The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About027-220-124A I f' r / r i 1 L APPLICANT Bob Condon ADDRESS P.O. Box 130, West Yellowstone, Montana 5'9758 OWNER Same PROJECT DESCRIPTION Tentative Parcel Map- To divide 20 Rcros to create 4 Parcels 5 Acres each. LOCATION On the north side of Melody Lane, approximately once utile east of its intersection with Palermo Honcut Ijighway, Palermo area ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS) ._APS 2 7 - 2 2 -12 4c, 12. ZONING A- 5 GEN. PLAN AG -Res 1. PROJECT CONSISTUMT? DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED T.Ia 13, 1985 Engineer: Ronald Graves- 266 Eutte Avenue Orovil1e. CA 9_�,9fi4`�'` DATE PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN PUBLISHED PLACE NEWSPAPER XOTICE(S) PUBLISHED - 0. C. P. G. B. DATE MAILING LEST PREPARED DATE MAIL. -'"T NOTICES WRIq'TEN MAILED NUMBER DATE PLANNING DIRECTOR I S REPORT PREPAPED ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL EXEiJPTION - DATE FILED DETERMINATION AND DATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED ENV. IMPACT REPO?,:S w DATE CERTIFIED SUS. COMMI'TIME MEETING DATE ADVISORY AGENCY REAPING ADVISORY AGENCY ACTION tOARD ACTION___Z BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY MINUTES Pad,(-: 2 December 16, 1985 4. Ted Runge, AP 71-01-68 ptn. , 4 parcels on the west (:,Lde of the intersection of beer Meadow Rd. and Encina Grande Rd, 11arts Mill area. Surveyor: Ron Graves OPEN The item Was continued to Jan. 6, 1986 because of confl, td, between the appeal process and a holiday of the Supervisors. 13. WE EX'114,11,1310N: 5. Dori Matthews, AP 58-19-187, TPM, 4 parcels approx. I'POO ft. north of the intersection of Concow Rd. and Nelson Bar Ted.,, on the west side of Concord Rd. Concow area. Engineer; Barnhart/Brown Mr. Mendpnsa made a motion to grant a 3 year exLen.3ion of tirr.e III which to fl -le the final ma:p for Don .Matthews on. AP 58-19-1.87: The ne•q expiration date to be Jan. 9, 1989. Motion seconded by Air. Streeter a6d cvt:L•ried unanimously. C. AfIl-- )VAI, ltd` 1UNTITES GE NOVEMBER 25, 1985 AND DECEMBER 2 and 9, 1985 Mr. Streeter said that on the minutes of Nov. 25, 1985, on page 5, on the Showbird Inc. item, there should be an eighti,.mitigation measure, as follows: 8. Contribute $75.00 per lot to the West Side Fire Station improvement Fund. Mr, Streeter made a motion to approve the minutes of the Advisory Agency of Nov. 25, 1985 an corrected; Motion heconded by Mr. Reid and carried unanimously. Mr. Streeter said that an the minutes of Dec. 2, 1.985a on page 7, on the Bob Crandon item, AP 27-22_,124 and 1.25, in the 3rd sentence of the Ist paragraph, it should read; The Condon'u,vere told by Mr. Hironimus that if the geologist's report Were sabmittod, there would be no problem, with the map being recommended for approval., Mr, Streeter made a motion to approve the Advisory Agency minutes of Dec, 2 ) 198$ as cori+ected and revised, Motion seconded by Mr. Reid and carried unanimously, Mr, Streeter inade a motion to approve the minutes of Dec 9 of the Advisory Agency as typed. tdotion seconded by %,, Reid and carrit-d unanimously, MEETING ADJOURNED BY JOHN A1ENDONSA MIIVI,ITES MiCORDED BY DIANA SNt.1EY ,86-31 Ron Graves & Associates on behalf of Bob Condon, appeal the (1665) Advisory Agency's denial of tentative parcel map (proposed negative declaration regarding environmental impact), AP 27-22-124 and. 125, four parcels, property located on the north side of Melody Lane approximately one mile east of its intersection with Palermo Honcut Highway, Palermo area,. ***** Motion:- FOUND THE TENTATIVE PARLEL MAP FOR BOB CONDON ON 00000 AP 27-22-124 AND 27-22-124 DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE POLICIES OF THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN, AND DENIED THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL OF THE ADVISORY AGENCY`S DENIAL OF THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP OF BOB CONDON ON AP 27-22-124 and 27-22-125: M S Votes 1 'Y 2 AB 3 N 4 Y 5 Y (Motion carried) 3'• Bob Condon, AP 27=22-124 and 125, 4 parcels on the north side of Melody Lane, approx. one mile east of its intersection with Palermo. Honcut Hwy. Palermo area. Engineer; Ron Graves Associates (cont. from Nov. 18; .1985) Mr. Streeter said that they revised the Planning Directorla Deport since the previous meeting. They tried to be fair, but they still, cannot support 5 aere parcels. OPEN HEARING Zein Mendonsa .paid that on June 24, 1974, a Certificate of Compliance was issued on the property in the name of Robert D. and Bernice Condon. Mr. Mendonsa read from the minutes of that meeting that the doctrine of merger was used to issue a Certificate of Compliance. The parcels which were shown as two parcels were combined as one. It is legally one parcel_ based upon that action atthat meeting. Mr; Graves said he had been unaware of that action, although he already believed there were 2 parcels. That does not show up in the title report- that action. Mr. Mendonsa said the Certificate was issued in Book 1928/Page 537, "and recorded Aug. 6, 1984. ,It* Graves said that his argument that there are not 36 parcels out there is supported by this information, What appears to be two parcels is actually one parcel. He described What problems he is having with the title companies including everything that should be included. Mr. Mendonsa gave Mr, Graves a copy of the minutes of the meeting to which tie was referring, not - r. Graves said the Condon's instructed/to accept the 2-1.01s so this agency should approve it for 2-1.0's and they will appeal it. The problem, with this map begId in talking it over with Dave Hironimus, He claimed there are 36 parcels in the area and Mr. Graves said there are 21 if this project is approved; Mr. Graves said that Mr. Hironimus called him back and agreed that there were not 56"e, parcels, The neXt thing that was required was a geologist's report. 1 sT� ,2ondon's were told by 14r, iironimus that if the geologist's report, there would be no problem with the map being recommended for appro�aolf The parceilspagain0st',['hatLtfihally got500. estrairhtens confusion about numbs s project is reco►nmended Por denial. because of circulation, Then out n no`s the the Crandon` s :net with the ;Planning Dept, Then the condition carne out for 2.10 acre parcels, *t Streeter asked if there is a Wayto get to Wane Charles did, to the. east, Mr, Graven said that all you have to do is cut through uhe fence, Mr. Meridonsa said that everyone might not have the ripht to uye every toad, RV- Graves said that in case of a disaster it would be possible to drive through the fence 8UTT9 COUNTY AOV180AY A08NCY MINUTE8 - 12-2-85 Mr, Mendonsa asked if circulation 'means being able to drive through a fence or do you need the legal right to use a road???? Mr. Streeter said that if this area is opened Lip to 5 acre parcels, that will, start a trend, The Board should be involved in this decision. Ten acre parcels would be alright, Mr. Graves said that it isn't fair to the applicant to have A-5 zoning and then not lei; people create 5 acre parcels. Mr. Streeter said. that some flags were given that there would nr-t be: clear sailing all the way. Mr, Mendonsa said that the application is for 4-5 acxe parcels, There should not be approval for 2-10 acre parcels since the applicant doesn't want it, The Board got confused on the Sorenson project because the map :jhowed 4-10 acre parcels. r Mr. Streeter said he would like to see parcel, 1 and 3 combined and 2 and .4 combined, A revised map could be turned in. Mr. Mendonsa slid not feel that something should be approved that the applicant doewn't even want, Mr. Streeter said it would save appeal fees to stick with the ten acre parcels. Mr.. Mendonsa said that if the applicants submit a map for 2--10 acre parcels there 3'.8 map to take action today. This agency could wait until they p hen approve it, But they don't want it. Mr, 'Graves said the really bad thing in this situation is that the applicants Were told that approval Mould be recommended by Planning if the geologist's report were doze, it was noted that a 2 parcel split would create 19 parcels on a cul-de-sac and a 4 ,parcel split would create 21., Mr. Graves noted that the road under diaussion is a good road, Mr: Mendonsa said that the idea of what constitutes adequate circulation has not been settled upon yet. He said that there is an offer for Wayne Charles Rd. but not for the connection between them. There is a 1200 i't: stretch, Mr. Graves said there is a road 'hut it is :not Legal., Mr, Mendonsa said 3.f that was the only issue it might be worked out) but there seem to be other issues: Mr, "Streeter said there is circulation, validity of the A-5 zoning and ag"residential criteria for parcels less 'than P-0 acres: Mr. Streeter said they didn't have full information back in dune when a letter was Written and they didn't know about th.- Certificate of Compliance BUT" t COUNTY ADVISORY AG1 CY MINUTED -- 12--�-8 Mr. Graves said that only makes his argument more powerful. ey can deny it based on circulation anyway Mr. Streeter said th There was more discussion of what was actually said to; the mppl,icuns the Planning Dept. and the fact that there is no to know at this byopoint. Y �+ parte 5. Mr. Mendonsa said he would have to vote to den s Mr. Streeter said the facts &Duld be considered rather conversation With the applicant and Nr. Hironithan a mus, Mr. Gravessaid the whcie point of the conformance report is to avoid problem, this f,ir. Mendonsa said that the conformance report had stated nonconformance, Mr, Graves said the applicant does not want 2-10ts, Mr, Streeter said: T will make a motion ora the Bob Condon parcel mai. AP 27-22-124. and 125 for 4, parcels to deny the .parcel ma ' ,Planning Director's Report of Nov, 15,1,985 and the diseussibated ofttheI Motion seconded by Mr. Reid and carried is K Lina nmous iy. . BU'l;'"Tt COUNTY AbV18011y AGV'MCY MINU1'1«8 — 90 oe 9. Bob Condon, AP 27-22-124 and 125., 4 Melody Laneae parcels On the north side of , PPrOX- on.mile east of its intersection With Palermo Honcut Hwy. Palermo area.Engineer: Ron Graves Mr. Streeter said that some parcels with two AP numbers are really one parcel. That effects the number Of parcels on a cul-de-sac. There are enough ambiguities to continue the item. There are also Problems With distance to commercial services and schools. Also there is a question about the condition of Palerri,o-Hozicut Highway. HEARING OPEN Ron Graves said that between parcels 124 and 125 there is a section line-- that may be Why there are double parcel numbers, Parcels in there. All those parcels There are not really( Tis was cl parcel rather than two that front oil Melody Lane one 1 , so the Planning Director'shReport cameras aUP surplastrisesummer with Dave Hronimus . ThWOu spent $3()(1 on the geological report if they had know thatey there ld wanot have n going 1. uo be this change of Opinion by the Planning Department, Mr, Mendonsa said that boughl.- 2 parcels. the title report makes it appear that Mt, Condon Mir. Grf-ves said that there is Only One Parcel there, That is how it was pvrchasetl. There are two different description, in two different sections. since the property is Mr. Mendonsa said it Would depend on how all the deeds read for the othe Parcels that are in A similar situation,r It wtuatiag agedout to Whethcontinue the item 2 weeks to investigate further this sion areber there are one or two parcels, it these situations; There Was some discussion about the toads, Mr. Streeter said he would look at the Planning ]director's Report and take Out the things that don't apply, and list any conditions 411d t4jtig4tions that hPPlY based on the geologic survey, Mr- Graves said that he discussed had said that he would put a note the Project With have Hironimus in the file -recommending a ) who pproval. lytr- Streeter said that in talking With Mr. that the position Was reversed HirOnimU8 he did not fool Director I enough to redOmmend approval, Tile Planning S Report should be revised to reflect W Planning Departmetlt hat the POsltiOft Of the that don't apply, actually is. There are comments about circulation W"Utet Heng a neighbor, had no objections to the Parcel split, but he .aid that the land drains into a W Condon's property, J-nter time Creek between his property It th#!ft drains under the rood and goes across otheand propertY near the wells., He asked what effect Would be Oft the weilg in the area COUNTY 'hbVJ8O1JY AGENCY MXNUTtS problem Mr. Reid said that there should be ,no since the Health Dept. has requirements that take care of that. Mr. Hentz said that when he bought his own property he bought 2 parcels and subsequently received tax bills for 4 parcels. Mr. Meadonsa said that perhaps the title companies wrote the deeds in that way because it was easy, but that makes it appear to create 2 parcels the way the law is written The hearing was continued for 2 weeks to resolve the question regarding the Planning Director's Report General Plan policies and also the question about the number of parcels BUTTV COUNTY AtW18ORY, pGVINCy MINUTtS w 11-4-85 85 INTRODUCTION The Oroville Earthquake of August 1, 1975 demonstrated the need for a , reevaluation of seismic hazards wJ.thin Butte County. Prior to the Oroville Earthquake, Butte Country was assumed to be relatively safe from earthquake damage. A map published by Jennings (1975) shows; only one fault in Butte County having historic movement within the ,last 200 years. Thai fault is located approximately 3.4 miles southeast of Oroville bet.w(jen W'ynadotte and Bangor. Surface fractures from that fault., later .named the Cleveland [till Fault, resulted from the 1915 Oroville Earthquake. Figure l shows the location of the Cleveland Hill Fault. Pigure 1 Biatte County's one Historically Active Fault. _. R (From Jennings, 1975) r 4 ♦ W, R.r u Ru rrr..��.K r�.�y r..r 4 .fur.. .Rra.�.R.• n .• Lr I. In 1963 Burnett published a report entitled, Fracture 111races in the Tuscan Formation, Northern California, wh Ch was a forerunner to the publication of the Geologic Map of the CI11,00 Monocline and Northeastern Part of the Sacramento Valley by Eia,wood,Helley and Doukas in .1981. The Cleveland Hill Fault ( Orovill(w 5arthauake and the map of the Chico Monocline suggested a nsl-thwest trending system of potentially active faults and fracturehj crossing c-bntral Butte County, Burnett (1963) used aerial photographs to iniLially delineate fracture traces within the 4.uscan Formation because they are generally notvisible from ground level. In this study both aerial photograph's and infra -red variscan analysis were used to initially Locate faults or fractures which were later identified in the field whenever possible. For the purposes of this report, a fracture trace is a small displacement, linear feature consisting Of topographic vegetation or soil alignments visible primarily on aerial photos. Such features are rarely continuous for a distance of greater than one mile. Fracture traces are composed of many hundreds or thousands of fractures while faults are more discrete, having lengths greater than a mile arid often display measurable displacement, The office of Science and Technology, in Their 1970 report. entitled 8arthquake Hazard Roduction'State, "Maps that dile; Bate relative kinds and degrees of geologic hazards are as yet rare and no fully satisfactory map of earthquake geologic hazards is available for any urban area. It is realized that such maps Prepared in the neat future will be tittle more than crcide 4 approximations and continuing decisions will have to be made regarding their detail and scale.." There are three ;published seismic risk maps from which it is possible to estimate maximum earthquake intensities for Butte county. These maps show Modified Mercalli (M.M.) Intensities of VI, VII and VI or VII respectively for Butte County. The maps suggest that an average M.M.intensity of 6.5 might be appropriate for Butte County. Table 1 shows the damage assessment criterion for establish- ing M.M. intensities. Caution should be exercised in using small scale regionalization maps covering large areas because as Richter (1959),states, "They should serve as general index maps from which the engineer or planning authority should pass to microregionalization maps for localities where construction is intended.'" The three forementioned maps are not completely satisfactory because they are not generalized from more detailed maps, MODIFIED MERCALLI EARTHQUAKE INTENSITY SCALE I. Not felt except by a very few under specially favorable circumstances. (I) . II. Felt only by a few, persons at rest; especially on upper floors of build Ings. Delicately suspended objects may swing. (1 to 11) I1I. Felt quite noticeably indoors, es• pecially on upper floors of buildings, but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor- cars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated. (III) IV. During the day, felt indoors by many, outdoors by a few. At night, some awakene,i. Dishes, windows, ,doors disturbed; wall's make creaking sound. Sensation like heave truck striking building. Standing motorcars rocked noticeably. (IV to V) V. Felt by ncariv everyone, many awakened. Some dishes, windows, eic., broken; a few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned. Disturbances of trees. poles, and other "tali objects sometimes noticed. Pendulum clocks ;nav stop. (V to VI) VI. Felt by all, many frightened and run outdotwrs. Some heavi furniture moven': a few instances` of fallen plastt., or damaged chimneys. Darrtat. slight. (VI to VII) VIL Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in tiuiidinax of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well -burly ordinary structures; .tow= riderah1r, in poorly built or badly desige,r:i structures, some chimneys broken, .Noticed by persons driving rnmory-xi. (VIII—) `.t'A$LE" VIIL Daman. slight in mimiallt designed structures; coruide"Wir, in ordinary, substantial buil<<Ingc, +a:itJt pzrtial collapse; great in ptixrly „tsilt strut- tures. Panel walls 000%Vn out of frame structure. Pail of chimneys, factory svicks, cnlumns wonumena, walls Heavy furniture ;!vttrturn,,4 Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water. Pee. sons driving motorcars disturbed. (VIII+ to IX) IX. Damage considerable in sptcially designed structurr_s; welldesisgned frame structures throven out of plumb; great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shift- ed off foundations, Ground cracked conspicuously, Underground pips broken. (IX +) X. Some well-built wooden structures destroved; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foun. dations; ground badly cracked. R -tits bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. lihtfterl wind and mud Water splashed ,niop- ped) over banks. (X) XI. Few, if any, (masonry) itrucilf e3 remain standing. Bridges destecv4!d. Broad fissures in ground. Un• derground pipelines' completely nest of service. Earth slumps and .: rid slips in 'soft ground. Rain: rent greatly, XII. Damage total. Waves seen on tzoand surfaces. Lincs of sight and ' -vei distorted. Objects thrown upward into air. 6. THE FOOTHILL FAULT SYSTEM AND THE 1975 OROVTLLE f4ARI-lQtAKE Sou-i.h of the town of Oroville there are a numbev of prominallt faults and lineaments which are a part of the Foothill Fault System which extends along the eastern margin of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys The Foothill Fault system is not comparable to the fracture system within the Chaco Monocline even though their strikes appear similar at some map scales. Some of ;the major differences between the two systems include: 1. The faults in the Foothill System have a more north -south trend than the trend for fractures which delineate the axis of the Chico:Monocline. 2. Major faults within the Foothill System extend horizon tally for tens of miles, while the fractures within the Chico Monocline are signific-Aptly shorter. 3. IN10 fractures within the Chico'Mcnocl.ine are nearly vertical while the e3 tablished fault planes within the Foothill System dip less steeply to the east or west. 4. Fractures within the Chico Monoclihe are probably shallow fractures while measured focal depths for earthquakes within the Foothill System are significantly deeper. FIgure 2 shows the locations of the fractures in the Chico Monocline and the major faults within the Foothill Fault system.: The major faults within the FoothillSystem ill southern Butte County are the Payhes Peak, Swain Ravine and Prairie Creek Faults which ate also shown in Figure 2. Chico ........ Photo lineOmOint Plob"ble Fault FOUlf, dio indfccfed It knOwn, Gr rd I ify SCgLE' OP I L FSE�S 0 SCALE OI+ XlLomeTRES Yuba CII FI'q y gut's 11113ameilts and faujt; in the northwesterner•ran Tooth .l.l. On; August 1,3 1915 an earthquake having a Richter Magnitude o 5.7 took place south of Oroville near the town of Palermo. Figure 4 shows the location of the August 1, 1975 epicenter and major lineaments associated with the Foothill Fault system. The August 1, 1915 earthquake and aftershocks produced a zone of ground cracking 4.3 miles east of the epicenter which was subsequently named the Cleveland Hill Fault which is ' probably a northward extension of the Swain Ravine Fault shown on. Figure 2. Figures g 3A an:d 3B show the Cleveland Hill Fault in more detail. Within a year after the main shook the ground cracks along the Cleveland Hill Fault extended for a distance of 5.3 miles in a general north-south direction. F1gu1^es 4&5 show the location of the main epicenter and the epicentar locations for a considerable number of aftershocks; Figure 6 shows how the foci df the larger aftershocks define the Cleveland Hill Fault plane as dipping 62 degrees to the "west. Calculations show that the depth to the focal point along the taultplane for the main shock was approximately 5 miles. The faults within the Foothill Fault System were formed millions of years ago under a different stress regime (compressional) than exists today; Currently, several experts believe that the observed fault movettents are caused by a reactivation of the older fault planes under an extensional stress regime: 9 • J� n 11 r --- frl QTS — RATTL.ESNAKE 1` a'` �WYAINDOT� E :4POINT— .. •{ 11 cc.Z VEI afro 1, = _ swenEs try Wl ��. ` V•! 4Y I'.I p C Toaoc aatilc q4INCA ' 1��j' s•n i. LL f c'I, .,. •ti tj 121•'0' <..�:,;_`�., 121"?,g' • Flguru 3A Geomorphic sur,-'ace area, Butte County. "AII ,I ,Is' Cleveland Hi l l pa f nts of Cra55-SeC: �r i gurend t cafe end COaa CL--VaLANO HILL-FAC1j.T 1000 RATTLESNAKE POINT ~} ISOu r WYANDpTTE SURFACE 6ANGoR SURFACE WE SES TERRACEC SURFIC r ""r` 10 Sao Figure 36 , Crass-se= on view i ! dissee;;,:b, mpunti:ain• front td the east- and Ban or fault. Cross-sec., tan11111, 9 9ecmorph c surfaces and "the end paints. "A". Ilg1 are shawlt�antma in vicinity of dlevelartrf Nit1 P , Figure ! tl,I�KII; � ours ,ww,.. ,aaa�s r ot;w .tarsi Uu�rca, Lyx6N.J1NATION 10 vfanrlett rfstlwcd + pry.-- - f— uscs ,�� spew 1 sires Mfi• cw-.-4•Yw l "at lwC0 Q Ix"acM (. ` �'�tCl wmzom 'mmulwt 4mmo : !fT frw `{ . ! LA" COW1 st nuulw UP"" J /� "in IWCC ArISti[viarloga Condon _ W." we ewoeMu oxpatrrtwt or wrrge e Mdktlw¢q 1� trwwp of l Utrlf 4MTt� tttTO fUA4AM tSP KC4.ImiTaIC �ar►t I CC, ~/ M usex lAwttl VAT[t coo" 00 tfltou" vm t000low oM-CLY9t 00ko .f"?l '.P46t ('Watt: It A111W:L i. 400 a r Ict r 'i t 1= / , r UfMIt�CG 1� n. rr 51 St Some 11lMlwrd 1 VlNi1+OCt � fwe "MI �war.as9wr.1.3.m 4M1coM .Mu f,f,aR.M 1rw1 � \ 71 dwwttJ: \r t6 c ams s rferi,4:7 3.4.9.t Ultll/wGd r „�u�M1OCG I.Sa,�traw�•.� �� .a:t,ualf.�r+Nr vaMltec7: ' ,► r..rrcrr Lzs.wa �ufsl7tow ,j•. `, Tllal ' WE ,"o MOGIF10 AFTER 1 low" F.0c�' MIOt)gMIARO•CLY13l.►CANSULIAINTS / 1'"'I !' ol;raltea Lrude+ rYiff Ld.1 Ytfblt = F3 gu re 4 eta j o t- i lineaments in the nO r•thwes to rl S i e r ran ,fco th 111 a shcw i ng exp 10 rt t i can - lbca l i't let with faulting asseswchts for eacrt site r Ma3nitudes ., more than 3.0 02-2.9 YJ- 0 ' less than 1.0 ORV21 JrY• .:,.t.. rte.. 't Dam t �D 0 d `�-tib► OtovilIe South OroVilleC 0 d I 0 0 r, O 00, Projection 0 ( —,/of fault plane J (buiriaceo 0 Mainshock 0 Q Aug.19i5.bfLSa Q o C) 0 I v p O 0 p0 01 0 1 (J ' C� 0 .. Q O q o .. l�j a 1Ctiomctcp C Epicenters plotted from the C?roville July,9(earthquake sequence. Vebivary through +, The black sgdate designates the location afth Oroville statione seisme ed : The vertical dashlite suace of the fault plane see also V1ne representsthe Projectiono the trent of Water Resources.. ] 9dre 4), [Courtesy of California Depatt» ' 1 rlcLtitE 6' Side view through the Earth's crust south east OfOroville, Cal_ E ifbMia. showing the 1oc 3tins of the fdt� ,, of tome of the larger c�hquakes in tCi 975 se. que11ce, _D-Tojected on .u, Lon West cross dip i section. The ang:e of s t;2°. [Courtesy of iAto Say. ages D. Tocher, and P. Birk. holm'] Distance 1; (kilomet.") 0 1 V ESTIMATED SEISMIC HAZARD FOR THE 13 COND'ON PROPERTY The literature and data suggest that Butte an area of low to moderate earthquakes which ha,CounLy is within recurrence intervals which are accompanied e reltiL•ively 101,4g and offset. liy minor �ryrpund rupture. The California Department of Wates' Resources la conclude that there is nothin ( .79) g in their study which would indicate a Richter Magnitude for another Oroville-t than 6.5 yPe earthc�ua}�e greater (the August, 1975 magnitude was , 5 , 7) . Eor comparison nitude of ,Purposes, the 1906 San .Francisco Earthquake had a Richter Mag - the ep8.3. A magnitude of 6.5 would only be observed near icenter and would exponentially diminish the eipcenter, with distance from Figure T for the August 1 g shows a preliminary isoseima,l map 1975 Oroville Earthquake. . California Department of q Add.atio.na],1Y, the Water Resources (1979) suggest that the maximum offset from another Oroville-tYPe earthquake 2.0 inches in the ver direction. t cal 1.O in direction and q ke would be ch in the horizontal The question of seismic hazard in the Chico-orovlle` esentially becomes one of estimatingarea the degree with distance froth the 1975 Cleveland Hill grof attenuation Lineament for an estimated maximum Swain Ravine Richter. Magnitucle of 65 Most techniques for estimating rb�,k accelerations as a f of distance ,from a function .fault plane or earthquake e y .;. and methodologies similar to those develop.,� center util.wze data by Schhabel and Seed iu• '{7]' 172' ur iar 4) a •.1 a ] 4r. s • i 4LIFORNIA ' �. � Y I!„��•�r.acr N$YADA 1 7 • �ry f -31 ✓ 4 nfN ! 11 ], ! • r 1] �Aa I • �• 1ef 1 f,f 1 Ifs •n•a�Y•ee . WaW.tai Y a f) `�•'SJ.•" n a� ay a� • i� • 7ar�.ra,yM. � � Y h �.i e• f_ i. lt' Cll ! �/hh7 ! ale t !1 7T'' MOT aCtT a !. Yn.r a Its• Ur „ IZr 121 k►itlA,E l ►CfLtglAAlt f30iC13A�1 MAP 01� CNE 0[tlMIILE !A►jMOUO[, fYiYt�l� 1l/Sy 2At!0 t il2y.A 1{t 15. (1973). Acceleration data obtained by the California Division of Mines and Geology (1975) is shown in Figures 8A and 8B. Figure 8B shows that the rock accelerations in the • Oroville'-Chico area are less than those inferred from the regional models of Schnabel and Seed (1972) Figure 9 shows that the Condon Parcel is located in the N8 corner of Sec. 33, T18N, R4E. The parcel has an average elevation. of approximately 170 feet above mean sea level. The property is underlain by flat lying, weakly cemented sand, silt and gravel_ Tiie matrix material is silty clay and has a reddish brown color. Beds within the unit strike northwest and din gently (approximately 4.0 degrees) to the southwest:. Most of the clasts are composed of locally derived metamorphici intrusive and volcanic clasts. The Property is M miles from the focus of the 1975 Oroville Earthquake and 5,0 miles West of the Swain Ravine Lineament which is a historically act.tve fault (1975 Oroville Earthquake) Stereo air photo and infrare6 variscan analysis suggest the presence of two lineaments nearer the property. The Prairie Creek Linea- ment is app:-oximately 0.58 mileseast of the parcel and an un- confirmed lineament (dotted on figure 9) is located approximately 0:32 miles southeast of the property. A field check on August 14, 1985 did not confirm the presence of this lineament. Neither of the, two lineaments are historically active. Assuminga westward dip 'p of 62 degrees for the historically active Cleveland -Hill -Swain Ravine Vault, the nearest earthquake focus on the fault plane would be approximately 4:4 Miles: .. • Is..... K'1. QUO ia. aMs x� R i IO 2a i K Statum LI A 'm"% 4 PeoCMA mowmt s e,ti,.q...r km, �wspri Lim r ��t e�fiewrld 4; C. is i Figur` 8g I I � ,.- a :+ jj r 1 Imo'' �Jf it r " ,,+" '� ••-�. t Flgure 4, Location Of The Condon Parcel %7- 39 ass A S.Suming a maximiim OrOville-type Oart7hquake of 6. 9 ncc*ording I -,o curves developed by Schnabel and Seed (1972) Figure 10, 1:Ock accelerations at the property would be approximat(..+ly 0.5l g, If the distance from the property to the 1975 OrOville Focus is 6.5 miles, an identical focus having a magnitude of 6.5 would, According to Figure 10, produce a rock acceleration c` 0.45 g's. 13stimated maximum rock aczolerations for the PrOparty range from 0.45 to 0.51 9's, depending upon the exact l0cataon of a future earthquake on the plane of the Swain Ravine Fault-,. The terrain at the property is quite, gentle so landslides or rockfalls should not be a serious problem. The terrace ar-'ivuls are thin, slightly cemented and, underlain, by solid bedrocks so liquefaction should not be a problem. Because the gravels are loosely comonLedi some differential subsidence along cracks is possible. Estimations of ground motions from earthquakes is an inexact science. The vari6us physical processes that take -place during an earthquake are not well understood and statistical distributions fo.- many empirical relations used to estimate ground motions are not adequately defined, !110 compensate for the abovej upper --boundary values for pr 4: ground acceleration at a selected site are often used because of the uric orj.,a'nties in regard ogard to regional seismic atteftuati= and local ground response to a selected earthquake intensity; It is believed that some empirical curves underestimate ground accelerations t,,hen the distance to the epicenter is less .8s than 20 kin. POr example, Figure 10 shows a ground accoleration, 02 0.70 g's for a Richter Magal;ttude of qll. �' 4.7 7 Hhic:h is we] l �ilaovr the curves Of Scx8=label and Seed (1.973) Clays (1980) suggestP, that such join's are exceptions or outl ie.rs or that the curvc'as dcv(xl()ped by Schnabel and. Seed are too low at distances cl:c),e to the f,r�ttt A plot of all the acceleration versus distance da La from whit) the 0.70 g value Was selected suggests that the 0.70 g value is indeed an outlier. Tt should be xemembered howevcir, that ground accelerations considerably higher than 0.51. g's ax'e possible at the property due to the fact that the prediction of future ground motions is not an exact science. The estimate of 0.51 9I merely represents a reasonable estimate based upon current in- formation and the stage- of the art .for the science c;;C seismology. It should also be remembered that this study assumes earth- quake activity only on the Swain Ravine- Cleveland r til Fault and that ground -Motions at the property Would be considerably highor than. the 0..51 g's if the Prc*xir:i.e Greek T.,..;ieaj*,ent becat��e aei�ive. 20. 0.9 0:8 Qroville, Calif. 0.7 earthquake (M1-4,7) Stone Canyon, Calif. 0.6 6• earthquake (M, 4.7) LU W o.5 0. s/ -Probable upper bound a 0.4 0 M=7.6 0 03 � r r a 5,6 0.2 M /5 2i o �a 3.2 6.4 9.6 lug 32 m /r -S 2.0 �,o �,� 1G 64 96 160 DISTANCE FROM CAUSATIVE FAULT, N KILOM�p S dao, FIGURE IQ - f Range of horizontal peak acceleration as a function of dist,3nce and ina finitude for rock sites in the Western United States (from Schnabel and Seed, 1973). REVERtNCES Longwell, Chester R.t Flint, Richard F. and Sanders, John B -t Physical Geology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969, 685 p. Harwood, David S.0 Halley, Edward J., and Doukas, Michael P,, Geologic Map of the Chico Monocline and Northeastern Part of the Sacramento Valley, California, Dept. of the Interior, U.S. fool. Sur., Misc. investigations Series Map 1-1238 (Z..:62, 500), 1181. Burnett, John L., Short Contributions to California Geology, Fractuve Traces in the Tuscan Formation, Northern California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geol., Special Report 82, 1963 Guyton, J.W., and Scheel, A.'., Earthquake Hazard in Northo�ist California, Regional Programs Z%ionograph No .1, California State University] Chico. Jennings, Charles W. Fault Map of California,, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geological Data map., No. 1, 1575., Watkins, Rij Baum, S.L., and Russell, J.S., Paleogrography of Late Cretaceous Clastic Shelf Deposits, Northeastern Sacramento Valley California, 1985, unpublished in reviowi California Department of Water Resources, The August 1, 1.975 Oroville Earthquake Investigations, Bull 203-7.8, 669 p., Feb., 1.979: Schnabelt P.B. r.ad Seed,H.B., Acceleration in Rock for Earthquakes in the Western United States, Bull of the Seismological Soc. of Amer,, Vol. 63, No 2, p. 501-516, 1973. Sherburne, R.W. and Hauge, C.J4, tds, California Div. of Minos & Geology, Oroville, California Earthquake I August: 1975, Special Report 124, 151 p, 1975. Real., C.R. Topozadaj T.R. and Parke D.L., Earthquake Catalog of California, January 1, 1900-Dece-Mber 31, 1974, Calif, Div. of Mines and Geology j Special Publication 52, 1978, Greensfelder, R.W,, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California, Calif, Div. of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23, Revised 1974: Hays, Wi 14. j Procodures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motionst Ui S. Geol. Sur. Prof. Paper 1114i 77 Pj 1980, sulfa Co. Plannino, Comm. JANr y e%royille, California LAND OF NATURAL W VA1111 AND REAUTY DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS WILLIAM (Bili) GHE FF, Director 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE-OROVILL, , CALIFORNIA 95M Telephorw (916) 554.d681 RONALD D.McELROY Deputy Director January 8, 1986 Bob Condon Re: Tentative Parcel Map p.0. Box 180 AP;# 27-22-124, 125 West Yellowstone, MT. 59758 Dear Mr. Condon: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Board of Supervisors held January 7, 1986, the Beard denied your appeal of the Advisory Agency's denial of your Tentative. Parcel Map APT 27-22-124, '125. If you should have ;any questions regarding thi's matter, please contact thi's office, Very truly yours William Cheff Director of Public Works q�n Men onsa Assistant Director JM%Jh cc lion Craves; P O. Dox 986, Oroville, CA 95565 '.P-1 anning Environmental Health TO. Inter-Deparft "i" ' t'd �i m tffieorandum Po Advisory Agency FROM: Planning Director SUBJECTI DATE' Report on Tentative Parcel -Map of Bob Condon AP#27-22-124 and 125 November 15, 1985 This is a proposal to divide 20 acres into 4 parcels - 5 parcels each. The present zoning is A-5 (Agricultural Residential). The Land Use Plan Map of the Butte County General Plan designates this area as Agricultural - Residential. There are no specific or community plans for the area. The Agricultural Residential General Plat designation requires conformity with five conditional criteria as set forth in the Lard Use Element of the General Plan. The subject property is at the end of a 1 mile long privately maintained road. The property is Iodated approximately 8 miles from 8oncut 5 miles from Palermo and 10+ miles from major commercial services and high schools in Oroville. The closest full time manned fire station is Palermo, approximately 6 miles to the North. Several Certificates of compliance have been issued for 20 and 30 acre parcels (consisting of 2 assessors parcels each) on properties located on both sides of Melody Lane, and 10 acre parcels along Palermo HOftcut.Highway. As such, the proposed development represents a cluster of 5 acre parcels (4) along with 8 acre (4) and 10 acre (8) parcels it an area consisting predominaAtly 20 to 40 acre parcels_ approximately 1 mile from a publicly maintained road. A review of the history of other small parcels in the vicinity shows - 1. Assessors Parcel Number 21-22-143 to 145, Pm 78-7; Applicant: Harry 8altle; Advisory Agency approved June 41 1919; recorded September 5, 1,979; O.R. Ropett Surveyor: 2. Assessors Parcel Number 27-22-146 to 145?, PM 19-36; Applicant,: Guy Jones; Advisory Agency approved May 5, 1980; recorded October 1170 1980; Ron Graves & Associates, R, Barnhart, Surveyoto 3. Assessors Parcel Number 27-23-61,6211 71 PM 3; Applicant: William Lockwood,, Advisory Agency approved November 1:9r 1975; Ron GrAV68 & Associates, R;. Barnhart, Surveyor. Advisory Agency Page Two November 15, 1985 4,• Assessors parcel Number 2 Elmer Roderick; Planning Commission �deniedPM �,?uly 12 Board . of Supervisors august �APPlicants Lngineering, William GeddioseSurveyor,120 acre 1973; -, 1.973; Kendall created in 1971; owner built a home on e ;parcel desired to deed a 5 acre property and son-in-law to build a home upon. his daughter and The A-5 zoning in this area was adopted in 1967, a ro 12 years before the preser._ General Plan Lip ximately adopted for this area, policiOS were An analysis of the sato designation criteria and conditional criteria cf the land use'Or this area, indicates that the A_5 zone is not appropriate but rather a similar zOPe with 10 acre element minimumparcel sizes. Other General Plan policies which support tentative map fo;r, four denim, of the Parc: of five area, each are 1, Page 30 of 4-,,, w 3: 4. 5. e Land Use Element for orderly development s Promote the full for of sites served by existing public facilities: in and around existingcommtan tieEncourage development public facilities. Page 49 Of the Land Use criteria E1emc.nt gran The site designation conditional zansn and develo meat criteria, and zoning factors for Agricult, Residential>do not support the creation of parcels of less than 20 acres in size in the protect vicinity. Ten acre . parcels could be supported based on the existing parcel sizes and area history. Page 57 of the Land Use Element -= finding for either Required consistency based solely on a mapvision (Into 4daaare range g y not be for Agricultural Residenl;ial), but rather upon the object, policies, general land uses specified in the entire General Plan, and programs Circulation dement -- Policy 4.1,5 on Page'76.. county will ensure that all road Thesystems, including roads; connect various property private development, slated for potential both to each other and to a Ceatin publicly=maintained' road system. Eighteen parcels now depend on Melody Lane for accesse g two the cul�de-sac. parcels would yield 1.9 parcels on A second access route is needed for over 20 lots per the Subdivision Ordinance. Open Space Element -- page 14.3: y the oxeation of residential The Count should permit Of vacant sites of siir►ilar character stacsargeynumbers need can be demonstrated, h a Advisory Agency Page Three November 15, 1985 It is recommended that the project be approved for two parcels of ten acres, finding that a revised map would substantially conform to the policies of -the Butte County General Plan. If the applicant wishes to retain the four parcel applicatJ.on denial of the tentative map clue to conflicts with the above noted General Plan policies is recommended. SAS:jmc cc': Ron 'Graves 1266 Butte Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 AM>PHND f X h CONN P' Op 1111'M'TI: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLTST FORM (to be -complete y Zea Agency) 1409 It 85-05-15-04 i, 13ACKGROUND AP tt 27-22-124, 125 1. Name of proponent Bob Condon 2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicsab�l,e) P. 0. Box 1310 Ron _GraYQ5_, _Aasw j. y West Yellowstone, Montana 59758 12_ 66ip[�Veup _� wr Oovil1e, Chi. � S. Project description ._ Tentative= Parcel Map IT. JUNDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YES 1`MAyl3i? NQ a. hoes the project have the potential to degrade the duality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self. sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. noes the proieet have the potential to achieve short-term benerits to the detriment of long-term, environmental goals? A short-term impact on the environment is one w5clh occurs its a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts will endure into the future.) c. Moes the project have imparts Which are 10 vidu- ally, limited, but Cumulatively considerak e? (A project may impact on two or more separates resources where the, impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacQ on the environment is sigpificant,l d. noes the project have environmental offec s whish will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or Indirectly? Y 111. 11Is'I'I:RTIIINA IGl, (To he vamplvtod by the Lead Agenc:yl On they basis of this initial evaluation; )K I iii: find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect an the environment, aid a NI:GATIVII IIECLARA`I'lON will be prepared. T/IVIP find that although the proposed project could have a signiVY can't effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described an. the attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I/wv find the proposed project MAY have a silnificnnt effect on the environment, and an PNVTRONM NTAL IMPACT RI.1'ORT is required, I3A'll. _ June 17,1955 y CTUNIT OP HUT` HI PLANNING DEPARTMENT . avid.�rR: i on inti , Asso,iate Planrior J�.� Reviewed by' R..,�` � .W„, IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP TS 7C xp anat;ions o a 1 ,yes"" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheet(s)) YES MAYBE NO 1. EARTH. tiYll the propoalresult in significant; a, unstable earth conditions or in changes iii geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacemenSs, compaction or overcovering of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering or modification of r:iy unique geologic or physical features? e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off-site? -f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beads sands, or changes in siltation, depositi,°)n or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or, any hay, inlet or lake? g. Loss of prime :agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes landslides, mud- Slides, ground failure or similar hazards? 21 AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial i Air emissions or deterioration of ambi.en:t air quality? b, The creation of objectionable odors, c-mmke or fumes? c: Alteration of air movement, moisture, ,{r temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? 3. WATER. Will the proposal, result in substantial a, Changes in current -s, or the course or direction of water movements in eith(,5r marine or fresh waters? b, Changes in absorption rates, drainago patterns, or the rate and amount of surface rur.Off? c. Need for off-site surface drainage i.,�prove- ments, including vegetation removal ch.annel- ization or culvert installation'? d. Alterations to the course or flow of fl.00d waters 7 e, Change in the amount of surface water any water body' r, O' ge into surface waters, or ,ti a, j �.schar , alteration of surface water quality, i �luding ,. but not. limited to temperature, diss0l.red oxygen or turbidity? g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? h, Change in the quantity of ground either through direct additions or Wit;t' drawals, or through interception„ t an aquifer by cuts or e:tcavations7 i peducti is in the amount of Water r. evherwi.s,e available for public stater suppli-0 Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as floods ngl V C_ xG x X C. tea_ YES MAYBE NO 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: mange in the diversity of species, 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 of plants? Introduction c. of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish. ment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? -- C,. 5,. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Gaange in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell fish,, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Introduction c, of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d, ,Deterioration to 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 noise `- levels? 7i LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce signi zcant light and glare? g. LAND USE. Will the :proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present, or planned land use of aid area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES; Will the proposal result in u_stantial a. 1..crease in the rate at use of any natural resources? b. Depletion Of any non=renewable natural resources? 1.0 RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve; a, Ars • o explosion or the release of hazard- ous substances (including, but not limited to, y pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b, Possible interference with an emergency response plan or PInergency evacuation plan? Ili POPULATION, Will the proposal alter the location, istriion, u density, or growth rate of the human population? 12. HOUSING. Will. the proposal affect existing housing, or ;create a demand for additional housing? tea_ YES MAYBE TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal NO result 1n; Generation of substantial additional vehicle � C� a, movement? a parking facilities, or existing p x b. Effects on demand for new parking? • transportation existing p .._.- x c, Substantial. impact on d, systems? resent patterns d. Significant alterations to P people and/or p P of �( circulation or movement of Stolm goods? Alterations to waterbtirne, rail or air traffic? X_ e, f. increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, )e. C, bicyclists or pedestrians? i4. PUBLIC SERVICES, Wi11 the proposa.l have an effect need for new or altered upon, or result in a governmental. services-, G a;, Fire protection, b, Police 'protection? c, Schools? recreational facilieu�ing d. Parks or other of public facilities, incl X6:1 e. Naintenance ----- c. roads? -XC f. other govv'xnmental servicesi 15, ENERGY, , Will the proposal result in; a; Use of substantial amounts of fUe .o merruon y? b. Substantial. increase Irequireathe development sources of energy, - of new sources of energy _ sal result in a need for 16, UTILITrIS. 19111 the prop riew systems, or substant al alterations to the following. Power -- or natural gas? a, b. Communications systems? J o. Water availability; d, Sewer or septic tank'? e, Stolm 'water drainage? ~— - and disposal? - solid waste lt in' l7 . I�UMAN I�P:AL"I"H' o fWill the any heal tholla�a�'dro�'upotential a. reat,on excludint mental. health) ? health hazard ( y potential health b, IExposure of peopi,e to p hazaxds'? lg AESTHE'rIGS+ Uill the p�ropostl result in the o stxu n of any scenic: vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of i an aesthetically o f fenr�ive site open to public view? - -X- M a, YES MAY NO 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the gvality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES, a.Wil-17 proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physeal" or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique X ethnic cultural values? d.' Will the proposal restrict exiszing religious -- or sacred uses within the potential impact area? V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVAJ,UATION AP27-22-124, 125 See attac;tinent ti� AP The causu normal di%rwptY"Y0l0PmeQt Of three additional home5,tus will ,on, displacement, and overcovepIn, as"Nated with construction. Due to thv 5 uzually pr7P01od, the amount of coil acre Parcel zizvt; disturbancez should o minimal, Thqqrj di"PtiOns will result in a change b in absorption ratelf drai PatQrOz, and surface water rumu+f and will be limited to he nalyA devoloPment site Only- A natwral On-Qite into which the properdrad"ragi.0 swale/intOrmittent crPol s. 19: While the erea in gronng land, located in grazziands which oro usable a - surrounding development and down parcetinq t. 10 to 24:3 acro darcel sizes have reduced the capability of the -in r grAzing unit. -Id to e�uppf")rt lh: rill Of "tte QOUMtY im within a Moderate JOM0 V111- The Project site porthquOke IntInzity +or location a+ '" located in an area 0+ hm1h Probability the fault that 'lineament% "Ociattd with the roothil! uPported Shoar Zane and survey should be performed " 197f OrOY110 EarthqualQ. A geological in order to determine if lineament, or +8ulyo aro located can -sits, and 1+ 00 to develop-appropriat(:' Mitigut&m meanur*q, 2b: ln""d dust Will be goneratQd traffic use. on "ludy Qanu +ram increased 391h; caul l w> fral^ domestic water will unk,ritiwn taP Pqui+Pry of amount of water dra DOP"ding On the qmourL of water Wn from thy Wellul available and the quan"Y Of grOundWaters m,y oaaur� some chango in rate of +joy and M Oeuse Of zeui thi5 Anuid Mot be a lif gnIinent Problem. tho $ acre parcel 4d c,,m. 1tr 04 lit InVrvowed rural rQSidvmtjal dening in this OutlY09-aroa. - Howavor, the Vntatiyu pan I arO the smallest ParCOI, in 1ho Oren "o, thu Pr=sld parcol" b"come with the curron+ A-5 zoning. If a trpnd cut map in cohnintshi- will to I acre parcel, bqcomos established, Gensitio, in the orva, muru than douhln. iways pQ Thio pt ojQct will rent, C',Intiru lertuth of Melody Lano and IIt in along 'mho intorbuction of Thin inerlaned traffic will rOlormo-Hanout HiqhwaV� the Snoreaso load to an "n turning m=om: at the interject,uh and an tr&&I hs%vrA,, IncreaYelin ZiAmi-H,ca-Mt, this projuc t Will �QPronont an incromental '""M in demand for public 01r,,Q in 0 rural area, 1 (J (:� tN The prapCII-ty will drain StO a trlhutary + CramP which currently axperiencea WndatQi WK weather, Flanding along Wyonduttp Cro,Prublmmu d"ring Pgriadg of p Q ,, to backup from thm Oman Rayine/North HOntut Creek Ronfluenco, Ou. to the size Of the parcels, any inarname In StOrM water thin Project should not he QqQ+Qnt. drainage from DR14,. Ikt Appndq V - Page r' As.,rrA-s'arcel "" sos r Applicantt Bob Condon 27-2;,j-1.14 L_oq 4 parcel MaP t Type 20 ,arras,+our POV Sriu+ Dvatr-iPtiOnt t E-1 1, Y ac,xOS ea -h. he north ZidQ O'f melody uaneq app , In Z, L_.Elr on * - th - On t mle r:zit o+ ts unit. t 1.1 -mo area, atro-", jlr� r"a t,v I - 4 Irvlapman 4 PrOPrJsL1r1 vr+ac:j-n9- Min"' mal O,f 1(t"Pervit it Rrjad( a) yj,:N jvjunody AmMAnt � 0,4�. V--4(bl s and Near Paltwmo-,HonC:"t vJighwil'yo in , tra d S�Y. CIO 7. %Aal 'AnI Is .thod (j+ SCPW) " Els snt�krc:e Of Wet 0- SL%pplyt opQrt.y M,t�,f 04 �,Ovler L,ines: To Pr nd td o n FA 9. fvrt,,h--r 1,1MI d'-Vi5ionti a �L 1, Potential fo unrjQr, W,".Uting --on-ing A `L pryt�tor C Choram and valIVY 1-1 10% .1 146 tcs ott a ravat I cana \r 5tin", P XV U M 7,8 -iA4-',Y- 'EL,awI I r,- �jlcvj Vc, rk o r Land'70ni- #moo aarthqv;MC, DO', t 70t tj t u lit ia Cl 10 P-0 t r e m ra) Apppj1di5t r, (a) 4. Hydrol ogy a- Surface Water". A tributary of Wyandotte Cr-OO: traverri,t,f� thw Westerly portion of this property. b. Urourld Wat-1-; Unknown C. Drainage Characterizticst Property drainz tr) tj,ILj toe vi �-k tributary Of (4vandOtte Creek, thence d. Annual Rain-r-all '(normal) - Z2 to 24 inches-p(,j- year 0- Limiting Factor-s,. Setback.�5 +rofn drainer gr_� v I / SI a Ur I i a Mua 1 i t Y: Good Wsty 6. (%tckjj-Ly. Good 7. 00tld eXcept during perisac o+ ng. 10 ,Ct der cl cn.' ummaut--c- 8. Vegatotiont Or,�tzt4lands 9- Wilds. +e Habi4--tits Small birds and anima1c, ajqjmr)n to 11 Y grazzI andltru a: a Arahe.QOIOgical and Hitatorical Resburaet5 in h, Low von-aitiv,.Lty area 1.1 BUttO COUnty Ooneral Pljn rjet r."p-sidentia.1 jig, tion . A-5 'to: OPe-M land 14. on-s., Lxnd Utlr�v,- OPO.VI larid, traziriq us0-:3, '.""'nd ma�Atered sinq!Cd. Ern Zona ng% A-!5 p5 at rurcal C,IL - riArl dr�--4�"qnati or'�Z-' AqriC:Ul'Lu-,-AI S'UAdt--m'v--el '��md lrz�zirjg and Opbp I_and b. GQnr-:-r,--klly to 40� pLA-r%ejs- rour P,Art-.Ol�i tIf 7#6 Acres C',-iah Llre ( I)+ thc-A 5',fib J ect r. r optx ' m 114 ZA i 0 N I. i r s t", Sitc, -.vid 6 Urban(-)r()Lj, Or ov 17, unk-'e.. .0 I�k -b,- -it -.a - 1-9Fire Protection sorvice. Co!jnty (8tat"O) Fxr'r-- 5" an t i tj _Itr4ly 4, (nIj �-:1'2 Fir(Z, txmvt-�r and in Union Schs.ml L)iutrr"-.t arld Orovilllu I-Ichoul OA. 5tjy'i(* _t. Appehdix V (b)