Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout028-170-0950 �r 1 r , 4 � r J } ,t ll ll + a %„ A 111 t'�,'� � 1y,�(`� ���►�` �1� � WM � �\ l i1 It IN 0 APPVNDIX P "ERMINATION T-10 secretary for �Rbsb'urc!os E Ninth `Stlrtfiet:, Room 1,311 'SAOWZ�Oa tbl CA 95814 F 'County tle.rkwi )l Coty of blit-te JUN 111994 (:, , I , tenter trovIiIID" CA .198,065 7 County Conter brive brbvillt 1) to M;68 -Sutjt,CTPiling of Not1c.-c of Deter-min,40-Con In tomplfasti-ii- Aej*li 211-08 or '21152 of th-d Publ' 41 `,jv pm Tit T n Ve Parttl-!!*�p AP 2,8-17-95 M. Piierte ,and V,, Cotttj'jjo tfa—tt Zlearinghoutt Number (If subtnitted to StateiCj*a-rjjj&oUp,6y Canta,et Persoti Tellephon-0 Nomb 34- 2A6 ProjP-tt Loratfon ion'the southwest torner ;of S totoy 'OaZ �;p AnA iViiding +0 ,acres intb,,four parcels, 7.;'8"8 aures;; 11.410 attesj 10.77 avret and 1'0.0 acrc84 agar ,3s -,,Lo zovise viat vie BUtte L0,0,14t. ACLVISOrY Agency ---- _y iad-44ag id.pt-erminations regarding Agency) o the f6l, ui, garding the above-described JM Tho projject in -,v i 3. 1 have a significant teffect ,on tbo environment. wiL not A. dnvironmental Impact ,Report was prepared for this fr'ofect pursuant to the provisions of CEQA,, and was ,certified as required by Section J:S!0&5,(g) , 14 California Administrative tode. A Negative Declaration was ;prepared for this proiect pursuant to the provisions t'of Cr;QA.. A :copy f tivo 146gative Peclaration may The :examined at t . lie Planning Department, 7 County Canter Drive,, 0roville, CA 959,65. Wotitt of txompt4on was filed indicating this project as vxempt .,from onvi-ronmontal roview. A statement of ;Overriding CotsJderatioff1— was not,, adopted for this ,project. M. %vas, AN $1itigation mca5z r.,es adopted by the Lead Agency to reduce *he impacts of the approved p7to7-csct a7e . 'See 'attachment x 4W t11 �q—lvtr SIgn, tUC 6344 Stcphen A. Strooter June 6 '1,984 senior Planner WE H •`"„'l"BAi�rj�ii$�iiCt-a'R':-,vkT.�.r�. ..� v Fr. I 'b � s �r�; d � i �cc►at t rn at1h1 ►$AA t' and Cot-l3t7C'Uctien ptti.ce"s to zitl . ,�rna a n ib�t ►nr c�rrra ar x� xan ° o r� t11 I � i c. SAT k � D1 MR.ATION REGARDING LVTA'1 IMPACT ' WOT-I'M IS,, i SEM. ' 'MP -N that the}pYo�ect ��5�'��°iiaed bttow has been rtvie*td pUrSU ant to the provisions of the �,* torni-at'Enviromeentsl zality .Aare lob' 1970 (publ-ic Resources Codd 1)100, et. seq.) and a 'dttieftifttlaA has been *ad* that it will not have m sfgnifictip;t effect upou the etivi"nsent yy i■ YY�/yq{y'` yW9 #g).`y0y2* yyZgt'h�l 4 r4�. ftntativOk paftcel. "Map AVi .ung O :mores intra,, four pab. tvCJis,j, IA4 "urbsy x'l;.a ures'o i'D y7 acnes and 0.49 ,#cants.. oLOCATION �b phi SCTI. n the viuthwest tbrotr sof Stotoy soaks Loop *hA Stooty Ooks', Soullev—Ardi Swedes Flat tr;ea.i XAM 'AND AMUSS OF ,P.IWECT APPLICAM.. M. vierr:e and F.esttllt Cobert ' luskey 11 : 21 'FPF Starr Route, ; 5 ► 'l �Ida<le Orov i e � A, :�S96.5 10rovill e,, ;CA '90M 1VIMAT100k I ASMIEs See atkathment A r-610 bf, Che initial $tUdy tbIgA AiAg tht e3viaonsental *ff t'! of thk# project is .on file at, 7 County Imatt.�C` Dr3:v�, �9rovix�e.. his .s,t0y !wast -Act,�>'t p- p ed. :ed as present td,., with changes.. 'Specifi-o modificatious and wappor- ting reasons are tatt .shed.. ' ► A ptd►b1IC hearing on this -Negative Decla'rat on was h> li(by' the ciecisivn making +body, floar'ing tody. Butte County Advisory Agency, 014to, of Determination ;?uBo 1,984 )ete.rminaation 40n the 'Ib:asAs of the initial study of environmental i*pact, the . nfoarmation presented at hearing;s,, comments reCejvexI on the pie, ,os.gi a.nd our own ,knowledge and independent researt0" I. Wo finch the propos.od project COULD NOT have a si,gnlficant effect or the envirenment a.nd a NiEGA.TIVE DECILARIV �s , hereby adopted. -, We find that the project �COULD I%Vlo ,asignificant .eff,oct ,on 'thfi environment but will not ari xhis .case because of artt,gclied mitigation ;Measures dest�rtbecl in .tem 5 above which r. by this ry ,erence made conditions of fro j ect approval. A conditional NEGATIV9 !DECLARATION is herOby xdop:ted gnature Al Saracen i y ba iarman :Butte County Bos;rd of 'Supe,xvisor s TRI -6 JUN 14 1984 at.e R i I S 1 '') i APPENDIX m NOTICIA i'0V.;DETJFRMTNATMcl t To. SC-Crleta-rY for Rcs,o,?ur . t e,.-, F 0 1416 Ninth StreOv; Room 1311 4t "P 1, t. Sacramento -SCA 95414 County (Cleek, cmunty, of 'fat t -Le UEMOR M 8 ou! Oroville, (CA951565 FROM 7 PLannin ' g D eporftent *A CouRty Centel, Drive FIT: i I lold iorovill4 CA 9Si9b-:-) IIIJEM* Filing ioF Votlicte of Delt-erminatIbIl in complIxacib lWith" Section 21110Y� ior 2115,2-� ,off the Publlc A4.6inct-k 'AIP,u-17-9S I. A F', St 'lC.Iearimghnl!Se Ma Or (,Xf oubmiuted to S.tgte ;.Cje'atrlinl r�pxtact Pers -on John Mendon,'s;a,_.Pubjjc Works, 19L"W —13, -426b Prbj,ect LacationOn the S0UtbV eSi (C-orner o'bey0 W' '",Gla `. MLL --a d,0 'Swedps Pro)i.,ct DescriptloTv: DivId g 410 a, re" xln C S to tCreate ,our parcells lat 10 acire.'s it*C-jj. WI41L iLlIC buxe_,LauntZi3oard �o-f supervisors ,cLr OnCY) g ka,s made the folLowinilete'rmi-vnations proj�ecv, p, ;arding the abbov,e-,Jez,c,;,r!bed L The Project '0 W'jrjj ,have a s, ig niftcant effect ;on the env� ronment. "WM not An Enrino.nmental Impact, Report va,s prepared foir t,4% is prbj�ect pursuvnt to the provisions ZE CFNA4 and was certifted as re,quired .by IS."Olction ISOSS(g), 14 CalifornL% AdWinkstratime Code. A Negatime De.Cj2r)"tj-'n kWfALs prepared foie this priojiert provitlons of- CEMA, A tc.opy of the pursuant to the Vegat),W.e DO.cjarat�,'on may be examined at the plaming DopavtmenT, 7 County Cen.ter Drive„I 10Mvillie,o CA 959AS, 3, A No t1 10 . f �.t. xO,m ptiop ,was f Uc,d indicating this project, 0 _111pt fro'M 0 nVIroximental r.e.vileW,. 4. S,eAtement of xOverriidiyig ICOASIderatjon' va..s not,, odoyted for this proj,ect.. adopted by -the Levi Agemy to rp&,ge vh,e lanpac:zs oX, the '9p prov,,e.d .proj.eclt ..re., Sete attachdd 144,Sve,26— Stephoo Ai iStretter Sq lif 1) e piior 4 APPENDIX t 1z,' it tY u thtt tht VtO ttt At%Vr1b*d b*10* hales b*41 htal 'quality Ait Of '1910 (pa blit Rev6urictsCoAt 211100et. t attommillm atb ha, bb'04 ttfiadt that it witt nbtt laamrt a ;t ,`&Jt � Wt efftct upon tthye' tlkv rrnnmhtht. -01 v� KWTIO 10�e IpAftel Map alylalm-; 40 atria tb id :'Att LZ pikyyp�•etyyy�a��115.��yya py�yRw,1��byWgLa trtt tach, 4 Lor%CT- O tht :southvest t,omer ao!t 'St�bhty ftks L.abp, 44iA ;Stbtaty jaak*C, r,r, %*gltvtrd� Swe&-t„ Pleat a�rift. l�z ME ARDADDRESS Op '.p�tij T APPUtLART- T�Ix hra It puree A :tpTant s fCoa?ttlt o gohtrt mut y „ 0 ` 1 to 0�:61S CA 19M ,Ste *tt*dqed r A oop-y`. qtr the 14AWS1 study M[`tsrLtr�din the of that peo jest is ,obi �i1e ,at 7 ; ouritl' C011ter oriv*,, alrovalm! 'I"h6,s s tuay tea Atelt Iva.th oh&ftel. Speati., mc�r� Hca t o d Amppbtrt'ibe trtasbns ,art Att,t*ch d, 7. A ubtiit Iearinrg �n thxts Ne��ithv� betlartti,01Vitt held by the :. io ;rnakitiag body. ' t1 ►7 ta>ti a ?CO YIt Soird�i 'of SS'Cl�,1�'�"'i%i5Ubr'pa of natti;an September ;b. 103 On tthei is of the inivial study of .11 At p say ted at . ears a� , rctltrbment's rectetia�ot a�n th6 prx�p said Baur ooh k iovied;g�e a�t1 ��►d�pencla�at r�xcarch aad the prroposod project COLT1,D Noir have a s i#n if itw tl ;, +eo`t +vn thO eaa',v, aroMOTM. and a NtCATr'VE DP34CLARATT.O.ft Js he rtby 440 d. We fa.tnd that t, he p o.jtct CONED have a signifi cant act ala, 'the !a , ronme�n!t but wia E not in this ,cast bacau, me �€ atta shed Mt�g&tibn measures described ;it xtam 5 4bovai ith Aa tt* by this rafttence rade ,ccnditionns of project -Appte'oVA1. ra 4 on.ditional NEGATIVE DMLA'RATMONI is hartby td.pt to re Jan, �Ilolan, :Chair Hiatt t 'County Board •of Supervisors SCO ■! s "eft 0Nuskey i +ti rt 1 ettgi tw - oia behalf of 41,chatlMerce'Afid Er is Cftt*110aPPea1 'the Advisory Agenolt deltial of a voted �vyyt total impact has been previouslytcertified�btitho de-M-F-Mofi Suo r r P� A#� 98-11-95* dividing 40 acres ibto four parcels of M8 actesi 11.40 ao er 10,11 ACM and 10.09 act6s, proporty locatad oa the soutl+*st co o of Stoney M4 two and Stoney,,Oaks 8oulevayA, Swedit Flat aroa6 (1558): 1 SWIMISOW +ALAN ABSENT AT THIS TIME. MOTION t I WILL NOTE 114AT THERE IS A PRET OUSLY CERT#FM MITICAU6 N-EOAI><V1r DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; F10 -THAT THE AREA S x0 FOA YNIS TYPE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT. THE AREA RAO ADEQUATE f1 PACIL T M ROAD CAPACITY AND, IS Nff -TOO FAN MM MKACTAIL S1+000 AND SCHOOLS FOR 119E TYPE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND IS A MATTER CHOM INDIVIDUALS MAKE WHEN THEY DECIDE WHEW THEY Wmt TO .L It. THIS PAWECT IS NOT A SIXDIVISION IN WHICH MD RE "AN 20 PARCC% ARE BEING COATED ON A CUL—DE-SAC, PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA.. ARE WORKING TOWARD THE CREATION OF A DISTRICT 'Iii MOVE THE COUNTY ROADD, THEME HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIATING DATA FROM THE DEPAOMEN 'OF AND GAME 110AT THESE POOR PARCELS WILL HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ENVIMNMENYAL IMPACT ON, DEER HERDS: I FIND 'THAT THE PROJECT CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLAID AND UPI9%0 THE APPEAL OF .T0C ADVISORY . AGENCY'S DENIAL OF A AEV M TENTATIVE PARCEL. MAP P MIMAEL PIERCE:, AN I7 FRANCIS COSTELLO_�P 8.17µ95, DIVIDING 40 ACRES "INTO -M19 PARCELS OF 7.88 ACMES, 10.09 ACRES. 11.77 ACRES AND 11.40 ACRES4 Wt'Ifl♦ IO WAKS CONDITIONS AND ENVIRON10TAL HEALTH CCNDITIO 11 AM 120N MEMO DATED JM 4 1984. VOMb Y 2 A 3 Y 4 Y 5 N �Cxry'edj�. SUPEMSOA DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIME. 0 .� l�121►i�nYai�cawl� .aw...t,�..a.L.aaa- - _ �,..�ai - J 0 0 ftt M. 011sk6Y, civil engineer` - ori '1s*hWXCof jftotwtj pjfta#a(#d 'MhOls CON'tolloo appeals the Advisory Agency's denial of a revised tentative parcel map (item or-, which a mitigated negative deolstation 4*,Z er,,vironmental impact has been previously certified by the Boaid Of AP, i8-17-95, dividing 40 parcels into four parcels of 7088 11.46 acres, 10.77 acres and 10.05 acroar property lwitt*d on the southwest corner of Stoney Oaks Wop and Stoney coke, lsoulsvtreo 904das"Mat area. ACtiAft r*%Uettodt SXT PMLZC PRARING DATZ 'Iron JuNt S f 1984p AT 1006 A*Mo V i r r Erma ` Putte Cou+4ty Advisory Agency c: p�toM=° Planning birector su6uRCYr Re 6i oxi Tentative Par.,cel of MichAel-Pi� ce and Prah�vrs Costen k. pia _ r on AP 2S-17-98 u�►E April 16, 1984. xht'lois a revised Tentative ,Parcel Map to dkv�.de �a 40, pared. into four parcels in a M-9 (Mountain "br Recr ea ion 1+ Subdiv�.sion-Residential) zona. The, previous project to create'. four 10 nacre parcels was approved on appeal by"the Boa-d, off' k r, Supervisors after Advisory Agency denial based on impatz's to.. wildlife habitat and the related requirements of the. Calitb'Jisloa Subdivision Map' Act. This revised project also will„h';We avoidable, impacts on wildlife habitat, specifically the ° Mooretow,n Deer Herd critical winter range., The Depament' of Pish acid Gape recommords thatno new'parcels less: thanr,40 acres he created. in the critical winter range, and has asked that all projects in these areas be held in aboyance untilButte County adopts a Land Use Plal", to protect the deeii. The ,> tg , ' ( y of Supervisors inAugust1983, haseformttl �ggested policies that indicate _ y „ appointed b ' the Board that development of this 41d be allowed in close ptoximi.ty to° "identified transports idorsF''; discussions have ihdlcated that this coulcl� din 1/8' to 1/2 mile depending on specific site conditiozi. �rib nearest "trUnsportation corridor" under discussion- J Swedes Pla't_lRoa,J, approximately 1 mile to the north.. The revised map yields two parcels of 10 r acres, one of 11.4 + acres and one of 7.88 + acres. A similar proposal for Joe Shr,eckengau%t (AP 28-1'f-68) 1/4 mile north); ;dor whichan EIR was required, was redesigned to yield 10 acre * parcels as ai. result of information in the BTR. That BTR wits certified, in July, 1975. The creation of a 7.88 acre parcel now would not be consistent with otixer approvals and decisions in the area, or the policies of the General Plan. Because of inconsistencies _ with the text policies of the General Plan regarding wildlife, the requirements of the California Subdivision Map Act regarding wildlife$ the tentative recommendations of the Deer Herd Study Panel and the smaller than 10 acre parcel, denial of this prgject is recoMmended. i7i�tN; lit cc'. Michael Pierce Francis Costello 111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION' This project is a tentaitive parcel map to divide a 40 -acre parcel Into four a'rcels, 'located on the Southwest corner of Stoney 0:,�ks Loopand Stoney gaks Blvd., Swedes Flat area,, S miles southeast of Oroville The site is gentle sloping foothill oak woodland on shallow (20-40 inches) well -drained sandy loam toll. Lower Rocky W Honcut Creek lies about 3/4 mile to the north. The Butte County General Plan designates this area for Agricultural Residential land uses;,,zoning is M -R, Mountain Recreation Subdivision-Residtot,iat. The sire i es in an area of high natural fire hazard, le. The Relativelytsteepsslopt inin an rea the�centerjofeto hi 9 h the pLecel`rinithehare, ds of the access road makes erosion likely. P reM lh The project site lies in an earthquake prone region; part of the general foothills earthquake region. h,c Groundwater resources may be limited. Some nearby parcels have established WAter supplies; evidence of water exists for five to ten acr& paecels in this area. 4ac n light to moderate amount of vegetation clearing will occur as. these parcels are developed. The project is in a key migratory deer winter range area, Sd; Wildlife habitat encroachment and deterioration - the"project is located in an Area of Special Biological Importance (the migratory('Moore'town deer herd winter range) which extends over mucin of the Swedes Flat area. The State Department of Fish and Gane policy indicates that parcel densities greater than l dwelling unit per 40 acres are incompatible with continued deer usage of range, County Land Use policies support the protection of winter deer range, Obviously, existing development patterns have somewhat compromised the habitat value of portions of Swedcs Flat, particularly adjacent to Hurleton-Swedes Flat ago Swedes flat roads. This makes the project vicinity especially important as one of the few areas of larger parcel sixes between the hills to the west and the higher elevation summer deer range to -the east. This is a concern which has to be resolved on an areawide basis, but each individual project has an incremental impact on this resource. The project is in a particulavly sensitive loijation. See attached letter from the Department of NO and Game. Appendik P page 8 of 9 AP 28.17-95 r DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUAT'YON (continued) 6a, 7: Local increases in noise and light can be expected for ,.residential use of this property. 8a; 14a.,b,coe,f 15a: Public/Commercial Services and Residential Density: The popect is tocatsd in &o arae& which has bean planned for Agri cultural--:Resi'dential uses, 20 to 40 acre parcals consistent with the Land Use Ei�ament;° 1 to 20 aloe' parcels are conditionals consistent. Due to the. isolated r:mote �D nautre of ths-area, is minimal public service availabi'liiy, ffir. �jolice, schools, roads, commercial services, ele;;tricity, 04 tela -f1 �h0P,� ,certain domestic water availability, and the increas�l°_ fuel cuujo,mption ,required for commuting. a,trend,_�toiaa4n, arcels smaller than 20 acres in size may be premature.f( in thf$ area "must expect a lower level of service than is typical fqr less Isolated properties nearer urban services. The project is located in an area which is remote from Orevili`e via a fairly long unimproved, unmointained road. Residents.,in this area Will require upgraded road services, pol ce and fire protection, commercial services and schools at increasing levels as the,popuaat'1on grows. The current General Plan Land Use policy for the area supports. 20 acre minimum parcel sizes as an appropriate rural residential density unless five (5) conditional criteria (relating to the above concerns) are satisfied. As with the other issueiR noted above, appropriate residential densities should be dealt`th on an areawide bafis (ideally through zoning that is consistent wil,h the General Plan). However, in absence of a consistent zone and minimum parcel Size, each individual project must be evaluated against General Plan policies case by case. 13cl Road circulation - The project would add three more parcels/ residences to a cul-de-sac street pattern (one way in and out) which provides sole legal access to 56 parcels (20 parcels is the eulationppattern must be viewed as an ateawinancon The poor fir maximum permitted, b Count Subdivision Swedes Flat Road, but at some point in,Jividual concern south to p vi dual projects have to be accountable for the incremental increase in parcels serviced by the substandard road system. At the present time there has been a 180% increase, in traffic poten- tial over County subdivision ordinance standards. All of the maps creating additional lots approved after the adoption of the cul-de- sac standards have been conditioned to provide circulation. In all cases that conditio~i has been removed on appeal to the Board of Supervisors. Thf�. project will represent an additional 10% increase over standards to;,19o%. Known contemplated projects, if approved wardswards ,v acre continues with no circulation and if the trend to- result i�r traffic tnai,s 354% of standard, atit�n provided, traffic loads, 'in Stoney Oaks BlvC could be 7'20% of that allowed by Subdivision ordi'r,�:e�ue standards. Appendix f - pane 8a of 9 AP 28-17,_gs DISCUSSION OF WIRONMENTAL EVALUATION, (co'ntinu'ed)" a , 2I The site, is located in an area ge"arally,,conaAd6red to *V , madarate sens,tttvity for archaeological ' roaaur-c�es�. ts�rr�rar ' by a qua-lifi4d arrAtt rlogist for und1scoVered S'ite,c is n!*,a�sitit�ry� �, ° U toy doxfa�rwirna if any res,oures exist and what iap'�i�irs i!irs-�it`i da.V#4,o,pasha 'Mi d be prorbabl e . as well as nece;rsa�r��+ t�+i "1��}�1ta avo,t�d destruction, of archaeological sil`tes if fovO ,d,,. ' k: 1, e 1� y ;i Appendlt P 0*40e 8b of 0 References• ;. Smithey ,TPM AP 98-17i.88 Log 082-08.24-02 Smith TPM AP 28-17-86 Log #82-+08-17-02 Schiadooh_TOM AP 28-17.-64' Log #81-09-16.01 Gold Mt. Ent, TPM AP 28-1746 Log #82-04,21-01 i sT111i WAtIfQ�NUI�-�IOIINn�+"�rkitxd� C'rlArlllw• W ASTMeW, OF Fl*, +NA CAME moo* ! _ 1701 tMAMuf MOO, W IWA WAft i0 CAVA, cA111 1�► tllq`� i r' , r`/ ��' •% +ti'123'r 146 \ p,77 t Mr»' t3 3tr+eeter'' 1 Butte�,bunty Plan iia :bepartment 7. County O±ntee�,-Its, (roville, Deg, w.,-Stret4� P !> K7G.; + rY,�7,it QJ� �C�riN4E Give has revie Cd,, the tentativeparcel aW for A.P. 47-95 irc Swedes. Flat. This project: would divide a 40 ~� ._ acre' parcel ins fc t tervowre parcels. Swedes Plat is an area. of oak nd. woodlaand' #i ral habitat, and has been. identified by the *&Ftmant as critical Wintet'range for the Woretown Deer Herd. The Department ra�*ds project, denial because ten parcels would be c created in an a` ea %Mere X40•-may:; a minimimis are necessary to' protect critical winter range. ,/Our -rc ncUvion is based on the following: lj p 31 by nt 16eW;, Y �r [bor+�Y 040 Deer Berd critical winter ranlge cairn went loa ,iia ao,,.e ..*hent tin Butte 06uhty already Od t.q-., 2. Field abserrltions',A�f deer a,rr thin great hrb�.tat sui�'>,�ulity, aaauma:-- 1. . + tisll �a,, sot kill mapsl all itdicatie ated data ,�� htn rx�•,arcrc tr thAi» a deer herd is high +lepertU�v )n the project area. If the Department can be of fur..bak a%:t:Act Gerry Menech ` Divirorrmental services Supervisoke teles �+:?e '(41'4:-,`,,55-7030. fF'' Sirlcerel�y fi `! � -p�Clensen 1 IWgional Manager t n I 1. Michael Pierce and Ticaheis Costello,, REVISED MAP AP 28-17-95 four parcels on the southwest corner of Stoney Oaks Troop and Stoney Oaks Sl,vd., Swedes Plat arca. Engineer: Robert IIuskey HEARING OPEN TO, THE PUBLIC Robert Huskey, engineer, said that previously they had an approved rap for 10:acre parcels in a checkerboard fashion. After they die the survey and,the ;arcs„ they realized that the road' they showed on the tentative map would resultin excessive cuts where the 4 parcels met in the center would rkquire a large c,jt for a cul-de-sac. It was decided to follow the natural terra and the existing roan and to use the centerline of the existing road for the,boundaryl)Jine of a parcel to the east, Which turned out to be 8 acres. Tba remaining acreage was divided, into approximately, 3-10 acre ,parcels,, fallowing contour lines and drainage Ways. When the mai, was submitted for checking, ftblic Works said that the change in geometry was, substantiA0. enough that: the project would have to be reheard., It was rather surprisift to see the planning Dept. raise the question of deer herds.: One parcel. is slightly less than 10 acres,. but this has already been gone, thtalVi already at the Board`ievel. The hoard indicated that parcels of this size would not Impact the deer, herd. There was a mitigation measure of'restrietion of the. exterior feucing of the project. It was not really felt by the engineer and Applicaut that this geometric change would impact the deer he-rds. He did not see how adding 2 acres to the barrow, parcel would make less impact, tin the deer herd. They tried to follo4 good plannin6.practi.cei;by Wing the, centerl31ne of the existing road as a property boundary and following terraixi. A well; has been put in. Septic areas hate been prowad./' It;, seem- excessive eem -excessive for: the Planning Dept. to reject it based onan olid issue t6t has already been covered, since no studies have been done and there.is no proof that- ahy, y9articular size lot has more ;impact on the deer than any adher. 'Tik.- doe;: nerd committee has not finished their work; a project, should not tie evalaatcd on a planned study. It seems excessive to reject this new map based on those ideam., The 7.8 acre piece could easily have been vidde 10 acres by moving the property, + nes around,, but it doesn't make sense. 'They request that the map be approved as 3s. All the work is done and they would like to do the final. map. '. Michael Pierce, the applicant, said that the changes of pges the r,�p were x of made arbitrarily, but vo nY l made on their underst,a�nAir+ y, od, planning prae- tAcem and utilizing the exl.st.U4f ..:+strain as best as poEs Lbic:a The ,property is not being,prepaied for additional. parceling. HEARING CLOSED TO MIC PUBLIC mr. Hironimus said that this Inas all been said on the Planning Dircctor's Repblt, but basically, the only change in the attitude of Fish and Game has been to Bold projects in the critical deer herd area until policies have been formulated by the Board. As such, there are still identified impacts: the polices of the General. Plan am the Map Act both discuss avoidable impacts to wildlife areas. There hasn't been much change in terms of the da-er herd situation other than being stricter, since the pvojcc:t eras originally approved. BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY titNtPMS Page 11 April, 23, 1984 Mr. Ifironimus said he could not find that there are not avoidable impacts on the suer herds;, based upon the atate ants of fish and Game. As for evaluating a project in terms of unadopted policies, that\has often been F' done, to approve a project without anyone complaining. 'Those policies Vero � looked at very hard and much couldn't be found to work with. Mr6 Reid said that: if the change In the 1irojeet wan M001 the board at previous action could be cited and their action on the envirowtatal Impact. It the change is Dirge enoughthe project Would haver to be heard again. Mr. H,troniaus said that there are other conditional criteria in then Gweetol Plan incllOng, primarily road access as that relates to schools and *ormrJc%41 services and fire protection. Since the last-approval of thio pxojee:t roes wAintenance fees have ceased being collected on Swedes flat ltd. die wc�ild be ready to make a'moAon based on incompatibility with the policies of the. General Plate, and avoidable impacts on wildlife as per the !Map Act. Mr's hoid asked if this project went bark to the original mapO would not it be a Morse project? Mr. Mronimus said he would not argue with that. Mr. Hironimus stated; T will malts a motion to deny the tentative parcel map for Michael pierce and Frank Costello on AP 28.17«95 finding that . the prnjact does not conform to the General Plant, paxt3cixlnrly as applying to road 466040 in that Swedes Flat Rd. is substandard and improllement fees are no longe► .wing collected and as* that relates to acees;iility to coa ercial sergices and schools atiA to the availability of Are protection: In the area and aj;Z finding that the project wpuld hb-ile an avoidable impagt or, doer herds as specified in the :Ca1ifoxn a Map Act- Mr. ctMr. Re4as ea-it t.,.i~ motion was based on looking at the project as a new project. Mr. Hironitrlus said It was based on " )king at the project as a new' pro3irot Mr. Void said than based on that, he would second the motion. A�ES : Mr. R'i ronirus and Mr. Reid NO.; Mr. Mendonsa W. Uendonsa said he Voted "no" because the map is still 4 ;parcels; the old map is i aVailable and is still there and the isnues that have been talked abort{,, although he alight agree in prine pal, Were taken care of at the Board level. MOTION CAMTED 2 to l ----«4:««a.wa:«i BUTTE COU" 1Y ADVISORY AGWCY MINUTES Page 2 August 8,, 1.983 Ce TWATIVE PARCE1, HAPS FOR 0011SIDERATION: I` 14chael Pleroe and Francis Costello o AP 28-17-9% 4 parcels on the SW corner of Stoney Oaks"'Loop a Stoney oaks 'Blve. Swedes Plat area. tp theer: Robert Auskey HEAliCiNG OPEN&qStD To THE PUBLIC AND CONFINED TO THE ADVISDIViomy No one was,pteseht to speak for the item. 14i. )4endonsa said that the engineer wotild not be present since the actioit was b fpragont conclusion. W4. Kirctiet wild that until 1iuch time as,thort io A revolution of the concerns by the Dept. of Fish and Came with regard to vildlifo and the dear herdst thea Planning Dept. will not b* able to support forthor.tparceling of the,property. The Board of Supervisors it setting up a comaiittee to study the matter. Until there is A policy stateiamt from the Zoard� the Planning Dept, will continue to take this position, Mr. Ntndonsa said that he felt that the project could not be approved slate it does not satisfy the requirements of the State Subdivision gap Act* Mrs. Kircher said that although it is known what would happen to an Appealp the provisions of the map Act must be followed. Mr. Reid asked if the appeal of the requirement for an impact report Vtnt to the Board. Mondongs acid that it did. The Board found a mitigsited neg a�vt, Kft. Kircher said that the Boettd actually recommended the adoption of a mLtigat6d,,n00tLve declaration,, lir. R614 polzted out that there have been.no mitigation measuren proposed. Mr. Kircher m=tioned the standard mitigation measure regardlbg erosion;,, Mr. Reid said that there was tiothIng for the deer herds. Wa. Kircher aaidt',14atthe finding was made by the Board thatthere I W010A, not be an Impact oa\,,the deer herds. Putting that aside$ she t4„+4 that this coobittea would be 0,'oing against the stibdivitidii Map Act to approve this proji-ect. The state- ageney,dc.Aghated to hatidle the public resource of wildlife has stated that there is a prdbUm for the deer herdr$ and the map Act4 is clear a'6ottt what action btAbt be taken, Mr. HaWo'hta agreed that the 'PAp Act is very clear on t-he subject. This tbutnittee • is put in the position of mak lig decisions accbA* to state lav, which than Auguiat 8198,3 P r 1 r M COUN'W ADVISOR AOM, -!t MfNU'�S Pap �' AcgUst $1 l D 'Ire appeulad to the Board and the prd�ect— cot bitf6re this cohudttec &gjkj t +M11erb they muni be denied according to aate lao j which deciai.ahe are them., Ap"616d to the Board again. Mrso kirahcr said that she was delighted that the Board wes app6iht'ing a tl comnsittee that might bring back something that the Board could embraoe. ltrha js the Board might make a clear policy s tateic p.nt Mrs. kircher stated: noting that the board of Superviboes had recommerided that a mitigated negativa declaration is appropriate for this site I can^still nht Mupport the approVal and mbve to deny thb project since it does nok'cotifotT4 to the,, County General Plan, or to the comments in the State Subdivi on Map Act Stiction 66474(e). Motion seconded by Mr. 'teld and curried unafnimbuRly, M ■l` 'Oat -low", upoul S �tt:a►, apaaele e lwpsct '�ieport mi :rk_ 'the aouthwec ct rn6 Plat arae`: (1335) lAb* tt^'Mnek47,v, on 1N'WE of Rtchlael !fere AW, lieancie- ha A4ftiwry AEeddy'e raRtra wtt of ee wle'lreaitieiital tan"t vt parcel uap for AP 28-11-95, four pstcele oa r oZ Sturkay Oake Loop and Stoney Dake Boulevard, Swedes HMON s WHILE CEQA REQUIP.ES THAT *,JOR L''WSIDERA ION AA-:- Gv`+�' N- 9 _PUVENTYNG ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, IT IS RECOGNIZED TwtT PUBLIC A�CIlW PAVE OBLIGATIONS TP- BALANCE OTHER PUBLIC OBJEd,.`a-, ,,S, I lk'* �1�1G E OMkQ AND SOI kAL rAdTORS IN DETERMINING MTHEif, AND HOW AF'Si,l"ECT BE APPROVED. AS STATED IN THE "BIG Go! HABITAT MA1lLAGEMENT nim •» MQORETOWN HERDUNIT" 1965-19156, PREPARED BY U: S. FORE$ SERVICIE/ PLUNAS NATIONAL rsJ`RE.S'T WITH ASSITANCE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF' FISH AND :WTj THE WESTERN BOUNDARY MaENDINC SOUTBI FROM BIG BALD ROCK TO THE OROVILLE RESERVOIR AND"SOUTR AND EAST ALONG THE RIDS FROM STRINGToa MOUNTAIN TO`SUNSET HILL AND WOODLEAF, IS FOR THE MOST PART, AN ARBITRARY LINE. OBSERVATIONS TO DATE INDICATE THAT MOST OF THE MIGRATORY DEER USUALLY WINTER AS Bido, ON TELE SLOPES AS NOW WILL PERMIT. NO HERD COMPOSITION COUNTS HAVE BEEN MADE DUE TO THE INACCESSIBLE TERRAIN AND DIMCuLTT OF OBTAINING A. RELIABLE SAMPLE. NO DATA UAS BEEN PRESENTED THAT SHOWS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL SUBSTANTIaLY INTERFERE WITH THE MOVEMENT OF RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY WILDLIFE OR SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE WILDLIFE HABITAT. I DO NOT FIND THAT THE CREATION OF THESE ADDITIONAL FOUR PARCELS TO THE AREA WILL HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DIPACT, AND I HAVE TAKER THE COMITENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME INTO CONSIDERATION IN REACHING ;i'HAT DETERMINATION. THE ADEQUACY OF FIRE FACILITIES IS A MATITR OF OPINION AND THE DIS'TANC`E TO PUBLIC SERVICES IS A MATTER OF CHOICE. PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA ARE CONSIDERING A DISTRICT TO IMPROVE THE COUNTY ROAD. RESIDEN- TIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PARCELS OF THIS SIZE ALREADY EXIST IN THE AREA -AND IT WOULD BE UNREASONABLE TO DENY THIS PROPERTY OWNER THE SAME RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHERS, THE AREA IS INCLUDED WITHIN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF LOTS OF THIS SIZE AND THE PROJECT CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLAN. I FIND THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT AN THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE MITIGATION MEASURE IS ADDED TO THE PROJECT AS LISTED BELOW, AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND UPHOLD THE APPEAL, OF M. PIERCE IMPACT REPORT FOR FOUR PARCEL TENTATIVE REMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND F. COSTELLO AP 28-17 95, ON THE '= UI' ,, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP BY THE ADVISORY AGENCY: 1. UTILIZE STANDARD VOSION CONTROL MEASURES AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE EROI81ON AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS. M S `OTEs 1.Y 2 9 3 X 4 Y 5N (Carried) go *, Butte County Advisory Agency 0*6mi :planning Director h I►rr,tcer, lte ort on Tarita�tve' Parcei Map of `Michaoi r:iere+� ani FJafi`cis � '28-174S Costello on AP J July Zs, 198 this is a tentative parcel map to create four 10 acr# parcels © fron a 40, acre parcel` on propoirty�� located on both side"t of , Stoney Oak brine, apPTOXIMately 1, mile south of Swod,et plea Road, 15 miles sduth,,ustt of 4roville. The present zoning is tim-Aff (Mountain Rek„toational Subdivision-esi.dentia1) . The Land Use Flan Map of the BAte County 'Gefteral plan design ties this area as Agricultural-Residential The Safety Rlatet: of " the General pian indicates that this project'is in a high fire haza=rd area. There are no specific or community pians fo'k the 7mp"acReport was required, for this project due � tipy� . im` , Ybf abitat, rand," capacity and traffic gentlretK y ,4, .. +w tion and 4t�' � a 6 40ablic and towmercial '"services . However, on wiuly 15.y 1�8 1kE ).t ;krd w f 3U�q' t isms upheld an appeal of 'thee Advisory Agency s re ; �r� i`«.�o f6r�.- an BTR j and fo E'rarded the proj�sdt back to the Advi5ory,44�i.°�Y. NoWever, s�rveral unmitigated he iti �.:. � ,�,. impacts still exist, L p Mott Of �-�", "-xe3aated to inadequate roads and circulation. the 10,rJttt .g�R��." ?, be conditioned .�` to provide road access and circulation A ac ai,dw�c�"'4 the Butte' County Subdivision Ordinance. The Departbient of Fish n& Came :has recommended the denial of this project becaus6' ,1.0 sere - '� J-v , 0Ud. �)) e 40 acre m1him be created in an area wheriYms aro notes xy to critical winter the range. recommendation is basad on" -, I. A Sit loss of MbOtetOwn deer hard critical winter range caused �! by residential developm"ent in Butte County already a st ;I Z. Piold ebsorvatiohs of deer in the aretr< habitat ifiit �' � 'aibxlityi,,�� accumulated data from research reportsr and Rill m all indicate that deer herd is highly dependent on the ptd-ject area, No mitigation measures to roduce theseim acts have Neon proposed. Because these of unmitigated impacts and based on General plan policies retarding protection, of wildlifL, and the availability of public serV des, and upon the Map Act's requirement for a denial of a project that would avoidably impact wildlife, denial of tih t project is rocomm+ondod. i1t{ l r