the five employees would: b • , also indicating very clearly the applicant'sproposal ;I fence, also delineate either' side of the strr�cture;� on property n relation to the applicanhs dwelling and the fenced playground. Staff suggested to the Commission -that they also request that the interior traffic circulation f be delineated regarding how the youngsters are going to be dropped off and picked up. Commissioner Lynch, stated that he would want a condition stating that the children mist be dropped off and picked up on the .5ide of the road adjacent to fhe proposed day care' facility. ,Tay Lyman staaed that he received a letter :from Staff requiring fount off'wsife parking spares. ` He also aslt%d if the fence in the setback could be less than 4 feet in i;elght. Re felt that a four foot fence''in the setback would obstruct a rrly hr's w.ew of pulling ulling onto the street. I I PLZ, �y�-f pi ry��q�� y+ ry� *� yy�g �k �y �y @ �y l.✓ 11 IJ,'J:i 4,�,1y�`hYY ]. PLZ,ibV,7.V +�b`��,7 � i+ +'J F'� Ja L`7 Fl+ J.V 1J it '^ �,6 1117 w " 6, J.990 �I 77777 Staff will' check with Public Works Department. Chairman Forbes would like to have the outline of the play yard and the nature of the fencing described, on the new plot plan: Peggy Johnson stated that the play yard is in the back yard, encompassed 'by a sir foot fence. Tay Lyman outlined the portion of the ;house than would be used for clay care to the Commission, The Commission thanked Mr. Lyman and Mss Johnson and asked if thence was anyone else that wished to speak. Mike Curd of 3528 Flicks Lane, Chico was in'opposition 'to the day care center, he was concerned about heavy traffic being a threat to the welfare of the children, as well as a fire risk. He was concerned that Mrs. Johnson could black top her front yard for parking and lower his home value, that the gates may not be secure, and was concerned about the long business hours. Isabelle Curd of 3528 Hicks Lane, Chico was in opposition to the day care center. She was concerned about the safety of the children. She also stated .that trucks which use the driveway ,across the street will, not have enough room to pull otlit of the driveway of Pacific Supply if cars are parked in front of Peggy Johnson's residence., and she is concerned that a preschooler would run into the road, and that she will have to be more cautious when I driving down the street. She is concerned that (the exhaust fumes from the tracks may be a potential bronchial problem for the preschoolers. 'Hike Curd stated that children hiwe, igen out in the front yard, and he was also concerned about fire protection and asked who would provide fire +protection. Staff stated that the State Imre Marshal regulates structural standards, and that the California Division of Fores-try provides fire protection. Commissioner t,ambert asked if the road narrowed in front of the proposed site. Mrs. Isabelle Curd stated that it does narrow, and that the firm across the street from the proposed site put a curb in and black topped their yard. Chairman Forbes thanked Mr. & Mrs. Curd, and asked if there were any other's that wished to speak; Q / 'logo T- 4TE COrNry.y PTiNV.NG yOLAT$cJVt I: P 1� Iatie, Schmidt "t53t;1' wicks jail Chico, spore in opposition to theproposed day carr $Facility, she was concerned about'the traffic and safety ,factor, and asked if atgAffic study, has been done in the area. She also addressed the fencing issue; and sfated that site does not need to use Peggy Johnson's dri,,4way, however; with'a fence blocking her view of the road, she is concerned that she will have difficulty backing out of her driveway. Commissioner Lambert asked if a three foot fence would be better. Lane Schmidt statedthat a three foot fence might work, but that a fence between the properties would cut off her sprinkler system., she was also cosicemed if the, proposed day care facility woul4 meet -the, state lire Marshal's strn+ctural standards. Commissioner Lambert asked staff.if a traffic study has beeci made in the area. Staff said that a traffic study in that area could be dune, however has not been alone recently. Chairman Forbes thanked Ms. Schmidt and asked if there was anyone else that wanted to speak. ]Dave 'lepton, 3530 Hicks Lane, Chico, spoke in opposition to the propo/ped day care facility. He was concerned about the safety and wellbeing of the occupants of a day care facility in a residential setting. He felt that with no increase in the' size of the driveway, and having a potential of 7 gar 8 vehicles being parked on thr, property and off-road, that it would be a problem for the Fire Department. He was .alio concerned about the business growth in his neighborhood, and the increased traffic, and would diminish parking capacity on the street., Chairman Forbes thanked lir. Tipton, and asked if there was any, others who wished to speak. I Mike Curd stated that he would like to enc„ourage the Commission to go to the site and take a look at the situation He also expressed concern that parents have to make a U- turn in the middle of Hicks Bane after delivering or dropping off the children at the proposed day care facility, creating a traffic hazard. Commissioner Lambert stated that: she had been to ,the site and agreed that there is no place to turn around. Chairman Forbes asked if the applicant or representative would` like to snake additional comments. Jay' lLyman vfiated that according to the information he received, the proposed day care facility was not a major change in the land use and that they do not propose to tni lke a major change in the appearance of the structure or in the traffic patterns. He stated that IsWrn'' CQ 1�1xNG ''(�i$'T1��l±lt5b�o t3} 'x99 a i d 3fi cars would not be at Ibe site at one time. He also stated that staff could park across t1�e street if necessany. He.felt that they were being misread, Ile felt that the portion of tls►e building that will be occupied by the children would be safer than any residence in ChicO, as they built fire walls, have smoke deteotmrs in each room, and would have ,regular flirt" ` drills. Mr. Lyman asked the Commissionwhat they would like there to do to alter their proposal' to meet the requirements necessary to go.forward, and stated that they are wilting to work with'staff to devtelo e p a harp p that would be acceptable. ,I Chairman Forbes felt that could be arranged. The ]nearing was closed to the public Commissioner Lynch felt that the Commission needed a more adequate plot plan showing parking spaces for each required staff member and two residents, fencing'. and traffic flow. Chairman Forbes would like the plot plan to show the interior plan -of the dwelling. Commissioner Lynch would "like the plot plan to ,dl�,cvw the residences which are adjacent to �I the site. Chairman Forbes asked if it was the wish of the Commission to continue the hearing, Commissioner. Lambent had no quarrel with the continuance of the hearing, 'however, she has deep concerns regarding this proposal: Commissioner Lynch agreed with Commissioner Lambert. Chait-man Forbes stated, that he had great reservations, but would ,like to see the new plot plan prior to making a determination. � i Commissioner Larrabert suggested that the Commission to go to the site personally. Chairman Forbes reopened the hearing to the public. It was moved by Commissioner Lynch, seconded by Commissioner Qstrowski and unanimously carried to continue the hearing open to March g, 1990 at 9:00 a.m. ComrrAssioner Lynch asked staff to give Mrs. Johnson a summary of the things they want on the new plot plan. Staff stated that a, summary would be sent to Mrs. Johnson. MTP, COWITY cot% $�.rew Mi -6 re'` ' ' I� ] I' V. T FILE NO.: AF 007-240-066 BUI rE COUNTY PLAN ING COMMSSION STAFF FINDIIS SGS . Janoary ,,lel, 1990 APPLICANT: ]Peggy Johnson OWNER: Same REQUEST: Use Permit to allow a day care center. AP NO.-, 007-240-06 SIZE: .46 acre LOCATION: Approximately 420 feet- north of Hicks ]Lane and Eaton Road intersection, on the east side of Vicks Lane, Chico. EXISTING ZONING: A: -SR ZONING HISTORY: Zoned A -SR Aug. 28, 1973 Ord. 1394 SURROUNDING ZONING: SR -1, PA -C, C -C, MHP, and C-2 SURROUNDING LM USE: Ogen space, transportation highway corri.do;r, commercial - district, and single family/multi-family residential. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential APPLICABLE REOULA,TIONS Butte County Cede Sections 24-47,. 24- 99, 24-201, and 26.1. 7110 Uniform ;building Code Sections 307 and 502. !0MMEI�i'I'S l@' CEIYEI3 Robert_ B. Heaton, Ay'chitect: "This letter is to inform you that the ,remodeling , -n— - , 7777777. 777777 AM BUTIE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF (FINDINGS January 24, 1990' plans for the above noted project have incorporated all requirements of the Uniform Building Cade and the Uniform Fire Code." Public Works: "Provide adequate off-street parking." Environmental Health: "Adequate sewage system and water supply is required. for the proposed use." Division of Forestry/CFD/.Fire Protection: "kilo impact on Fire Department." ANALYSIS: This project is a Use Permit request to operate a day care center. The project site is located in an A-SR zoning classification and is designated by the Butte County General Phan as Low Density 'Residential. The project proponent has modified an existing home to accommodate 36 children as a day care center facility. The yard has been fenced to provide an outdoor play area for the children. The proposed project will result in some minor alterations of the present and planned land use of this area.. The vicinity is characterized by residential and commercial land uses as well as a major transportation corridor. The ,proposed site adequately accommodates the necessary space requirements for the proposed children under the California Department of Social Services regulations. The project site is also easily accessible 'Via State Highway 99 and the Eaton Road interchang. The existing, transportation infrastructure is considered adequate to accommodate the proposed land use. In accordance with the Butte County Code Section 26-1 and the Uniform Building Code Section 502' which states "Any change in use... upgrade and hazard,.., the building must meet or exceed the current building code requirements." Because this building is no longer being used for strictly a residential purpose, but rather a commercial endeavor, the building must meet the current building codes of 'Butte Cocznty: I In addition, in accordance with Section 307 of the Uniform Building "Certificate of Occupancy" it is the Code titled responsibility of the new business proprietor to obtain an inspection and County Building p � o occupy a certificate from the Butte, COlin I3uildin Department in order 4 once residential building for commercial purposes. RECGNUVWNDATION A. Bind that the requirement of CEQA have been completed and considered in making this decision and adopt a Negative Declaration; and 2 it BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDINGS - January 24, 1990 B. Find that the proposed use of the property will not impair the integrity or the character of the zone in which the land lies . and that the, use would not be unreasonably incompatible with or injurious to surrounding properties, or detrimental to the health and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or to the general health, welfare, and 'safety of the County because _ i and C. Grant the Use Permit to allow the operation of a child: day carecenter on AP 007 -NO -066 (Peggy Johnson) subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide fou: off-street parking spaces off of Hicks Lane. 2. Obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Butte County Building Department. 3. Meet the requirements of the State Fire Marshal and the Uniform :Fire Code. 4. - Meet the requirements of Section 24-35 for off-street parking which includes providing landscaping to a depth of at least 10 feet of said street right-of-way with openings for a walkway r,�r drive purposes in accordance with County standards. m additional 5%v of the gross lot area shall be devoted to landscaping. Eac,a ;planter area shall be surrounded with a 6 inch raised concrete cu bs"iog or equivalent. An irrigation system shall be installed a each separate planter area. A solid fence at least 6 ft in height shall be required on all common property lines when any parking facility is established abutting residential zoned property. 5. Applicant must also comply with all other ` applicable State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. B,l.,,' 4:Ir Attachments to the Commission and Cities, Enviro mental Documents Site Plan Location Exhibit 3 r Sp �ti} n �' 8It?fitfl� �Ps4l7la APPLICATION, FOR USE PERMIT SAY 419€ 9 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT: Read and foltovi instructions as set forth on attached sheet. Applicant's name�' a �� s�r��]l1'S n Phone No, . Applicant's mailing address�r2'rJ—i4 Lkl.5 L.aria C''In"oc) Applicant's interest In property (Owner, lessen, other)—Qujl�e r Owner's name and address, cam? C✓ ,- Ir- �Contactperson for project (it other than applicant)�L C M-Y ED Assessor's parcel number(s) IL2,'7-- �2 12 Present zoning' f Location and size of parcei(s) a_1 cif' Street address 5 ?q 14 r W(,-s ! _ C r rte. (° rxL' Directions for travel to property (rural and mountainous areas only).:AZA _1 Description of proposed development and use1:6.. a4r) one- rnorwti l ( .Ca lnr--e CrArra r� t�r� U_ Description of existing land use Pr000sed scheduling/associated projects aer!a In ss,-P4. Anticipated incremental development i�.►� " fJ Suilding construction (state dimensions, square footage and materials used) �.., a. Existing buildings. 4e5o 1� b. Proposed buildings I e It0 Hazardous materials to be used (inflammables, explosives or strong' chemicals)' fAiA Daily hours of operation % 00 a-vm +rs 6'3,t, am, Number of employees Number of off-street parking spaces provided Existing/proposed sewage disposal method;• i�rY� t rr�� ayjr�5 Arel,'Jin[iA I La l rr, In Proximity of power and phone lines: X?<xZrir_Q V , tri ll—t µ Mii f e_rtlh'rjc-_S .(,dt,CLErDmund• Distance to natural Water course or storm drains Anticipated on and off-site drainage Improvements!L Water source: Proximity of water for fire fighting purposes (hydrants, ponds, etc.)lliLie Will excavation or grading be nscessety? Cubic yards (estimate). UL)nC. � t•,y,hr,--,r--^-----(fes n x' f i i " IL aList and describe any other related permits w ti and other public approvals required fir this ;project, nclt,tdin those ` city, regional, State and Federal agenclies: yt ,f„+irl�. V131S required �f � g I,gUired by -•-cam.---' t: (1�.�L�°� l--a-�°c,+e IF RESIDEN'T'IAL, includc- the number of units, Whether units are single or multi- type of househ',yld size expected, story in height, schedule of Unit sizes, and IF COMMERCIAL, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. IF INDUSTRIAL, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. IF-INSTITUTIONAL., Indicate thC1 major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupiancy, loading facilities and community benefits to be derived from the project. C,�irlct»Care, Ce(yle' , WA Lorv"n �ar:, i ) Q E.ntpjoc��cs � (�M� �loChi)dren � "i"p (7e.1� cA�c. �.. L'hi lct Care '�robleYn t� C.hr'co. -� ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASIJRES* 1 Identify paten VailY sig niffcr.nt environmental impacts associated with the use permit, What project design featurez or special conditions of approval (mitigation measures) are proposed to alleviatepoteritlal environmental impacts? 00"iL 1400wn F—r)Ui ranrv)ei)+q I Iryl ac,+t,' h-- ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING* Describe the project site as It exists before -the project, including information on topography, soil stabllit+ t s anani- mals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspeots„Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use oftlhestructures. Q. Describe the surrounding ^ropertles, including information on ph- land animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, t:L Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc,) in.,,;tslty of Land Use (single-famiiY' apartments, s,' ops, depart-ment stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, ;�itbao<, rear yard, etc:). * Useseparate sheet for longer responses, �?shf� 1 my-s•"dencc on 6urr0UfJCJe 10� C1(her rc^6icl�nCeSf �u IrlesS�S ><+ryA C',hut'r,h hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I have read and understand the instructions and that the foregoing sta are true, complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, tements Date Applicants signature___ eyc ,�- Daae. ,5- ry Property owner's signature r Use permit Number_ G fit �- Request: Use permit to allowd�%f Location and size of parcel(s) f err' S n �.�alAt VERIFY: twos 4 Number(s) tom• ----�.Projeet Description -. t _ Ownership Zoning and Requirements Proof of Agency (if needed) r,t ,.•✓ Locatiarl Description —- 110ples of plot Plan I1" �coived Receipt Number ✓” Date RI p �.7 . Appfic4rlon taken by 1 `� %✓ r, tl _ ,, it I INSTRUCTIONS -0 USE PERMIT APPLICANTS 1 1. If applicant is not the owner, written authorization by the owner or other proof of agency must be submitted in order for the applicant to legally sign the application, Application shall be considered Void if not signed by the owner or Ingal agent. 2. All items on application shall be filled in as completely as possible. If an item is not ;appli- ca:ble,p lease indico.te by Cha term "INA". 3. It is important that the applicant supply an accurate description of the location of the proposed project, including the following; a. Assessor's parcel number(s) (from the 'ax, bills or Assessor's maps). b. Street addresses (if available): c, leis_, -,aces and directions to named streets; bodies of water or railroads. 4 Twenty (24) copies of'a`detailed plot plan of adequate scale to clearly show proposed build- ings and improvements, folded to 8% x 11 inches, shall accompany and be made part of the "Application for. Use Permit". If the use permit is approved, the plot plan becomes the ap- proved development plan for the property. The plot plan shtill include the following. information: a. A scaled drawing of the parcel(s) boundaries, b. Location and dimensions of all existing and proposed improvements on the property, . including buildings, driveways, parking areas, wells, septic tanks and leach fields. c. Location and name of bordering streets, access roads, Peachy crossroads, streams, bodies of water and railroads. d. North arrow and scale of drawing. 5. The tl1Appl.ication for Use Permit" is subject to public hearings and approval by the Planning Commission. Any special conditions of approval shall be made a part of the approved "Use Permit" and shall be binding on the appl',iant. The procedures for County 'action on use per- mit applications are stated in Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code. 6. The Planning Commission, on the basis of the evidence submitted at thepublic hearing,may grant use permits when it finds that the proposed uses of the, property will spot impair the integrity and character of the a,one in which the land lies and that the use would not be un- reasonably incompatible with ( . Injurious to surrounding properties nor detrimental to the health and, general, welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood nor to the general health, safety and welfare of the county. 7. In approving a use permit, the Planning Commission may include such conditions as are deemed reasonable and ;necessary under the circumstances to preserve the integrity and character of the zone and to secure the general purposes of the Butte Count/ General Plan and Chapter 24 of the Butte County Cade. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to:melimitations, developmer t plan approval, hours of operation, fencing, dedication of right-of-way, and street and drainage improvements. Conditions imposed upon issuance of a' use permit mast be reasonably related to the use for which the permit is requested. 8. Application fees as of,—__, f (date) are $ _ y p y ' p y ble to "Treasurer of Butte County". ` Fees. may be aid in cash orb clteiu„ moor: a a 9. Before submitting a use permit application, applicant is requested to discuss With staff all questions about applieo.tion requirements, County procedures, zoning provisions and possible conditions of approval. r' all _ I ��_ MCLAUGHLIN LUTHEP� . W KATHY A , 3637 BRIDLE LIN, CHICO CA 9u9S6 c i a PACIFIC COAST` BUILDING~y Fr:`OI)lJCTS INCICdC F O BOX 160488 SACRAMENTO CA 9Z816 • A� SCHMIDT RONALD P & LANE T JT' HESKIETT K'EdNETH L PATRICIA 5 3520 HICKS LANE 3067 BRIDLE LN CHICO CA r_ 95�r�6 CHICO CALIF 95926 ; f ; MULKEY LOUISE JOHFORD AARON DEE ETAL 3537 BRIDLE LN JOHNSON PEGG"DY j , CHICO CALIFORNIA 959E6 3524 HICI S LN CHICO CA 9 926 .�: � , . CUMMINS ROBERT D & PAM (CB DVA) a CURD MICHflELJ ISASELI-E CF' ' 3048 BRIDLE LII 354CO .3528 HICk's LANE ` CA CHICO CA 95926 Y' 959c6 HELZEP WILLIAM C 9BARBARA TIPTON DAVID E SANDRA CCTV .DVA) 1216 E ST JANE$ AVE ° 353£3 HICKS LN ORANGE CA 92665 CHICO CA 95926 1 BAXTER LEE E & BEVERLY WELLS WILLIAM L WILMA H JT 442 EATON ROAD 3534 HICKS LANE CHICO CALIF 93926 CHICO CE 95926 BROWNFIELD JASON P LYNDA D JT RANCHO CHICO 3344 HICK'S LANE 801 A ST CHICO CA 959e6 SAN RAFAEL CA 949roi HILL MITCHELL D �; DOLLIE D CF` �tYGFS E EUGENE A & ALENE Ft 8540 HICKS LANE 472 EATON RD� CHICO CA 9r 9'�6 CHICO CA 95926 MAYDFUN HARRY E w CAPRI E CF' PAISLEY MICHAEL SHCLTON 3647 BRIDLE LANE 3514 HICKS LANE CHICO CA 9'5986 CHICO CA 95,926 . t, a .� ae Count'' LAND (?F N)ATUftAL -WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPAP71VIENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE — OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (9'16) 538-7601 March, 21, 1950 Peggy Johnson 3524 .Hicks Lane Chico, Ca: 55.926 Re: Use Permit, AP 007-240-066 Dear Ms. Johnson: We are enclosing the original and one copy of your conditional Use Permit NO- 89-60 to allow a day care center for, up to 36 children on property zoned _':-SR located on the east side of f-llicks Lane, Chico. Both copies mu be signed and returned to this department within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. We will then have them validated by the Chairman of the Butte County Planning Commission and the original will be returned to you for your records. Please be aware that failure to return the signed copies within 30 da will result in the use permit becoming invalid.Re-application e- pp • days department would then be necessary to proceed with the project.lzcation to this The Use Permit is deemed granted when this permit Inas been signed b g y the applicant, with the counter.. signature of the Chairman of :the Planning Cornaussron, and said permit is recelived by the applicant by registered istered $ Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact. 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 D.M. this office between L Sincerely, B. A. Kircitt:r Director of Plannin g t;LLc.c-lW' •lc... -CJ . ��=�ti.-�t,`. Paola S Leasure Senior Planner PSL lr Enc. 'I SJ 1.r LAND OF NATURALWEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING' DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE- OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE! (916) 538-7601 March S, 1990 Peggy Johnson 3524 Hicks Larne Chino, CA 95926 Re: Use Permit AP 007-241-066 Dear Ms' Johnson: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Commission held March S, 1990, your request for a Use Permit to allow a day care center for up to 36 children on property zoned A-SiR. located approximately "420 feet north of I-iicks Large and Eaton Road intersec'aon, on the east side of Hicks Zane, Chico, was approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide 7 off-street parking spaces off of Hicks Lana as indicated on the Plot. Plan entitled Exhibit A. (5 employees, 2 residents) 2. Provide for circle drive access as per exhibit A. Entrance and exit to be ,clean yrnarked as a fire lanes PP ed by Public Works. Driveway � to be clew marked to a planner approved 3. Submit plans for approval to the Department of Public Works for drainage and install the required facilities. No surface drainage be directed onto neighboring' properties, 4. Maintain shrubbery between driveway 'entrance and e; is so that it will not impede visibility for vehicle exiting driveway. 5. Obtain necessarybuildin g permifs and a Certificate of Occupancy before oplerat*ng under this permit. 6. Meet requirements of State' Fire Marshall and the Uniform Fire Code. 7. Obtain permits or licenses from State Department of Social Serv'ces. 4, ®fA4iAI u March 1$ 1:990 Mai.��a 1'o Whom it .May Concern, In September 1986 our t-rro, old daughter. Casey, began ,a loving relationship that lasted.three years (and is actual.l;r still strong today). This was the date that Casey began going to Peggy Johnsonas day-care. y We searched long and hard to rind someone to care .for our child. bier criteria in selecting a day-care for Casey were: l,. First and foremost to find a person who genuinely loved and respected children; who would cuddle and play with our child and recognize her as a uni.cLu.e special person. 2. A home environment that was cheerful sai'ep well -supervised and clean as we—" as one that provided a variety of safe playtningsa Ifother people were working with �;i1e day-care provider, we wanted then to be as lowing and respectful of the children as the main day -.care provider. iia "Ne hoped to find a day-care close to our work or on the way to our work. In PegLy Johnson we found, all that eee could wish for. Peggy so loves the children she cares fox, that long after they have grown u , and/or ::roved on she still calls or writes to them. Pegg -j often plans little celebrations and events for the children to remind them that lifs is fl.in and that they are special. When a child needs extra attention because he/she is hurt, angry or blues Peggy is always there to let them Imow she careso Casey laueri going to PeggyIs house. She always came home full of stories about picnics., plays3 and activities She did that day and with antic pat - -bout what, they aculd do the next day. We never worried ahi:rj,r ::a.$' is feIL, yr 4 the center be,au.se �?e���+' or a, helper was alitays there x j 11.; c_r Jo ning in the fun. '`As day -care fills a vital need in Cha co. it is in an e; w �F'r IdC./ - `^ M✓"' I,�„' �% ��'�' Lrr�� `� I i'S�'•C j.�"^"L:r �• �"_4I . �" � � .G�'. � .. �, l...: C,.�• �^;a.�✓✓,./r.��°.,�,.. l.�G,.� �, r. ,fir✓`".. ,,' ��`� �r �" `,' '' ✓ i ,.�, „✓ �,"fes �, � �% r,,.E"""../`"" �` �. � T r�" Lit "c,�r..�, lop a 'rtw•.„._ Ay' 'C.r^' �s'qy'"..(✓"" "; L...,r'' ✓ �...+'" f,�..- j n fib.-7'-� XL, r�'1 ��4-•�u " .r:a � �"�,� .w,�,;.",�•°�-,,` r"`•✓i� �"C, C' U�t'�.'� �� /'t.-..� �..' �+G��''�..or.`"t, - •/G'�G''.�t�.Y . r.. ire e- 2, — le ,wr ,/ ,� �ry ,/�r I P �rr � �r` L3r'•r•� r�,,,.,, � �.l'tW«.+ w.��..f r !�� 4r*""'v...P�p�' "" "w G '>°�«�,�+�,r �. str"'p„f�✓'�✓� � �,�,.�,�y,,,,f d:�(n tW,w.�"�'' � ,, .�'� r{�,��,w� ",�+ Yrpr r. ataYrir:„y xh ^•-yr•.-rr�girw�+m,rc�r a �,., ,,.y�,yyn. rw.r+Xv*'nrM*•+a ,M.mr-ww4r,.,. .. �,>rp,.,«<,irrrrrrlp• ",.e{,„ 'I� . ";1'rl� Marven ±. «er.;��nr�r".�,w+'.rM.�-i a�,r:r.�+.+.trr.�r nrt,+i.sar �as+r.T ,-'7�• t , qP • � 1 STATE OF CALrFORNIA - HEALTH AND WELFARE, DEPARTMENT-OF SOCIAL SERVICES - -- --_- COM14UN ITY CARE LICENSING 520 COHASSET ROAD y ;SUITE 6 CHICO, CA 95926 February 14, 1990 TO IfliOM IT MAY CONCERN Tamil day-care ho Day CareCenter means any childd caret facility, other than a Center" y than 2 hour 102352(i), in which less 4 per day non-medical cane and supervision is provided for children in a group setting Sri ,here is nothing in licensing regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12) which prohibits the day care provider from residing on the same premises as long as the area in wilich day care is provided is separated from the provider's living quarters. Of course,a day care center must also meet all other state, �!oti7ty, city,, and local codes and :regulations (this includes fire, .:,ng and zoning re.quirements). 7/• B A�tarran Licensing Program Supervisor MBA/ lac D 2 n cru, ti=� ►� D O'�tt�,,4k� 4,�q_ aj4za_ C t­6 r ZIV C64,0-, 6471 111;�rl AN, -Mal-fil-V COFtwa4o Mato $ , j 4 ro ew" :QA Jhr.0011', W I CD cl V � c b H ti m wro v o O O F -e H -1 -,1 00] N AML February, 20,1990' To Wixom It May Concern, Being the mother of three children, 1 am very azure of the types and quality of day care services available in the Chico area. Good quality day care services are few and far I between. I can't count the number of hours I have spent calling, looking, and inteririewing day care services. I feel I was very fortunate to have found Peggy Johnson's day care through a fro end's recoTmendation six months ago. My Lour year old son now spends five days a reek at Peggy's home. He is anxious to go to Pe"ggy's dome in the morning and is sometimes reluctant to Leave in the afternoons. He spends hi_; day playing with friends, singing songs, exploring different art mediums, listening to numerous stories, and many other lE�_rni-ug activities I a .'veL f pleased Frith the quality of care my son is receiving. He is in a home There he is loved and cared for - Peggy makes or.Peggy'makes every child feel very important and very special. Tt is for -this reason that T feel. it would be a disgrace to rob' twenty-four other children of having this very special mind of day care service Sincerely, IA _ ' msµ_ y - a . .P� 4. �,,,,G-',��'7i l�� ��-Z'~ dG:�.nG� Gr.''✓�-s' R'G.-���%�* Lar / ✓ _ U d"-v��''`.2'I�� �5�' �� ,.»'-���,� r� ' e.-./...�rr�.,r•G�� �G'��i?6'C �'�°`�,�;rar+� 4ti"'i%����� �r L (Y/ Li�G;�� '�''�,_ ir'"✓��fy{iri7rG. � Ilk ll / 76 y ,/^" +� "�� L •./rte d...r'ry .e "" , jI ""'" ✓ ,,r'.r' a fir. ;� . .f r w .a ;_ h ^. I'1 �. i � � , ,. � 1•� , , �� i •' rs s� � � fi s i i 4� i�, �� 1 �_ .� t t'� '� �. � � �' i ��U.,. . ,6��' ,,.� . �...... �4� . � ` ,,. _ '�rar. ai ti , fr ` v'y.. y * ���' i ,'r.;,� � + �t � 4 Y 1 �:; 1 � � 1 � ! � � lY _ � 4 1un.�� AL :. f x e-mx r Aah- �/ Azad �L) try- ute,(,dab 17 0 Ede, nab (nI 1 ci cuu, cz wy Con` V l.r�wr �' I' L.�+% � Y � •l/ f } '✓a'wL' 6�� °i 9 ( "V' % _ / larn arc t )9,' 1�. LY, i trr hdd. te,/ (.f tit , I cv wv tkfi, AdcAfIrl;a ALI allk V lfowloc, V M ,(�q 1.. ��+'�. �4r!' �'�.� .�".J,CI✓�:.✓(�,.,� j �/ f��, t,+c.,. �( fr�i� � �l' Ltd W (.+C+�,, �. I.f✓i y r {:.+'�.�I�:�C.iM1sL�✓�,J r th'b + Y/17 t , o, Q �: c,'r - .� , �,r !� ,cel i�.. c6v r i dc G AuZ: s t`� t c,?t'T �l�'n2.C,,.. t,r,.,. � /7'Z�j�7J-�('l Z) �OtOAM C' � � ("�i� , x'1`1 �C 7� 3,',30 a) ? cluit dtito /ru- owe) j ca4& ' S r LCG`- Laa'C; P t1u-I � ,�:,� � C1�.C�G.T'7G� �,�.�.C:�C.t',frl,C` G�7'T.C. , ' „�.•°r?.(�/ t�C.��.CJi�� '�11 �',� �C..�r..�t.,�2,r�,,� � � MI(I 0t��^1-U'L�r✓J sUTa E Corr�TY PLAN" "-TING Corgi :S S I b1V %4UN 5 1989 7 County Center Drive Oroville , CA 95965-11397 6° a iita�' 1t AreeE� (916) 5333-7641 TO: Fo reatrySATE:`' 3 GS /< RE. PROJECT REVIEW &, EkWIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Enclosedis preliminary data our office ;has received or generated concerning the following project: Peggy Johnson^ AAP407-24-66 USE PERMIT to allow a day care cent�•r, on -property zoned A-S:g (Agricultural-Subuxban Residential.) located approximately 420' north of Hicks Lane and Eaton '" _ ...toad intersection...' on the east side at Hicks Lang:,, Chico. vie are making an assessment of possible- ei,%,,ircnmental impacts and will be preparing an environmental document, either a. Negative Declaration, Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures or an Environmental impact Report (EIR) 'lease provide any .factual statements, ideas.,for investigation, or oa either physical, social our area of concern or expertise that relate opini ans you can ari•er in �, L p y , Or economic impacts that this project may generate Please respond within l4 days of the above -noted date. If no response is generated by this inquiry, then it shall be assumed that there are no significant environmental impacts which are potential from the project We appreciate any assistance you can provide. Sincerely, Judy 11/Kramer Planning Technician Comments • No i . mpact on Fire Department- Does Your agency wish to receive a copy o the environmental document(initial study for Negative Declaration (with or without Mitigation. Measures) ar-EIR for this project) YES NG '777-77-7 77--,"'7J 1 I1�, L _'1.: L .JC wJ i. C; 01, .1'1.f:+.L�t County Public works azEsc►trRc res M State Water Resources Department r' Environmental Health V County ""� �_ u. S . Forest Service ... City of Biggs 'U. S. Bu eau of Land Management City of Chino """` Blatte County Mining Committee ......._ C,ity> of Gridley ;State Department of Fiph & Game City of Oroville California Native Plant Society Town of Paradise Planning Department State Div. Forestry - attention State Transportation Delpartment Craig Carter Regional. Water Qual. control Bd: �- state Reclamation Board 7_aC1�37E:.S2LC '�TAa�'� Butte Water Distl ict Sanitary District California Water Service too. North Burbank Pub. Util. Dist. North B DelOro Water CO. - '"- skansen Sub. (CSA # 21) OWID Therma7..to Irrigation District Stirling City Sewer MairaL, Dist. Thermalito irrigation District n Other (CSA 4 2 6, ) ZJ'i'xI.ST:� 'S TTU; xCA_r1:01q WATER. Biggs -W . Oridley�Water District Ftp&E North (Chico) (Marysville) ( Butte Water District PG&E... South So th � Durham Irrigation District -PG&E [PaciP State TV Cable .,..a_. . ra Paradise Irrigation District - Viacom, TV Cable � Richvale Irrigation District Table,Mountain irrigation Dist. Thermalito Irrigation Distriot E1 Medio Fire Protection Dist. County Fire Department/CD RxC12 C MCS iJ =0 A:i3L,a TElviANT 7DD x STRY Durham, Oroville or Butte ;County _ Rg:c�c.�,rR�Tx�ra :EST Stage Highway Patrol ZCouaty Sheriff SCHOOL :L a CxL7C-X3ESDistrictParadise R1CR-V'ATxf71'4 „eczeation Dist Fines Architectural Durham��reaRRec . & Park 'D'ist . ____. Control Committee Butte County Farm Bureau Feather River Rec. & Park Dist. Paradise Rec. & Park Dist. Community AssoCiation. Richva,l.e Ree. & Park Dist. State Par ks,'& Rec. 'Dept �. --- By Regina Purcell is ;� �` �.. ';i' s �r �P., Wfi � ., Y. , h4EflCURV•REGISTER STAFF WRITER r. p r u y Parents who feel cheated by the state child care licensing Ward complained Monday about the dif- ficulty in finding quality care in the Oroville area. The 30 parents, who had sent 24 children to Sweeney's Day Care, 193 'Mountain View Dtive, for 12 ;. were told the center is licensed to care only ,r� children. Some of tttc 24 children have been required ,� to leave, even though parents say the care was the best they could ford in Orov We. On Dec. 19, Sweeney's Day Care was tnspectcd z by the state Department of Social Services Com- munity Care Licensing Board. At the time, Pauline _ warned Sweeney was canng for 20 children, She w n at the that her license allowed only 12 children ����� ��,� ,� ��'� ^��.�•_ - - center.y Earl Nance, licensing program manager, said rep- kM- "�e i:��;lrM. N "" i,�A rcaentativcs went back on Jan. 24 and found 1$ children.��..�r Sweeney met Monday with state officials and y_' "i' REGINA pUncELL ! merbuP%•5ogisw parents, "This is something l reallyhavcn't felt like has Marge, Swanson, right, and hr:r daughter, Slisa Swanson, 7, listen to representatives c (the bepartrnent of Social Services. Elisa goes to Sweeney's Day Care after school See CARE, Page Al2 CAR been a business. These parents and kids are part of Sweeney, said his children have stayed at four other day care centers; but he wasn't happy die family. That's why 1 broke the law,"' said „ " 5wr�nuy, t couldn't put oul on the streets:` Orovillc-area will, them. . the ' slid, is ilial school -ale Nance said her license allowing 12 children w illp g Ihe.problem, parents childreno placetogo after scho not be revoked. ome for 11 provided y tare in her have period ofttme. the s� feel it isoin fthe best interest to make efor afants to school-age children. ars. S e cares g cars. Sh.. stay,, y 9 y She said. arenas dectdt;d Which children would... , Docs ,, , _ Deb y' bie Long, the themmothlatchr keychildren?" in accordance with her license Parents, devoted to Sweeney, concocted schemes basked of Nance said the patent are a les 'mony to Mrs, lie suggested they contact advocacy to allow more chil,tre-i such as having older ones Sweeney." local legislators and school officials to stay outside, but Nan e wouldn't budge, "1 bend the law," said groups„ solve the day care problem. And he said Sweeney have no authgrity to could apply for an extended license to care for up to Nerctr'xy-Register-er Nance: Rick 14dvens, who has two children staying with 24 children. lt"ef�rttarr A, 1990 Pto � .G � rtSS �' P =vl �i � a) n da � tt� tin � � ry a) �s vI � "' a) • (1toocra)C)1r{ ' � @• �y� LL.1: `C� [C 1,�� CJ C, S��j �aryryl qtly) 4 �. �i�}} � . a) 1"i Y'7 `"� tl� to o UI r-1 • ©.I• ('� .�, a)w +-i Y C) � i � y li�•rI � �l� � Cb r+ �,f�" t[� lLf �i� { 7 � C� Q � ���9 n� t4 1.�,� T" r^'! •f"'r Fd ..�W as T 'P .�-y1 tU a� t •Yn QLLJ t' i .r{ ,rI F� N C) K T4 4f4 '1'I as a) 'd (1) fp 0 Y ,lJ 1.0 Y'] + bW �t M� t) `N Y tt1 r"! td UI r%) fJJ r7 +1 w r(:i s j t a) 'C7 4a I r tial � U) G v) C7 rCJ Li «i lJ $" •� nT td � cfa • a) C1 {.a � ' x 0 W! W fat •rl r-I G4 sv, It 0,0 EZl1 tv � va N •d % I' th � 9 0) b � r l � o r� ;C' •a) �r +' , r-i {"a va td �� G •r1 KSS rn �,.� CC to r { ) �` 0 .•.,, a) •r! f r H W •N ' Cti •,..{ o ' •d r-1 I� rn [n d" Citi t a) 4) r_l c r M d): �; " t5� v"IC) G rl d) R1 b a) d 0 r-! # •$4 1-f Q er{ rd r� v i N b a) CJ Q a) rd tq r { C� f S� l? tom' 3y K?1'h� t! 4i Q) $4 )Q 0 td XI +f-1 4 Z r- a) �a r-I Crl r-I l •r { •r-o C). i - ti) %".. !�`a 'r-I r tU d} CO P, Cl :PIP I; •f- r •I = d •rl •r! 'a 04- "d va r �r M 0, H � � W ua 1 � W a) •r 1 C) W rn c t� I 'H 4H t'u F1 � et $-1 � Cl) ::i V PIr'"! .r{ w to •r•fi C) 0 Cd � C4, x1 P Q w 0 � t� vQ r-I a) t Com^ Ra �i2 G d ' 3 1 a! m Sa rf U) :>, •fa tU C7 $ O tEi Cd , CQC d5 ted 't-D— 0 �» ` rr{ • I Q C ' 'rb tD t� . C) Q rt # a) .Q tU r-I a) S4 I lici fU (d td G -r-I at' Cf tJ tJ' �i r a'd • C" 1 q) �' r Cn o .H r rr •ri ° a" a) 4 � Q ' �'.I.d. �; f'> t C) 0 H III P4 •rf 4--' C) l`3 4 C) 4-' 0 a) "va � � r` `a C I � tU tl » � a b j 5 ro • I a) G ,cx Cf, a) �1 " G .La � I w� a) N n) •,� � 4' ,_ cu ro � S 1 ova •ri E -Sw 0� ..� �, s' ,- � i' G .r.1 r 4 t'd a-D (.y .rl CH N N �' CI •w{ t/i < C1I r i ! tta ro a) tU tH !� , j r F � t H r-I » Ctj � a) LI- as a) fH a) r-f M EA �i o C0) SPI � •r4 Wrl P �4 � �r � 0 Y C) y 4-I •r a) a) � 0 a'l V) t n Q S', N h' d m r t L1 n F4 1� Q a) f�, � 1� a) P » rrt-r W » �`• r i •r! •rl a.� !)f% O Ua �.Q 't7 •r) C) � C) 5 i N Q) C) 4-r a) v) dy �." tU a) •ri & tq I`I S" r 1 0 h r I � r ._ • '' ' � a) � •rl r vI " U�C4�.. 1, � ,; r" r-iA,�« ell U)PZ4a)a)bD 11 r f •a C Ckl « a) P Q1 wa)its� � r .{a C" C, i P '0 10 G tii ; •Cr I. r"i (d vI G •P 13 Ci r"i i77 N tCi v:4J G RI GC' •;a « .. 0 Lk' Cb 0 bil ^' r--f H U) $Li r'I W tf-I -Zp 0 W Z to •fa a) •If f5 ; M � Q � "Y`7 G 1 a) f a) »rl CCt r-I •�h f � � Q) t4� -Cl •ri w tU r I »rl � rb 4 I +rl fly tU Ct rr f »ri 0 CJ 't� ' ty cd t1t) rtr) .H td H f a to CN »H 4r1 0 Cd « =4 ,£i .`�, C)''C1 i� � •I' S' � k 4--1 is tU 4) w' •cs �" +� •r1 rr'I F r 0 •w G P 4-:� rd r 0 � t a} +rf •r•1 •I-:1 :>51 s •P '� tH CH O1 0 0 p .S.'w a) r-1 ra CH -P 2 r•1 •a) ads 4-1 qa or at tU •r-{ x! r-I a) 41 '0 N Z co tr'. 0' fwd r IIICJ G +x 11 f-+ a) IJI (to b (D R to r-� i I i ± rli 44 r •r1 aJ �+, P1 Q � q-4 ' r i P, `,� v) � 4-y CG4' b 0' v) a) F, a a°: a) a) G ttcrwl �i i3 r-f CCJ t4 r� » tiE% i i � 4 ! tiS CL k)p H H a) a) a •r-{ N 4•� C) •d to •r 1 F� b •1� 1Ii r ld a. nI f� d fn 1-D Cd 1 r-1 CJ t.:•' � b g Gx G ro rrf CU rl •rr iv d) E) v) C) r ! r r 1 a) x o +r-f 1 4-1 % tl^.1 +1 rr) eta G • G a) > f )1 � •4' W CJ 'Ct a) � G S rt ill of rl 1' r. • p "r1 1 f N' lU G C<I co t;) N' M, � = fir a) N . .h f [ 3� I. Cl •r1 5�) rC] r w P •ice � "d r-i .}� Qi X! td .r{ C.) a) $j rd CC 1 r I vj + a) •r I tta rl , Cr .a' ' r1 tld X tr' • »s~ va G ,.a G� r'y r)I S # U) L. •rl Cti G G i 1 C a) � r' Z +' H � � •H ai '1 �- rel a) CH o . `H1 4-1 LT'( G a) lC' 1st rtt Q rd q-f AM6rh Ct 4 "Ci �a Q n •rNi f� C) 61 rd trt 0 Q » �I, 0 a ` I7 F•1 = t�q- 0 P44 •rb�l a u tNi "CQ' Z 4-:1 W q "� °'te t f) ' rv1 a) to rtia.N 4 l r � r$' rn f3 d A ! fn a6 r : +� CLT .fs a Q) ,a •w a! -H(Db -!' � CU � rj ` r i �1 Z 1 Ck, t N T 'd r 1.7 ra" Q)1 + .t d C »Ga CCi .Q �r C C) Cd a) - ni �' Lin »r+ a � 'd a) a) -Fa bU » �r •r 1 E)t'!r-4 W ,04 4Z irl a) P P 'r-! •{•� l' " tL i rn ' � in G CC' 'd 4-• •r { CC' Ca 0 r`4 UI .N 1-j -P Ct Cu r I `, •a) •,-! a) r.-1 Er 0 a) a) I •wNl • 0 ,i/1'd N (U H M `k, r`'a tl+ Ci" n �+ t-4 N I' Cli 4'•1 tt, ��, a) Z Q C.) N r i 4-" W U) r-! �' �j,,L; tlp j •� { °(b 1 i rQ t> r!h r-1 CL �3 r 13, • 11 OH 4z �..) a) tt t •�I +:,• tt C N a) tG r-I •rl w tp •rl •¢4 rL C) • a 1 � r .3 ,rvj G+ f r-1 ri r-1 G () M a) »rl a) ra a) rn R a) ria' F' wU' g' '' G �i G 4»I a) KJr Cr) a) M •rC tU i '4'' () d) »ri ri , , ••i tr "C r�' r^l I N �4 Q 'i t � - Y) r'0 r; ,:C! a) -W �' G I t f-f Tls Q vI Z • �t ill .0 d "C: � C? kli) � 4iU � 'd Q �.t a a) -r-4 d -w � a) ,rt. tt. r H �•✓ Ua Ct1 ;W" G LI `� 4 1 '�" � � � 'G � � "r*a Iz�l v1 ai tLl t/a � t � :4 s rd r") + -w ,--Ij r-I »wI t d r-I UI r •ri tU 4-r a) a) S-1 I-'+ +i a) •rf a) � c t;) ♦r� +rn " w rt' 'i A' r •rl -N a) � m •r"� a) 0— K-1 � $4 .r{ a) 4-1 0 +r{ �d C' t G »ri rrI i ' "C„ N •r i C5 .Q G a) »0 •� � Q �+ •-P a) �+ 4 C.7 � S"w G bl' G "C{ rQ � (� •r1 a) N rQ i`t 0 tt' •H {� P r-4 t� (r � C'1 a) ry+ � r^l Ck" G If) •rf 61 U rS � rC5 .'� Ste" C) � � C7 4 i a� "+ all{� �+ a)i »� CU r-I r-1 »r rr7 a) ,rt «r-J c •rr-! m ,r{ `5 = ` }r G .-. b C" +rl C) -o-4 Z 4' N) r w r-i rf rl CU r 1 1f a) v ca r . , Y•d Y+>r-{ a) G a) , ry�ry nn� y / �y r`i r"'�1 4 �.,/ Hi... /� F 4 •fr' W _I_' '1'"' 1Y`'i t a) »r--� f'] •t`I ty''^ y ylx� day) +(ref C7 •i�-y td yf�Cq 0 .YL! (� N •' j C" � [.`4 t^'f tti rIJ1 t �, .�a ,�y 1 4-:1 4✓ '4J F)1.'1" '�`' ar! T Q.� W tFf "i'"" 4. r, FEB 2 7 1999 MA February 20, 1990 Butte County Planning Cofr;nissioner" Attn: Allan Forbes 7 County Center Drive Orovi l le, CA 95965 RE: PEG JOHNSON -- DAYCARE CENTER Dear Fr. Forbes.. I anwriting on behalf of Peggy Johnson and her request to open --a. daycare center on Hicks Lane in Chico. chiidI haveaknown Peggy since 1982 when she began providing my then 1 1/2 year old dauter. . Peggy continued to provide fulltim childcare Tor our fame through June 1985 four family had expanded to two children by this time). in addition for the past several years, Peggy has :^ovided summer vacation care for our children now 6 and . They look to Peggy as a second morn during this time and a very important {cart of Chea lives. feel E estwrite your c«rmission as you would be doing our ccMMM y a great in ustice in denying Peggyy Johnson's request to open her daycare center. As wori:ing parents, my husband and ! are acutely aware of the great need for qualified, licensed daycare facilities in our c nmuni Ly. Peggy Johnson is a professional in every sense of the word. ff she has any fault worth mmntioning, it would have to be her generosity. Peggy is always wilizn to work with the child(ren) and family -as a unit and pr4ovi a the type of care that is rarely found anywhere these d&Ys. The mals she provides activities planned, nurtarin lovingatten- tiveness that" she gives each and every child cannobe over- looked. She has that rare quality of being able to make each child feel ,important'. I qiost urgently ask your ccMission to aur pprove P ggyy Johnson s request to open her daycare center without furti�er laX . Peggy's daycare center will be a most needed asset for Chico. �eyely'_ Jle Wold "Ioyer Wa co, CA95928 U t 7 i LIAR 219�t� PARKING AND TRAFFIC FLOW In the letter dated February 8, 1990 sent to us by the planning Department; you asked us to provide seven parking spaces. Five for employees and two for residence. According to Section '24- 35 Butte County Corte, Parking requirements for Day Care Centers is a minimum of three or one per teaching station. We have three teaching stations and one .resident. Mrs. Johnscrn is a teacher as well as the resident.. We feel that we should only be required to provide four employee parking spaces. Resident parking will be on the South side of the property where a six foot fence will be constructed. Employees will park on the North West side of the property facing the Day Care. The North side of the property will also be encompassed by a six foot fence. To insure proper flow of traffic, we are providing ,,a circular drive. Parents'wi.il enter on the South side of the property and exit on 'the North, facing oncoming traffic. The circular drive will be twen-y-one feet in width, which will provide sufficient space to accommodate the limited parking for parents who will be escorting children to the Center. The present design has th;n capibility to accommodate six parents parking simultaneously. For your information, we have 'estimated bur -heaviest traffic flow to be between the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. The following is a traffic study taken on three separate days. DAY TIME NORTH SOUTH TOTAL 2-5 90 7-8 a.m. 10*1 6$ 166 2-5-90 4µ5 p.m. 70 i05 175 2-16-90 7-8 a.m. 76 102 178 2-1.6-90 4-5 p.m. 98 70 168 2-20-90 7-8 a.m. 74 101 175 _20-90 4. 5 p, m, 100 73 1 73 M I 77, 17, AML a.=&OU/1 - LAND OF NATURAI, WEALTH AND 5EAUT`+' PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 February 8, 1990 Peggy Johrtson 3524 Hicks Zane Chico, CA 95926 Re: Use Permit, AP 007-240-066 Dear Ms. Johnson: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Commission held February 8, 1990, the public heading was continued open to March 8, 1990, at 9:00 a,m., to consider your, application for a Use Permii to allow of day care center for up to 36 cbildren on property zoned A -SR located approximately. 420 feet north of Hicks Lane and Eaton Road intersection on the east side of Hicks Lane, Chico. This meeting Le Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Ooville California. n tr Please send this office a copy of the plot , plan requested by; the Commission during the hearing on February 8, 19910 showing the following: L Two parking spaces for the residence and five spaces for the employees. 2. Flow of traffic for parents when delivering and picking up , children, with 'sufficient area to accommodate limited parking.' 3. Fencing for the children's playground: 4. Interior plan of the dwelling, specifically showing the area for childcare. 5. Delineate structures or! either side of the property in relation to your dwelling and the fenced playground: i penrdd a ' A 2 r va e t� Floseanna Ct. ' f / r d4yj Short m N10 Grandy a^� ar $ Iharn Shop Fhorn p� r- Landmark ro rummanA U� L� �C•. .a � Rio Drava L -6'1 Green Meadow '. -r Ir, 'o Lanc s anti!}" Lrlr� f3 P`'`p " x ` naho Drive :Fait P re Ka by Lame Our We Keith Land' WVI Gold i io Stonealleys a \I Manalactarin . Gallo AO wtrJ sal, _.I Aunt nu1� m C OL°a0 Ga��G .b S H, I t_ {rank U �1 J MMI 6� �� � 6�F1a0/7ARfVp'(/16 'LY Q97TfR6�11 .. ,... tliq I -7-777777 1777 Fj a. APPENDIX COLTINMW 0P :Et=:E Eri7Z''SR�.7NI�IE:N'T'AL c�%��itx._,�s,T FOS (To be completed by Leach Agency) LOG NO. ,89-1.0-25-01 AP NO. 007--240-066 I. BA:Cf�Gi2C7L7�tT7 I: dame of proponent Pegqv Johnson f 2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable) - pplicable):3524Hicks- 3524 --Hicks bane r1l no CA 9,5926 3. Project description: '_ Use PerIilit IT. MA1VDPi7TCJi2i' r1:xDxxC3S or, STCTWT TCASTCE _YES MAYBE NO I. Does the project have the potential to degrade the qua' 7ty of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife :,pecies, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animalcommunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered 'plant ,or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory.' Vl 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term benefits to the detriment of long-term environmental goals? (A short -,term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while impacts future:) long-tei4m will endure into the ti 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact an two or more separate resources where ' the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment: is significant.) 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse human beings,,either directly effects on or indirectly? IT �rT�ET T2MZ? 3A�T_ON (To be'completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this initial evaluation: _ I/WE find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 11/WE find that although the proposed project COULD have a. significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEAStTRES described on the attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I/WE find thero osed project MAY have a significa,t effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 'I COUNTY OF BUTTE, PLANY41NO DEPART14EENT DATE: 1,7ovemb er 17 1989& 6�,� By.• �.. ..._ Brent L. Moore Assooia Bl.ann r Reviewed by: , —S. Pail a Leasure""".:_,_ Senior Planner ...------•�■..mK- cru Iv. =1TVT_1_3_c7r -xYkz; iMP—AC'Xs' (Explanati.ons of all "YES" and "MAYBE" answers are required on'.attached sheet(s). 1. EARTH,. Will the proposal result in significant: YES MAYBE NO a. Unstable earth conditions, or changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruption, displacement, compaction or overcovering of the soil.? y/G c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic:or physical features? e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? r f. changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream c;: the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? S. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas?._.G h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards?�� 2,. AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? w ._ b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? t. Alteration of air movement, moisture or 'temperature, ar any change in v climate, locally or regionally? 3,.,WAFER. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? b. 'Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount 1% of surface runoff? c. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation r removal, chaiutelizat,­ or culvert installation? d. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? e. Change in the amount of surface watdr in any water body? f. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water a quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or - turbidity? g.' Alteration ;of the direction or rate of flow of ground Waters? h. Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters, either U-itnugh direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer hy,cuts or exCavaclons? i. Reeuction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water ✓. supplies? ... j, Exposure of people or property to water-related hazards such as flooding? _V_ tc, PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result In substantial: a. ChangeeY species) �eany speciess of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatpants)! b. Reduction of the numbers of any ,unique, rare or endangered species of plants? _ _1 c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of .any agricultural crop?, -2- ' r � 5. Ai;.,:MAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial. YES MAYBE NO a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including rep,tiles,,fish and shellfish,, organisms V, of insects,)?, b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of t! animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? - _ ---- d. Deterioration oZ existing fish or wildlife habitat? __... 6. NOISE.' Will the proposal result in substantial: ' a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe no, -.se levels?', 7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will, the proposal produce significant light and glare? y` 8. LAPID USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or .planned land rise of an area? 9. ??ATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in substantial; a.. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any non. -renewable natural resources? 10. RISK OF UPSET. Will. the proposal, involve: a. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency / evacuation plan? 11. LIOPULATICLN. Will the proposal alter location, distribution, -density or growtil rate of the human population?` 12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand , for additional. housing? r� 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in - a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement?' .�Ly b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. .substantial �.mpact on existing txansportatixan systems? d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to Waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC S-ERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services: y G a. fire protection? .._... .. b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities?, e. Maintenance of public, facilities) including roads? f. :Other governmental services? -3- a 15. FNEiG'l. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of ,fuel or energy? YES MAYBE NO b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources .._� of energy? 16 IMLITIES. Will the proposal result in a reed for new systems, or� substantial alterations to the following: —� , 1 a Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Tater &.ailability? d. Sewer or septic systems? a- Storm Water drayfaage? f. Solid waste and disposal? V 17. MLI HEALTH. Will the, proposal result in: a. Creation of any; health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental b. Exposure of people to Potential health hazards? 18. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. REMEATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? V 20. CULMAL P.ESOURCES. 'a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric. or historic buildini, structure or object? ✓ r _c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? V d. Will the proposal restrict existi.ng'relgious or sacred Uses within the potential impact, area? V � h L?�SCi.S'SS� " AL M'%rALTJ'ATxON See attached, �IIf1rNRr�di�r .�. r_. , DISCUSSION OF ENV 9 i iC1�AEi^ITAL EVALUATION AP 007-240-066 ib: The applicant proposes adding an add1tlonal room onto the existing structure. The proposed room addition will result I'n some minor disruption, displacement, compaction, or overcovering of the soil as a, result of necessary earth work for the foundation of the room' ' addition. it is ant i c l dated that such soil d l srupt l on and overcoverl.:ig wiil not constitute a significant Impact. No change in the topography or ground surface relief' features are anticipated as a result of the proposed project The project site Is an existing single family residential dwelling- within a developed neighborhood. No major earthwork Is associated with the proposed room addition Ig No Foss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas will occur as a result of this project. The project site Is located within a suburban neighborhood within the Chico Urban Area. The project site is currently developed to single- family residential densities with common infrastructure associated with such densities. Ih All of Butte County is within a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone Vill The proposed day care center Is to be housed by a single family r-esidential home Due to the upgrade In hazards an+'d the number of occupants which will be utilizing the structure It will be necessary to inspect the building to insure It meets or exceeds the current building code requirements for seismic safety purposes.. Because this building Is no longer being used fer purely residential purposes, but rather for a commercial endeavor, the building must meet the current bUlIding codes of Butte County. In addition, In accordance with Section 307 of the Uniform Building Code Titled "Certificate of Occupancy" It Is the responsibility of the new business proprietor to obtain an Inspection and certificate from the Butte County Building Department In order to occupy a once resisuchdential Inspectionsding andior thecUnmformaBupil�dinges. Codelw'lis provide ad that e adequa'Ge protection against seismic hazards. 8: The proposed project will result In some alterations of the present and planned land uses of this area. Currently this lot is being utilized as 'a sl,ngle family residence Along Hicks Lane the land uses are characterized as single family ,residential -dwellings and a mobile home park Immedlatply to the south of'the project site Is,a commercial district Which accommodates a boat sales and repair business as we;I as a radio and TV broadcasting_, station. The physical features of ,the site seem to be adequate to provide for 36 children In a day care center facility. The outdoor space requirements appear, to meet the State, law for required outdoor activity space for 36 children in accordance with Title 22, Divislon 12, section 101338.2 Sub Section A of the California Department of Social Services regulations. In addition, required amounts of open floor area for the Indoor activity space Is 35 square feet per child. This relates to approximately 1260 square feet needed to house the proposed population of the day care center. The eXl sting home on the; -5- i pro jet t s I -te Is 2200 square feet. I3a,b:1 The proposed project wII1 generate approximately 38 vehIcIe trips at a peek hour as est Ii�-sated by the Tr Ip Generatlon Manua] ThIrd' Addition, 1982, lnstltute of Traffic Engineers. The exlsting transportation system Inas the Capacity to accommodate'' an addit'iona,l 38 vehicle trips per hour dur I ng +the peak hour. In accordance With the Butte County Zoning Code for off-street Parkin g "apae�s w i 1 l be required. The. project slto appears to have necessary space to accommodate the `} add1tlona] parking spaces reduIred. No signIf!cant adverse Impact Is: ant.lclpated on the traffic from the proposed project. 14a: Approval of the proposed project will Increase the service demands for fire protection services beyond that which Butte County can expect to meet in the near future. Firerotec:tion project site is in p for the ;Jeopardy at this time due to fiscal constraints is being experienced by Butte County. Due to the potentla] service demands a'day care center With 36 children may pose' on the Fire Ce nrtrnent, It Is critical to Insure fire protoctlon services are available for the long term. Until such tlme a dedicated fanding- urce for butte C"ou' ttty Fire ' Department Is developed there Is considered an Impact on fire protection services by the proposed project. The applicant W111 have to provide additional Mitigation measures for fire protection services.; IFd. Sevier and septic tank system Was approved as being adequate by the Butte County Fnvlronmental Health Division No Improvements are deemed necessary accommodate the proposed day care center. Recommended. Mltlatlon Measure: -- 1 The applicarit will have torovld e p ad dIt Iona) Mitigation measures for fire protection services., Igation -7- Appllcatnt: Peggy Johnsen Assessor`s Parcel m 007-240-066 Log 0:8§-10-2B-61, DATA SirilE E1' I A. Project Description' l' 1. Type of Project: Use Permit,, 2. Brief Des-ription: Use Permit to ailoW.a day care center. 3. Location: Approximately '420 feet north of Hicks Lane and Eaton Road Intersection, ion the ease: aide of Hicks .ane, Chico, 4. Propo, ;d Density of Development: One dWe I I I ng Linit per 1/2 acre. S. Amount of Impervious Surfacing,: 50+%. 8. Acces1 and Nearest Public 1Road(s). Hicks Lane, 7. Method of Sewage ®Isposial: IndIviduaI septic and Ieachfieid systems. . Source of Water Supply: Private Well. 9. Proximity of ;Power Lines: Adjacent to property. 10, Potential for further land divisions and development`: N/A. B. Environmental Setting Physical Enylronment: 1. Terrain a. General Topographic +Clitararo er : . I.at valley lar -1. b. Slopes: 0-1%. G. Elevation: Approximately 185 ft. A.S.L. d. Limiting f=actors: None. 2. ,Saris a. Types and Character l srL i cs V i na fine sandy loam, deep ~wel'I drainin g, prime agricultural soil: b. Limiting Factors: Nor^ie, P, Natural ' Hazards of the Lane a. Earthquake Zone:- Moderate Earthquake. Intensity Zone Vill. b. Erosion Potential: Nione. - c . Lands i I de Potential: , None. d. Pure Hazard: Unclassified. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate, 4. Hydrology a,. Surface Water- None In the Immediate vicinity.'_ b. Ground water: Overlies area of Intensive ground water withdrawal. C. Drainage Characteristics.- Within ,hasta Union Dralnage Assessment District. d„ Annual Rainfall i normal 3: 22-24". e. Limiting Factors None. -7- V►suai/SeenIc QUallity: Fal r. 6.; Acotast i;c Quas l l ty;'. Fair. 7. Alf Quality. Fair. Biological En.v l rcmrnenit: S. Vegetation: Typical Urban landscape. to' urban 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small birds and animals common residential areas. Cultural Environment 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources In the area: Low, previously developed area. 11, ButteCounty General Man designation: Low Denslty Residential. 1.2. Existing Zoning: AS -R. 15. Existing Land Use on -s I to:Single-family resIdentIai. 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Open space, transportation highway corridor, -commercial district, and single-family residential. residential. b. Zoning: SR -i, PA -C, C -C, MHP, and Q-2. 0. Gen. Plan DeQ l gnat i on : Coritmerc �. I Lova Density Residential. d. Parcel Sizes: Range from I/2 to 30 acres. e. Populatlun: Urban. 15. character of Site and Area: Suburban Neighborhood, 16. NearestCity of Chico. 17. Relevant Sphereseol, I of 1 ience.of Chico, Shasta Union Drainage Assessment District. 18. Improvements standards Urban Area: Yes. 19+. Fire Protection Sery l cft t a. Nearest County (State) fire Station: 'Station #42 locatr,:d approximately I mile from ,she project site, b. Vater Avaiiabiilty Engine capacity and hydrant. 20. Schoo l n In Area: Chico Unl f I ee School District. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCEMATERIAL, 1.. Map, 11-I, Earthquake and Fault Activity Seismic Safety Element, Butte County General Ilan revised 1-.77, by CH2M HI 111. 2. Mae 11-2, Liquefaction Potential 5elsmilc Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hili'. 3 Map i,il-1, Subsidence & Landslide Potential Safe=ty Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hl l 1 . 4. Map 111-2, Erosion Potential Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised '1 -77, by CH2M Hi I I ., - 5. Map 111-3, Expansive Sol.ls Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill 6. Map IV-1, Noise; Noise. Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill. 7. Map U-1, scenic HighWays: scenic Highway Element, Butte County General Plan revised 11-77 by CH2M Hill. 8: Map 111-4, Natural Fire Hazard Gasses Safety. Element, Butte County General Pian revised 1-77, by CH2M Hili. 9., Archaeological Sensitivity Map by James P Manning, for Butte County Planning Department, 1983. 10. School District Map, Butte County Planning Department. 11. Chico Nitrate. Study Map, Nitrate Concentration In Shallow Wells, 1983, by Department of Water Resources, Northwestern District, The °,esources Agency, State of California. 12. Agricultural Preserves Map, established by Resolution No. 67- 178v Butte County Board of Supervisors, Decemher 5, 1987.. 13. Flood insurance Rate Maps, -National Flood Insurance Program, Federal`' Emergency'` Manag'emen't Agency, 1988. 14. USGS Quad Maps, Chico, 1980: 15. Soil Map, Chico (1925)/Oroville (1926) Area, U.S. Department of Agriculture. IS. SoII Survey of, ChIco( 1925)/Orov-IIIe,(1926) Area, U.S. Department of Agriculture 17. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Fac l l i t l es Map, Butter County FIre, Department and CaIIfornIa Departmeht Qf Forestry: Butte County Planning D%,,artment -9- � ��, - x ---T_.___; .....,.,.•.v. tai i , r a TTE—C-O A L.. PYJiN.NI t,.7 COlV11V3J� iW�1 -NOTICE OF PUBIC HEARPNG Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning, Commission that public hearings will be held on Thursday, February g, 1990, in the Butte County. Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following item at the following time: ITEM DETERMINED TO BE C GORICALLY, EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIE VES 9:00 a.m. Craig S. Walters - Variance to allow a building 5 feet, from the side property line on property zoned TM -4.0. (Timber Mountain - - 40 acre parcels) located on ' the south side of Forest Ranch Road, approximately 1200 feet west of Highway 32, identified as AP 056-280-013, Forest Ranch: ITEM QN WHICH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION W TH MITIGATION MEASURES .. REGARDING ENYIRON�M NTAL IMPACTS HAS BEEN RECOM MEL4DED 9:00 a.m. Peggy Johnson Use Permit to allow a day care center for up to 36 children on property zoned A -SR (Agricultural Suburban Residential) located approximately 420 feet north of Hicks Lane and Eaton Road intersection on the east side of Hicks Lange, identified as AP 007-240-066, Chico. The above mentioned applieations, maps and Negative Declaration with office on Measures are on 'rile and available for public t the p viewing a office Mitigation .the Butte County Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive Oroville, California; If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing. M BUZI'E COI.II`dT'i' PLANNIT G COMMISSION &A. i(IRCI-'ER, DIR8QTOR OF PLANNING To be published in the Chico! Enterprise Record on Thursday, Januaty 25, 19908 MAR 21990 P1, ` r ,R . fRAF'FaC FLOW In the letter dated Februh- 'TUU sent to us by the Planning P2p,artmentsyou asked us to prov'i'de'seven parking spaces. Five for employees and two fear residence. According to Section ,z4-35 Butte County Code, parking requirements For Day Care Centers is a minimum of three or one per teaching station. 'We Nave three teaching stations and' one resident. Mrs. Johnson is a teacher a well as the resident. We feel that we should only be required to provide four employee parking spaces. 'Resident parking will be on the 'South side of the property wf'ere a six foot fence will be constructed. Employees will park on the North West side of the property facing the Day Care. The North side or the property will also, he encompassed by a six foot fence. I To insure proper -Flow of traffic, we are providing a circular drive. Parents'will'enter on the South side of the property and exit, on the North, facing oncoming traffic. The circular drive will be twenty-one feet in width, which will provide sufficient ;space to accommodate the limited parking for parents who will be escorting ch ldr-en to the Center. The present design has the capibil7.ty to accommodate six parents parking simultaneously. For your information$ we have estimated aur heaviest traffic flow to be between the hours of 7:30 a.m, to 9:00 a.m, and 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m, rhe following is a traffic study taken oo three separate days. DAY TIME NORTH SOUTH 'TOTAL 2-5-90' 7-8 a.m. 101 65 166 2..5,.90 4-5 p.m. 70 105 175_ 2-16-90 7-6 a.m. 76 102 178' 2-16-90 4-5 p.m. 98 70 168 2-20-90 7-8 a.m. 74 101 175 u -r0, Wt1, 4w , p.M 107 73' 173 I 1, PeggyJohnson 3524 Hicks Lane Chico, Calif. `95926 February 25, 1990 8 . A . Kircher Director of planning ? County Cent>er Or'ive, Oroville Calf, 95965-3397 SJJBJECT: Use Permit to; allow a Day Care Center. Dear ms.. Kircher, -Attached are the following documents reguarding Peggy Johnsons request for a Use Permit. PARKING AND FLOW OF TRAFFIC FENCING FOR CHILDRENS PLAYGROUND INTERIOR,PLAN OF DWELLING PLOT PLAN OF ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES COPY OF LETTER FROM STATE OF CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND WELFARE COPY OF LETTER FROM STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE FIRE MARSHAL SUMMARY We have complied with all requests: We would appreciate a prompt response of approval for our Use Perm t. Sincerely Peggy Johnson Aaron Doxfor,d PARKING AND TRAFFIC FLOW t1,(' 11 1 t t 7 1' I ;7 tit � ; 0� i I' SUMMA,`:Y In summary I would like to' address the need for Day Care ` in tl-re Graatew Chico area. As a single parent, I found myself in th+, position many women find themselves. After working a long day, I would pick ,my children up from a Day Care. On one 'occasion my son was spanked until he had welts on h1L legs, because he was a few{ minutes .late arriving at the Day Care after school 1 world „run start my search for a new Day Care that.met ,the ,needs of my children, yet was affordable. It was at this 'point that I decided to stay home with my own children and take other children in. I wanted to offer to other mothers what I myself could not find in a Day Care situation: For the past eleven years my children and I have extended our family to many children, in the Chico Area. Ouch grrkuth has taken place during that time. We have grown from a baby sitting situation to an extended family creative learning situation. The children have olways come first to us, All our learning programs are geared to the individual neads of each child. No child has ever beej��turned away because of the parents inability' to pair. On one occasion, a special roam was set up for a little boy to be his own because his mother was dying of cancer and he Would be spendin6 ;some extra time with us. What I am trying to express to you is that we are not a'baby sitting service; we are an extension of every family that enters out door. We are in a partners np with each parent in molding the lives of these preciotis children In a report made by Ehe Greater Ch'7o, Chamber of Commorce, Child Gare Task Force 1989 Report. It was noted` that 70% of women between the age of 25 - 34 have jobs. This leaves these 70% in the same position I'found myself eleven years ago, searching for Quality 'Care for our children. Committee developed list of priorities xn the same I report the Su b Comml lopbd a that: needed immediate 'attention; 1, one major concern is the What can we do to relieve quality Of caee ou11 recommended; Review situation? Amonthe C 'r children recieve.g,others p the I mmittee Which may unintentionally, drive costs current licensing standards Ci , 4-y higher withoutany benifit such as improved quality.it it11 and County governments should also weive fees or Telax regulations to facilitate construction I ction of new centers.? The Committee found that unless action was taken Day Care could reach a critical shortage in the early 1990's, Weekly I recieve phone calls from parents searching for Day Care. I have people 'who have driven by come to my door and ask to be put on a waiting list. I have mothers who have just I found that they are Expecting, call. and ask for an interview so they will. have a space for their child when it is liorn. I do not advertise in the news -paper, Vailey Oaks Childrens Service and The Association of' Family Day Care Providers hold all,referals on my request. I Feel that we have teaciled the critical point, and it is for this reason that we have decided to open our doors to more children. Children are the most important natural resource we have. We must protect and educate -them as best we can. I ask the Commission to keep this in mind as they make -a fair and just decision. 5inceraly pdqgy � Johnson 6F E;wCE C'F= TI'HE STATE FIRE'MARSHAL 4 V'Alr`ramsburcg Lame, Suite ;4 S;F f hfco, 'aiiroe nia 95926 (916) 895-431 ATSS "459-481 PLAN REVIEW TRANSMITTAL 4 GATE. FACILITY NAME:%��'�, --� ? FACILITY AGGREss: PRaJECT _DESCRIPTION:_ � ')L l n C ..t uk As requested, we have reviewed [)'Plans (]Specifications []Change Order []Addendum []instructional Bulletin for the prof listed above to determine Conformance with the fire and life safety standards of Titles W and 24, California Code of Regulations. By copy of this transmittal we are: advising you that the items listed above were found to be In accordancewith the applicable provisions of Titles 19 and 24, [] returning the items listed above to you for review. Consideration must be given to all comments noted in red pencil on the documents, requesting that you contar.t our office at the telephone number listed above for an appointment for our stamp of approval or back-check. Nothin in our review shall be construed as encompassing structural integrity. Approval of this Ian does not t authorize pp y r deviation from applicable regulations, Final approval is subject to field inspection, r a ve an emission o Deputy to Fire Marshal cc: j Fire Department j Building Desartment !� Facility Adminl i aicr jjOSHPD Other �j [j Other CSFM Regional Office []Coastal !]Sautherh Field Hie Ch7,6, IretaelF+Ti,, TOTh` P4Yt1y1G �'GiR<i if i !' tl1pQ VFpIxMcQ� NilmY.la.�-YbYAIMG �� isHN o7HQK APPA{'CANT :_ nECEIVEd;:RUM rm"MiTr+ ptlCUM KF(T9 HOALF" Mn• RISCQIV 60' WORKU Aft �.� _ LAhlD QF IVA7`URAL WEALTH AC`I17 HEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CAI-IEORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (016) 536-7605 November 17, 1989 Peggy Johnson 3524 Flicks Lane . Chico, CA 95526 Re Use Permit, 'AP 007--240-066 Log *89-10-25-0 Dear Ms. Johnson: An Initial study of your proposed project, a Use Permit, Indicates potentially adverse Impacts to the environment (refer to the enclosed environmental checklist) To reduce or eliminate these Impacts, suitable mitigation measures are required as part of the project Otherwise, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Is required pursuant to the Car.fornla Environmental Quality Act An early response to this notification, sent to the Planning Department, will expedite the scheduling of your project. Please forward ,your written response wlthln 15 days from the date of this letter. 'Should you have any questions regarding this mztcer, "please ciantact this office between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m,. c 1 ncere I y,. B. A. Kircher DI rector of Planning Brent L. Moore ' Associate Planner BLM:Ir Enc. f' 'project site Is 2200 square feet., 13a,b; The proposed project will generates approximately, 38 vehlcl;^ trips at a peak hoer as.estfmated by the Trip Oeneration Manual Tht,rd fieldition, 1382, institute •of Traffic EngIneers, The existing transportation system has the capacity to accommodate an additional 36 vehicle trips per hour during,the peak hour. In accordance with the Butte County ton I rq Code for of f-street park,l ng 'spaces w 116 I b;e required. The project site appears to have necessary space t accommodate the 4 acid t t,i onai parking spaces required. 'No s1Gnlficant adverse impact Is, anticipated on the traffic from the proposed project. l4a: Approval of the proposed project will Increase the service demands for fire protection services beyond that which Butte County, can expect to meet In the near future, Fire protection for the project site Is in jeopardy at this time due to fiscal constraints being experienced by Butte County. 'nue to the potentl'aI service demands a day cane center with 36 children may pose on the Fire, Department, It Is critical to Insure fire protection services are avaIIWjIe for the Iong term. until such time a dedicated funding source for Butte County Fire, Department Is deverToped there ,is considered an Impact on fire protection serviced by the proposed project. Tile apN l l cant will have to provide add i t l opa 1, m l t i gat i on measures f'or fire protect Ion saaty Ices. 16d: Sewer and septic tank system was approved as. being adequate by the Butte County Environmental Health Division. No Improvements are deemed' necessary, to accommodate the proposed day care 'center. Recommended Mitigation Measure: 1. The applicant wilt have to , a pie additional m i t l -gat l on measures for f I re protect ion ser , I ces { i a h p 1 � r f APPENDIX I ;w CC►T.JN-XY Q1»" --BUT,E :TNV_TH0NMRN'rAL C-IVICKL7CST 1--c) ?M (To be completed by Lead Agency) LOG N0. 89-10-25-01 AP NO. 007-240-066 I'. BACZCGi:C7L3ND 1. Name of proponent _Pec rRY Johnson 2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable): 3524 Hicks Lane> rhieo 1 CA 95926 3, Project description: Use.Permit II, 1AA1-- IMATCS2'i' F'XND2Nl3S OF SD=G q_rY'_CCANCEYES MAYBE . NO 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below oelf-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehist.ory'f _ _✓ 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve hieve short-term benefits to the. detriment of long-term environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts into will endure the future.) 3, Does the ,project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two ,or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small) but where the effect of the total, of those impacts on the environment is significant,), V, 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects, on human beings, either directly or indirectly? •'III.,DETEPMZN'A^LXO yT (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this initial evaluation:, I/WE find the proposed project COULD NOT hava a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, yI/WE find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described on the attached sheet have been added to the project,, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I/WE find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required'. I COUNTY, OF BUTTE, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATES November 17 19 85 - xy; G✓1t trent'L. Moore ,Associa � Planner Reviewed by., / Pau a S Leasure Senior Plahner 1 Ir i i r . 't ..:ENV yam.. /����. g.���Ttrrmmp - /y : \Explanations of all "XFSi and "MAYBE" answers are required on attached sheet(s). 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result ;in significant: YES MAYBE' NO a. Unstable' earth conditions, or changes in geologic substructures? it b. Disruption, displacement, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering oX modification or any unique geologic or physical features? e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? f,. Cha.g"-�s in deposition or erosion of beach aands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify this channel of a river, or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or Take? l g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslioas, ground failure or similar hazards.' y1C„ 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Air emissions or, deterioration of ambient air quality? V b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? l/ c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? 3. ,,W�TEP. Will the proposal result in substantial. - ubstantial;a.` a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ✓ c. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation ' removal, channelization or culvert installation? 1/ d. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ✓ e. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? 1/ f. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperatures dissolved oxygen or turbidity? t% g. Alteration of, the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? h. Change in the quant.tty or quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies" ✓ j. Exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? 4, PLANT LIT-. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Change in the diversity p ' of s eciesa or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs) grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species o planta? c, Introduction of new species of plants into an area., or in a battier to the normal replenishment of exiating species? _tt d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? -77,77777 f, 5. ANIMAL T�IFE. Will the proposal result it' substantial; YES MAYBE NOM a. Change in the diversity'of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, organismis- . or insects)? b. Reduction, in the numbers of any unique,, rare at endangered species of - animals? barrier to c. _t.troduction of new species of animals into an area; or in bar , V the migration or movement of animals?of d. Deterioration of atisting fish or wildlife Habitat? b. NOISE. 'Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Expature of people to severe noise levels? _ 7. LIGHT AIM GLARE. Will the proposal produce significant light and glare? �✓ S. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial. alteration of the present or planned land u-- w of an area? JC56 9, NATURAL;RESOURCa. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resour~es7 b. Depletion of any non-renwAla,ble natural resnirces? lo. RISK Or- UPSET. Will the proposal, involve: a. A ;,Ask of explosioh br release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, nesti.cides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? _ b. Possible interferencewithan emergency response plan or vnergency evacuation plan? 11, POPULATION. Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population? 12. HOUSING. Will the ro r,4al affect existing housing, or create E g, ate a demand , for additiona3'.housng"� 13. TRP.NSPt1RTA_T?C)U/CLRCULAT'SON. Will tt,�e proposal result in: a. Generation of, substantial additional vehicle movement? b. Effects on, existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? pr C. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems? d. Sign, ficant alterations to present,pattera,s-of circulation or movement of people and/hr goods? e. Alterations to waterborfier rail or air traffic? £. :!-crease'in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycli -i or pedestrians? 14. 'PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need P P p , ' for new or altered government services' a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? ✓ r.. Schools'! d. Parks or other rec*national facilities? e. Maintenance o4 fir. it facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? �'' II'' J Y b 9 aCUaS i Ohi OFEP+I'�i l F€f?TAViEf�iTA4.,' �V�CLIIl�:"P $ CJI s4F� � Q07-2, L „�J-Qa;6 Ib: The, applicant proposes adding an additional room onto t'he existing structure. The proposed room addition will result In some, minor disruption, displacement, compaction, or i,atsrcovering of the soII,as a'result of necessary earth work for the foundation of the room addition. It' Is anticipated that: such soil disruption and uvercovering will neat constitute a significant Impact. No change in, the topography or ground surface relief features are antli„ipated as a result of the proposed project The project slt-e Is an existing single family residential dwelling within a developed neighborhood. No major earthwork; Is associated With the proposed roam add'tlon. ig: No loss of prime agriculturally productive Solis outside designated urban areas will occur as a ,result of this project- The project siteIslocated within a suburban neighborhood within the Chico Urban Area The proJect,s to Is currently developed to single- family residential densities with common infrastructure associated With s.Uch densities. Ih: All of Butte County Is within a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone V i.l I The proposed day care center Is to Le 'housed : by a, single family residential home. Due to the upgrade in hazards ahri the number of occupants which gill be utilizing the structure It iNiIl be necessary to inspect the bUilding to Insure it meets or exceeds the cur rent building code requirements for se iesm 1 c safety purposes, Because this building is no longer being used for purely 'residential a purposes, but rather for a commercial endeavor, the building must meet the current building, codes of Butte County. In addition, In accordance with Section 307 of the Uniform Bt,,Iiding Code Titled "Certificate of Occupancy” 1t is the responsibilli:v of the new business proprietor to obtain an inspection and certifloate from the Butte county EauiIding Department in Order to occupy a once t,esldentlal building for cammerclal'purposes. It is anticipated that such Inspections and the Uniform Building Code will provide adequate protection against seismic hazards. 8: The proposed project Will result in some alterations of the present and planned Iand uses of, this area. Currently this lot Is being utilized as a single family residence. Along .Hi.,ks Dane the land Uses are characterized as single family residential dwellings and a mobile home park+Immediately "to the toUth of the project site Is a commercial dlstr'Ict, which accommodates a boat sales and repair business. as well as a radio anti TV broadcasting station The physical f'e;Atures of the site seem to be adequate to provide for 36 ;children ir. a; day care center facility, The outdoor space regUi,ements appear to meet the State la.w, for :required outdoor activity space' for 36 c'it i I dren . 1 h accordance With Title 2,2, ID Iv i s ion 13, Section 101:338.2 Sub Section A of the California Department of Social Services regu l at i ons . In addition, raoW red amt,runts of open floor arca for the indUor artIVIt„y space Is 35 square feet per child. This relates to apprnitlmately 1260 square feet needed to house the proposed popu l at I oto of the day care center, The ex I s't l hg home on the '®r protect s l to Is, 2200 square" Peet 13a, b The proposed project ` w I VT generate ap;pr`ox i mate 1 y 3$ vehicle trips at a peals hour as 'est imated by 'the Trip Generation Manual Third O,ddItIcin; 1982, 1nstitui.e of Traffic Engineers. The exIstfrig {.,ransportat Ion system ha9the capacity to accommodate an additional , 38 vehicle trips per hour durNng the ;peak hour. In accordance with the Butte Courrty Zon i n Code for off-street parking spaces w I I ! be re�qulred. The project'' site appears to have necessary space to accommodate t'he 4 add, } t i onis if parking ' spaces required. No significant adverse Impact i s ant i c l pa.'teij on the tr of Ic from the prrf.,osq+d project. 14a: Approval of the proposed project Will Increase the se ev i.ce demands for fire protection services beyond that which Butte,County -can expect 'to meet in the near future. Fire protection for the project site is in jeopardy at this time due to fiscal col<straints being experiencedby Buttte C16kanty . Due to the potential service dL seryicedL ids a day car-- center with 36 ch i i dren may pose on 1the Fire D( r., anent It, c s critical t o Insure fire protection seg; vices are available for the long, term, 11 g nt i t such time a dedicated fund i rig : �t�urce for Butte County Flreg DepartMesnt Is developed ':here Is considered an Impact can f i rte protection sery I eras by the proposed Project. The applicant w l i I have to pr,ov l d.e add I t f anal mitigation, Meascires for ,Fire p.,- tect I c's services l bd : Sewer and scot l c tank 4tystiem was approved as being adequate by the Butte County is nv i ronmehtk al Health D i v I s }.en . No Improvements are deemed recess ary to (accornmod�jte the proposed day ;are center. Aecommended Mitigation Leasure 1. The applicant will have to provide additional mitigatlon measures for fire protection services. i 7777 777, 1 App'l 1+Cant: ; Peggy Johnson Assessor's Patrc 0, 007-1240-066 Log DATA SHEET A. Project Descr 1pt;on I.' Type of Project: Use Permit. 2. Brief Description: Use Perm I t to al low a play care center. 3. Location: Approximately 420 feet north of Hicks Lane and Eaton Road Intersection, onthe east side,of H.icks_Lane, Chico. 4. Proposed Density of Deveiopmentc One dwelllno unit per II2 acre. 5. ,Amount of Impervious Surfacing: 50+%. E. Access and nearest Public Road(s): Hicks Lane. 7. Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual septic: and l eachf i e l d systems. 8. Source of Water Supp i y Private we i I . S. ProximIty of Power Lines: Adj4cent'to {property. 10. Potential for further land divisions and development: N/A. 8 . Environmental Setting. Physical Environments 1. Terrain a. General Topographic Character. Flat valley land. b.,Slopes: 0-1% c. Elevation: Approximately 185 ft. A.S.L. d. Limiting l= tors: None. 2. Soils a. Types and Gharae-ter i st ics: V i na fine sandy loam, deep well drainiµ,g, prime agricultural soli. b. Limiting Fact >. None. 3. Nritura l hazards of the l..ancl a. Earthquake Zone:, Moderate Earthquake Intensity zone VIII. b. Erosion Poteptlal: None. c. I,-andsilde Potential: None. d. Fire Hazard: Unciassifled. e. Expansive Sall Potential: Moderate. 1. Hydrology aface dater: None In the Immediate vlcInity. b. airound tater. Over 1 169, area of Intensive g, ound wa Ler withdrawal, c. bralnage Char4tterlstics: Wlthln Shasta Union Drainage Asseosment District. d. Annual Rainfall (normal), 22-24111. e. I_ I m l t i ng Factors. None, AMk e ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCEMATERIAL 1 'Map 11-1, Earthquake' and Fault Activity: seismic Safety Element, Butte County General Flan revised 1-77, by CH2M H l l l 2. Map 11-2, Llqu'efac'tlon Potential: Seismic Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill, 3. Map I I ! - E , Subsidence & Lands i l de Po•ter itIal: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revlsed 1-77, by CH2M 11 1 11'; 4. Map 1 E 1 -2, Erosion Potential: Safety Element, Butte, County General Plan revised -77by CH2M Hill. 5. Map 111--3, Expansive Soils; Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill., 6 Map ►V-1, Nolsel: Noise Element, Butte County General Pian revised 1--77, by CH2 M, H I I l 7. Map V'-1, Scenic Highways:_ Scenic Highway Element, Butte County General Pian revised 1-77,, by CH2M Hill 8. Map 1 l 1 --4,, Natural Fire Hazard Classes: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill 9.' Archaeological Sensitivity Map by James P Manning, for Butte County Planning Department, 1983. 10. School District Map, Butte County Planning Department 11. Chico Nitrate Study Map, Nitrate Co,ncentratlon In Shailow Wells, 1983, by Department of Water Resources, ;Northwestern District, The Resources Agency, State of California, 12. Agricultural P'reser'ves Map, established by Resolution No. 67- 178, Butte County Board of Supervisors, December 5, 1987. 1' Insurance National98 food ins{.Trance Program, FederalEmergency Management Agency, 3 14. USGS Quad Maps, Chico, 1980.', 15. Soil Map, Chico (1926)/OrovlIIe (1926)'Area, U,S. Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico(1925)/0roVlile (1926) Area, U.S. Department of Agrlcul.tiure 17. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Map, Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry. Bunte County Planning Department, -9 ~- o urt LAND OF NATURAL S.WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT , 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - CAMILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3387 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 May 8, 1989 Peggy Johnson 3524 Hicks,Lane Chico, CA 95926 RE: Use Permit AP#07-24--66 Lear Mrs. Johnsons We received your pre -application review request for the subject Use Permit. Butte County Public Works and E`0-irc-.inental Health have received the information you submitted. The Planning Department will consider this application complete only after we have assurances from the above departments that the project complies with, appropriate ordinances and. any conditions imposed, can be met. it is the applicants resp3iisibilityy to provide any additional information needed by Public Works or Environmental Health to meet their requirements. Public Works i,tatiy be contacted by telephone at 538-7266 :and Environmental Health at 538-7281 for further information as to their evaluation of the proposal and their requirements;_ The Planning Devartment stafr will also be reviewing the application for .any special conditions or modifications a at are appropriate'. Should you have any questions about the pre -application review, please contact this office. Sincerely, y H . A « XIRCHER Director of Plant' ing, Judy ".ramer Planning Technician JKsfcU cc': Dee Aox�ord t , j,