HomeMy WebLinkAbout028-220-004PLANNING COM ;BION DIVIE2E
.._. SUMMI,�RY SHEET FOR LA r
'S
APPLICANT Sharon Pevy Log#85-12--23-04
ADDRESS #42 39 Nelson _� Oroville, CA
OWNER Same
PROJECT DESCRIPTION TPM to divide 10.78 acres to create ` parcels 1
@ 5.39 acres and 1. @ 5.39 acres
LOCATION On the West side of Darby Road, approx. 1600' South of
its intersection with La Porte Roads Bangor. area.
ASSESSOZ'S PARCEL NUMBERS) 28-22-04 � ~�
20iJING_ GENERAL PLAN
PROJECT CONSISTENT?
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT
DATE OF APPLICANT' SIGNA'T'URE
LAND CONSERVATION ACT CONTRACTS'?
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED December 17 1985
AGENT/SURVEYOR/CIVIL ENGINEER: Michael: Muoytey
ADDRESS,: 1650 Lincoln Blvd., Oroville, CA 95965
DATE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT PREPARED
ENVIRONMENTAL.�
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - DATE FILED
DETERMINA'T'ION
AND DATE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE ADOPTED
MITIGATED NEG. DECLARATION DATE AbOPTED y-�
ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE CERTIFIED
STATE CLEA91NOROUSE No
SUB. COMMITTEE MEETING DATA
"VISORY
,NCY NEARING DATE 5 1
ADVISORY AGENCY ACTION
APEALED �,PPEAL
HEARING
.. NG DATE
BOARD ACTION
COMMENTS FOR PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT'
NOTICE OF DE'lERPAIR ION APi58NDIX if
T(3'- Office of Planning and Research FROM: Planning
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 7 nth Iic�i��r,ttnent
Sacramento, CA 95814 t'`'01 :er ive
or Or Ile t;t�"959
X_ County Cleric`"`
County of Butte ?;i,41J86
SMECT. Filing of Notice of Determination in ft
[M
fiance t< ,
of the Public Resources Code. p Cc lORQ1l6MRQuaiyM452
ley a. D A [1 Deputy
sect Title AP �f
Name
Tentative Parcel xap 28-22-04
tate Cl 11% N.smber Sharon Pevy
Contact Person---Y.-5.._�
ed to Clearinghouses Telephone; 'Nu Hoer
(If submitted
PuLlic Works John Mendonsa
ect Location 534-4266
On the west side of Darby Road a
feet south of its intersection with La Porte Road^�gangor area.
oil, 1600
t Description Tentative Parcel Map dividing J 8
two parcels of 5.38 acres each. acres to create
This is to advise that the Butte Count
Y Advisor Aeric
has a Lead Agency or Responsible Agent
pproved the. above described project and. has 'made: th4 following determinations
regarding the above described projects
1
The project _ will, x will riot, have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant
to the provisions of CEQA.
., A Negative Declaration Was prepared for this project pursuant to the
Provisions of CEQA.
The BIR or Negat1ve Declaratiotl and record of project approval may
examined at; y be
ButtO 0011h+y Planning Uepnrtt�etit
Cf7tttltr
S• Mlttgation �measurles � were, - were slot, made a 'condition of the .
of the project: approval
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations
,
this project, wast wat not-, adopted for
I:k:te CteceWed _foj3 Filing -
._
1p
Siyen ia. St�eetr
Senior planlier
'fit e
Revlsed aanjat y 19 .
Sharon Pevy
TPIVi, AP#28-22- 04
Mitigation Measures
x Utilize standard erosion control measures and cr
Practices to onstructon .
minimuze erosion and other constrIlotion impacts.
Retain veg0tatio,h except in the actual
development for roadways and building areas, Of pAysical
2• Place note on map, This
Protect -ion fire _, property may be includod within a
established by thee on trzct should such a distr:,Ct be
Board of Supervisors
4+�
Suite, coun
,. LAND OF NATURAL WrALTI-I AN (I C,tAUTY
L DEPARTMENT OrPUBLIC WORKS
WILLIAM ((3111) tr)I�FF, Uimetur
7 COUNTY CENTCR DRIVE . oitOVII.l-)•, CALIroRNIA 79965
ToIrpkorrn 1916) 534.4681'
r20NAl,k) D. McE(.RC)Y
0"11111y Director
May 7.p', 1986
itl
All p6-rP-q4
;gharon levy '1 mIt ative Parcel. Mair
39
Neloon Ave, #'42
0rovillc , GA 9596
hear Ms. Tlevy:
At 'tire regular meeting of the I�uttc (?c)ttrrty ratcd�no�attivr�� declaration
4,n Mray 1` , 1,98o, the agency grant,ecl a mitt,' €;
,„f cnv9xonmeiTtul impact .tnd approVed your trrrxtui'ivi" p'.arcel tnap On
}
t,hk: xbc�v - rr�i'��rtile twirl prr�pc�rt;t C,ub,j r't to i txr 1loncia to,rxry r:t" approval
l i ,1t r'at
on t htj u l. t ached sh) Aot
#" no .xpppals am., timkaly t"il''d-"-within tete ct I'l Of ttxp r]rLs" 0,,V approval
Advq iSpy. , A ",t,r, }._.,wi..;.yi 010" t"la rk ()f t"txr� }hoard of1,100rwi�snre; thio.
1,y t1lo :; �,
%,t3.j)tx w' I! be final,
��7txetl t h' c�xitl to SCxw, oi" rxpprOv`.ilrra�re armtpl.irc":t with, i t willaa iment;be in p�fGr
X . ,.,. your "final n)ap wittC the mutt(. County I.r� p
for yr)+I t., .ale
Public W „rxa fi°,,a�� rvoor,t,xt;xcan within Lwr,xtty i'kiur tnorrttl: r.,i ttyr. rZCat,
t:hc> .NclViaory Agency:
you iriv�L �xt;y �1�'-tiFy,1'}xil' th;6.o� nl'lt�;til, p1r,r,AtCra &"�)nt�i t tris
�� y
vnr y teuly youre ,
("hoff
?1it"r�+r:ttUr rJ�' T�a.y1.3.t: Cw1Y)rlkry
,t:� tj Mr�rxelwrtt�a .
A ;;i:itaixttt ,7t reci;trr
�l I�I�ctt
ra ttktc" ialttir�r: t•
tic
111annin
Healt tt
Mike Mooney
C rJ;
"r 5r 11.�iil
Sharon, Pevy, TENTATIVE PARE L MAP, 2 parcels on the whflt rime of
Darby Road, approx. 1600 ft. south of its intersection with Ln
Porte Rd Bangor area
AP 28-22-o4
Rnglneerc, Mike Mooney
Public Works conditions:
1. Indicate a 50 ft building setback from the ceratrjr.t irrfr of
Darby Road.
:? Sb7w all easements of record on the final mrj,p.
Obtain encroachment permit for all (Irivr�waYs., rfr'w 07'rrx runt ,,
and c()r:;Itvuct tr) County standards.
4 i V tAny delinquent taxes Or current taxes ac ro;,q of r,rtt.t
Planning Dent. condition
5 Note on ficial mapz ;irrstal.l an ifttPrior sprinkling sy;: tem fer the
new dwelling zznit With ariequn t e wat:,o�� flow to mer t, rr,�c e.mmr ndratihe of
the Butte co"nty yirs 7sr�ia,�rtmeart,
Health Dept;r oL)jjditiOj%3-
ti. I`rLIVO witty :;cr i Rieptta L,:sts, thtat, the rr>rluircd sewage " wa
ares exit;L.: 4n parcels 1 tank] , Combiner with Tara : d `ac>eni; dip,l a'ny
�} ptarrel gray
parcr;1 not proven to oonf,airi the fkaclt.. rr�.`traie d'^P0 �al rarev, required
h+y ttsr�;ui��i.ivi.riaatr tsr�airl,aratrt,
~ . PvQ ,•.= that fhr? ro(juirrd cl,'zIrrtitic+s of domestic gvajlaisl.r
to p.arcelo l and 2.
il: 1l Swim "Iitig8tiOn 410astlres wires rt quire.d
:3f'1n9a'J"I t'l'00iorr ctllltri-A mcII.Anurn.:,,
to minimize and other (*011a4
r,ti[t,.f'laCti ira Arp l'1Ct,"i fury
, , , t+a i n rr fir, t 1 t. �7r1
��t= �ti #1N' tlt,tlatl�. carr"Llii .};L` �t}7,y.`l,t`U�. +i�V'«-lolJzrtr;rit- a',Jt 2'r'iC�tl�•?",1��';" at1C�:
buildaclrr
�._ I'l"alrtr it trots, ')n rir'air: Thio' proporty
within a 2rrrl
proteet;iori Uotviot Should aiai.ati' 'a ,liar>rS.4�t L"tsi��I,i,1klF7d lad thr!
nclar�i yfr ittl7r��t'Vi: ttrr��
to:
FROM:
SUB ISCTt
DATEt
0 0
Inter -Departmental Memorandum
Butte County Advisor, Agency
r
Planning Director
REVISED REPORT ON dTENTATIVE PARCEL MAP OF SHARON P:EVY ON AP
28-22-04
May 6, 1986
This is a proposal to divide 10.78 acres into two parcels of
5.35 acres each. The present zoning is A-5. V e Land Use
Plata Map of the Butte County General Plan designates this
area as Agricutural-Residential. There are no specific: or
community plans for the area,
Though the initial General Plan Conformance Report indicated
that three of the five conditional criteria were not met,
the finding is now that the proposal does not substantially
conflict with County zoning nor any adopted or proposes:
element of the Butte County General Plan. The status of
fire protection will change depending on, the staffing level
of the two nearest fire stations in coming budget years.
Agricultural compatibility is a concern, but one additional
five -acre homesite will have a limited effect on grazing
land with LCA contracts. Access to commercial services and
schools is still a factor, but the number of five -acre or
smaller parcels in the vicinity reduces the significance.
The applicant submitted the following mitigation;measurese
1. Utilize standard erosion control measures and construe-
tion practices to minimize erosion and other construction
impacts. Retain vegetation except in the actual areas of
physical development for roadways and building sites.
2. Record .a covenant, to run with the land, agreeing to
inclusion- within a fire protection district should such
a district be established by the Board of Supervisors.
Additional mitigation measure/condition ;for adoption;
3. Note on final map: Install an interior sprinkling
systetr for the new dwelling unit with adequate water
flow to meet recommendations of the Butte County !?'it(,.
Department.
SAS/sJS
Oct. Sharon Pevy
Michael Mooney
Buft�. o. Funning Comm
MICHAEL MOONE`t
CIVIL ENG NEER APR 2 9 1985
RCE 24647 0MA110, Col faaala
Butte GcaLtnty April 20, 1� 116
Planning Depart m(.,�nt -
C:nt.1n•t,tr tit:=.,ritcr Drive
r„)r cava.l,1 on LIcti i,farnia 955165
Fin Tentative F,,iravl Map -Fc)r ShFAron Eevy
A *20_2-(}4
,I.t1�,,r4.-�5 Tor th ce hv1F ft` ,t:l input on this project.
apC roLAcheld my client with the, :i rbc l oaf- recordinq 4.t covonl Ant,
to 1,1111 w'itt`r tho �%%greeinq to inclusion Waai;hin Fire Protection
gal"t +1,11 e4 ra1.4c f"1 h 'r>'t". t .t i shuv:f by the r- krd ca+ Su. -ir ,v1 Sw11S LIS .�l
prt" ,r�J`01 1t;°i (,N1 tc,, v.ot ii ,,, f y 't t1r! ai to designtnt on criteria -f or 'f it
i -nd 4 0(Araci her cm1rcg uttt'l eu
i°rar!_.c null ; S +ind th lvi o 1-ota ji:.jve =tt op and mi coma i.s vrir°It.a the
P++:+.. tt?�,1 X:;. �; x11 :Ltwtclir't� tttNh is°1 ftltt11wr� pro,ioci.s.
ti c r, tv wrr caolat. y k; i (z,, 1.,tutst. + t.h c, ioIzninn3.n9 Depor-t:111r�nt to itlTr?t�
shr Aron t• c�; y f.o 1ncm—''t. t.h °obits+ cwr it er is tory +jro prutocztion
flet" I. t`?cc:w"'t:IF"Ig iLC:I L'.".t:{tiJC?iiril?1�{�fHlfik t:i'Y :lr'aC ia..t{i3i—on .k 1° c) o, +iY"P
fG,.: 1 I-
1`t1rYrll��� �-tl,�t_1�1P c�t:'rtr ;.`1�t.trhtt;;ah.;1,p
Y0UI"f v
TfYUAt6,�:srr Inc'lvd.
W�
T
"o
el
7.
MICHAEL. MOONEY
CIVIL 'ENGINEER
RCE 20647
1trr:ct;t.r� t:;tat..tr►t, + Maruft 1.4, `3�plrrs
tw., .✓ a. l 1 , 1 ,_r 1 iJ ornr i 6r
'I'tentativo Parcel MAp for Shal—on Plevy
AP 0. 20-122-04
lhi E� t r ansui "us a retil„tufnt o+ 1:hel Pl,-"lf`lf' ing X?ap,,iF"•tCCei—it tn; Amend the
botsc:>> ,A.°t. Plan oArld ea.,n-Agpi thin parac;..1 a rtonaoricultural t;esigria,Fi;ort
%-,41ii h will dip compati blcw with a -Five acro r arsinq.
+(-)r t hryT., a` o let; t to kat+ l.rrit i l t tmh aunci cicnent
+,:a.itD tJC? 't?i Fi?d:'G;[:ry1A in t.i'ani.afn"lti.od.
1'It,int. you +4„xr ion
H �0 FV
w 020647 E�Ii tta:tt+1 I�It�i�trt;•
sa`j4,3 L.i n uo1. to 131 v
Inter -Departmental Memorandum
M Butte County Advisory Agency
FROM: Planning Director
sueJEcrt Report on Tentative Parcel Map of Sharon Pevy on AP 28-22-04
DAM March 6, 1986'
This is a proposal to divide 10,78 acres to create 2 parcels of 5.39
acres each. The present zoning is A-5 (Agricultural - 5 acre
The band Use Plan Map of the Butte County General Plan designatescelsthis•
area as Agricultural Residential. There are no specifl,c or community
plans for the area.
Prior to creation of parcels of less than 20 acres, fiVO conditional
criteria must be met:
i. Agricultural compatibility,
2. Proof of adequate water and sewage capacity,
3. Adequate fire facilities.
4. Road capacity and maintenance,
5. Access to commercial services and schools.
As noted on the General Plan Conformance Report; Criteria, 1, 3, and 5
are not met, Major commercial services and high schools are 20-25 miles
distant, While Bangor Fire Station is approximately 3 miles away, budgeting
for that station past fiscal year 85-86 is uncertain. The next closest
year-round staffed fire station is at kelly'Ridr , approximately 15 miles
distant; CDF statistics indicate that 8:8% of -All fire department responses
are for structural and improvement fires: TheFs fires can be caused by
lightning, faulty wiring, woodstoves and water heaters:. Structural fire
protection is inadoquate,
Several properties in the area are subject to California band CotxseLvation
Act contracts. Most of these are grazing land contracts with minimum
contract acreages
l60 cseneoiion of a acre resident jai
parcels ltsuch areasw3lxrepres- anincrease
in potential conflicts
between agricultural activities and residential uses
While the subject property is within a critical winter deet habitat,
similar neighboring development has compromised its value a.
Department of Fish and Game had no comments regarding this sproject.
The
An archaeological survey was performed and clearance is recommended.
Recommended_ Action;
bez+�t the Tpm, Finding that the map does not comply With the General.
Pl'
The applicant submitted the following mitigation measure:
Butte County Advisory Agency
Sharon Pevy
Page _7^
March 6, 1986
1 Utilize standard erosion control measures and construction practices
to minimize erosion and other construction impacts. Retain vegetation
except in the actual areas of physical development for roadways and
building sites.
DRH:lr
cc Sharon Pevy
Michael. Mooney
r - 'Pave
MICHAEL. MOONEY A 7
CIVIL ENGINEER v1pn h
RCE 20647 1t cajll
C . tnrl nr� (, c iittrY , i s�rz
January it, l91R.)
L."ont c-itom Drive
1311001110, r :a l .1..� Xr"�
n ��"J9S �h?� I
Uh nm• trzarhsrtrt'L;n the proposed mitiqation rnMSAU'Ot., for, the bharon
Parcol Map.
'AOMP MU l gat 1 on Measures include "Ut i l i ,°k l ren of gt andgwd Promi. ern
ol. iTien .r;tt"'` B to pi'"oi»act F,ho of`lvir"f1nfiJant from cll"1y C::Lgi•7xfiiW ilnt
Jim, and an !'ireht~ologival .-Ar.t'1'w• y to �L�t-Q;�'r(fti!ifs 7.�� sionixicant:
r! c h"t.alof,;{Li;"al. artifacts o"Ist vn tho '� {c; s a
v 1 r,
i tw 1.1i"tur1WwiE- i vo of the property ty hi:tve been Tion _vtl t,.)inro 3,tf, ar"nat i on
ifi1 hit- lOr`t. W;,U ..a, ats have &7ran`rd of the original prt:)i"ar't1t9ai In the
Ort %',
, ;i w no f Vvy ! ni:vndm to build a _+nr tlor c';��'I on tho.
Pt t l "M W 64S ':i ,0t, "`+ 01 tho ar'•om ohm 10 c'ir„Y'lu<1:1, 1"1tind with the 'i" i ra ,,
fo,lwi� and nr-s°-Krpt_:,, t;.r:ncli ta.ori of the r,l vwt. r`Itc tp i I t�:; 1n t it
U91110 f ov" i .that ; i) and will r:,t: w ' t � ' +t1B:3 has Indicated s 1-
' 1 rn:::t�"fwti �nt"t fVIC' 1"NYr„`0.
w'K or`' f or c °f:hip i-, .& mi-Ql rM +"ind a.lC;:2">: p s the fact that the arra W5
hod ;fin;#` i ii�.'v�1fi"'"n rs s
`� �W ,: 1, ., t,°, r v"t n r,
l h,.in[ nt lot y It rr;,, consi a-Ir„rn t i un
your ir n a
Michael Wonmy
tyyi ncol n Blvd.
Urovi7.:,
Y l Fa 5 2i
Archaeological Reconnaissance
of the Proposed Sharon Pevy Land Split,
Butte County, California.
Prepared For:
Sharon Pwy
39 Nelson Avenue, #42
Orovil`le, California 95965
Prepared By
Jensen & Associates
Archaeological Consulting and Research
41 5kymountain Circle
Chico, California 95928
January 198
„
I ntroduct'�ion
In order to assess the archaeological impacts of a proposed land split
involving approximately ten acres of land near Bangor within Butte County,
CaMornia, the property owner, Sharon Pevy, contracted for a complete
records search and on -foot reconnaissance of the parcel In compliance with
recommendations received from the Butte County Planning Commission,.
Accordingly, on Thursday, ;January 23, 1986, project archaeologist D.
McGann conducted an intensive, on—foot reconnaissance of the project area
for the purpose of locating and recording any evidence of prohistoric or
significant historic use and/or occupation.
The Pevy parcel consists of a nearly rectangular piece of land located
on the west side of Darby Road about one mile north of the Confluence of
Honcut Creek and Soweil Ravine and approximately 3.5 miles northeast of
Bangor. The current proposal calls for division of the parcel into two
separate lots, each of which would presumably eventually be subjected to
homes'te and perhaps other developments. Inview of the potential adverse
affects of future construction to cultural resources which might exist within
the area, and in view of the general archaeological sensitivity of the
region, Butte County and other regulations required that cultural resources
be fully inventoried and formally, assessed prior to project approval,
pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 470), procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (36 CFR 800), and other iegisIation and orders.
The remainder of this report details .the results of the required
archaeological survey and inventory and provides appropriate
recommendations. Ail fieldwork procedures followed guidelines provided
by the State Historic Preservation Office (Sacramento) and are in.
conformity with accepted professional standards,
Location
The, Pevy parcel It located within a portion of the northeast quarter of
the southwest quarter of Section 13 of Township 18 North; Range 5 East,
M.D.M., of the USGS Rackerby, Califollnia, 7.5' quad (see attached Project
Location. Map), The parcel consists of a total of Opproximately ten acres of
Pasture; brush and oak covered land, With numerous exposed bedrock
outcrops in the area,
Records Search
Prior to going into the field the archaeological records of the Northeast
Cailforna Information Center (CSU -•Chico) were examined for any existing
recorded prehistoric or historic sites within the project area, In addition,
r _ arra
2
sites atrencu currently Register
Historic Places (USD 1983)...was also consu �
Y orded for the project. area n��j�'�rNf
or immediately
archaeo
parcels, although the project vicinity is an logically snslk:v8
within which numerous prehistoric and historic sites have alrps,
recorded (cf., Jensen 1981; 1985). y c3
Ethnographically the project area falls within territoryi=
occupied by the Northwestern Maidu, or Konkow Indiana 7 i i� sjre
1), but near the border separating the Konkow from the hiilleNisiena to thee
south. Although the ethnographic data do not identify any $acifl �� $h,t
within the project area, the general, ethnographic information in combinatif-
With the results obtained p is
excavations within tjie re ion m previous archaeological sur ?
suggested that a number of prehistoric site types Might be l �' al -id
9 (e.g., Jensen 1978; 1979; 1881; 198,7)
the area, Including the following: (1) aboriginal Middens locate on ' oij,,_
or ridges above Honcut Creek; g l don knoll `
(2) aboriginal milling
rock outcrops within the vicinity of good acorn collection areas stations located pit
scatters of lithic flakes and implements resulting from short ter
m use and
(3) Slli`fan
occupation; (1) isolated finds of aboriginal lithic flakes and artifacts, and
and thesous tY nes ofhistoric sites datinc.. .7 time periods between
Such sites have n IMth t r,Rt
project vicinity and throughout Konkow eIndianoter territory and andithin h#ho��,r�diata�
Locality generally. villi.
Fieldwork
As, noted, fieldwork for the
project was conducted by projeco
archaeologist. D. McGann on January.1986: The on --foot curve
cr ss—crossing the parcel in survey transects ranging from 10 y involved
apart. EXaminatlon of the surface involved inspection of all dist o 15 urbed m rets
(including road cuts, rodent middens, etc. ) for evidence of subsurface eas
cultural material, Particular attention was given to inspection
numerous bedrock outcrops f,,r possible mortar cups; such features
Indicate the reg, p n of the
pre, nearby of more extensive middens; house pits and
other evidence of tA historic use or occupation,
Vegetation cont, $ted of large areas of pasture grass ante
brush species and interior Liveoak. Interspersed with
disturbances were III evidence on the parcel
Some ground claaring and other
totally obliterated wv,frience of past prehistoricuseorough hOccupationnot have
evidence were prey err if such
Survey Results anal f�edOMfhendat on
No evidence Or prohistorie or n0h-donteMpopary historic
occupation was en4ouakered during fieldwork, In view of those findin use
e_ or
findings, as
3
well as the negative results achieved during the records search,
archaeological clearance is recommended for the proposed Sharon Pevy
land split. However, should future construction or other development
activities reveal evidence of subsurface prehistoric or, historic material, a
qualified archaeologist should be contacted immediately in order to assess
the impacts of the project to the cultural resources involved.
References
Jenson, Peter M.
1978 Archaeological Test Excavations at Three Prehistoric Sites within
the Mendocino National Forest's Chico Tree Improvement Farm,
Butte County, California, Report on File, , Northeast California
Information Center, CSU—Chico,
1979 Archaeological Reconnaissance and Overview for the Proposed
Southeast Chico Development Project. Report on File, Northeast
California Information Center, CSU -Chico, and Cook & Associates,
Orovil e.
.1981 Archaeological Reconnaissance Proposed
Be p
sed i000 Acre
Subdivision adjacent toHonureek, Yuba County,
California.
Report on File, Yuba County Planning Department.
1982 Cultural Resources Overview and Field Survey for the proposed
Collins Lake Basin Development Project, Yuba County, California.
Report on File, Foothill Design Group, Marysville, California, and
North Central California Information Center, CSU—Socramento.
,,lddell, Francis A.
1978 Maidu and Konkow, IN, Handbook of North American Indians, Volume
?: California, Robert F, Heizer, Editor, pp. 370-386: Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D:C
Uni -�d States Department of the Interior
1983 National Register of Historic Places. Federal Register through
Derember 31, 1983, Washington, D.C.
.. - 1 a .:t.. \. it ,..:."'e' d r' 1 „�••" h/`^�..r .—,t
TA
�
1'��/ I 't •h �i'.11'� , rl'!.r':!' .. � n�, r' V r Vii; `/�,j�• r �fJ'\../
+366 �), • ; i ��,„r•.✓ jl\l �✓�f�I `' � �,� �.,. � �`j l 1 �, \�,.Y` t ..�,�„j�
It,` ' 1
�,>-�� 1 rJ r� J J Y ”,°• J �.✓ \✓ �r°� 1 J fl:iG'U „r �:..` r ; 7, r
�.. � ��� hrf t � . �,, ✓'/;i%" ,/ J , , iii "r,..' • % � 1, i : �M ,. '+�„ � �' � , ' 1,
4365 }) �,/ r f �� o ����\.�+• `'P °1 1 f `-d1 C�„-✓ -w;, u�.
--,/'r1rl../ �, rd�✓, :,1 � �` 1.---�4`r o '_...,r`'.."�LJ '""! '�.1 � �°' -'r 11'r--s.:r'
,,.-!r I"r' r ��A'! �(�' �,�'✓�Z`Y^'�1.�.��\ " "'l�, ). � � I� ,�w�' -"r, � , �"�^� /�re� y�r:
tea''y1
41
, �.,r fl � +n _ e-�.. 1 � + a` � � e i 1 � �• 4��".t�_ , h"y `n d ", J;_ Ji .,J �.
i' ._�.. ,ti `*.�_ �, r`��.' �� � " `,� `^�+.�,.. vrMd 1F tl f .:.J�� t���"".. i� •y/ ....,r r .f-
,,
'3�1� e � �V � ' �� �� ..� �'" `�...-' � ate„' /��d n� � -''� ,' r I" , ., ✓, , ` �
' �- „/L .M11l7, ' ,���+,,r � fid•, r til' ��F ��<f�r� `J"� ,( � �i`�(�� �'., 1Co(/,'/p 1. .
�; ��l �=� ..-°r� 1} ♦ � � ✓ gin, � �f � �' 'r' �'���;\, �� t `
1�Ni
630000 1
336 �. `'�•� a "' 1 ��,r. 1 " y' ! � ` r , -=,sir ,�� : �
.J
Ilt�Or
�!5��\i.\
FEET
tup
"w Y 4ti-w4 �� �� `��(� i'.'.1 �,` 'M1Y�`� s.� ` ,,,,, r•4 �,�. �itW
� ' , ° r �ii.;�w J1���1, i~I 1: �,.++... J' w � \.+/,•��� zu_ � yr r✓'yJH . � wFl�1 t+' � ! ' ✓"\:« r. u/ '� '\ . �. 1 1
Ai PHN1)t.\ I. 0
COMIr'Y Or, BIKI'7`lI
ENVIRONNIRN'I'AL GHT?M',TST FORM
(to`1c conipleve(l by L -Ca Agency)
1. BACKGROUND 1,09 1f 85-12-23-04
Ah ff 28-22-04
1. Name of i'roronent
2. Address of Proponent and repre.;0i1 ative
Of applicable)—""---" 1icabl —,---"
Sharon P MY c -h
39 Nelson Ave,_. '"" — ae-1 moon
eY
Orovil.le CA 95965z� @>�-� ` -`"1E5" L`�nro1-n_BI_%jd
~ e
r- oy
3. Project description Tentative Parcel.. Ma.,� _
I':T. MANDATORY VINUlNC;S Or. SIGNTMCANCG
T`fA1I)]l
� a,. Does the project iia have Y88 NO
the to d
quality of the environment,tosubstantiall.ygrade reducehc
the habitat of a fish or, Wildlife species, cause a
,fish Or wildlife population to drop below sel.f-
sustaining; levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant nr animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
Of California history or prehistory';
b. Does the project hnvo 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 uccut� in a relatively
b-►ief rerioj orf time while loth;-tvr .impacts will
endure into the fututr.,
C. floes thnpro.jec t hhve impacts which are i;ndivi.tltt-
ally limited, but cumulatively considerable? CA
Project may -tiipact oil t{Vn or more separate resources
tubage the Impact on each tesourcu is relatively
small, but ivhrt'e the affect or the total or those
i , , significrint,) %C
tm1�1�t5 ntt t}1G tot"irnntllent t5
tI.
Does the project havo environmental effects tvh i cwith h
cause substttntial adverse orrec'ts on human
being$, either dircletly nf• indirectly'
T I11;`i"I.(2AII NA ! CON i'1'u Itct olt�It }eta*cl Icy t ltc� l�.0 LI ;Agen�ey)
(Ili the�basi4 or this Initial t•k°•lltitltictn
I/wr`' I"incl fliv 111'CI tOSed COIII 'b N01' ,have Ct sigiiA ri cont eftoet
on the ontl i ronmett t rind tt Nt,G' ? , ,
AiIVI's ilI ('i ARA'rltlN Will bcA :It1`eiiared'
ant rind that al thou ;ll tehc� pr�tlu�;td proacct could Italie a. signiri-
t-ant effc��ct nn the r�ttvirontnt'nt, thc�1•r will note ben signlfiennt
efl•ee��t in this cases hoclttttt' the MIT'WATI'ON MHA,tlUR).��i� cJeatsrZh'ed �,n
the att,acltr�tl siat�t�t 1tttVe loch �t�,}�,od to tho� J)rojtct. A NfiGA'I'Wr.
MIt:I.AiAIION tviIl he Jwk'ltsl'Vd.
1/m find thr 11rOper,h0d 1)N)ioct MAY hlwo tt sig;nlficnnt errect oil
the ClIViVonntcttt, ;uld an IINVIRCINMIXI'AL ]N1IAC.,r gLI'0WI' is rorluired,
lhiI'I?; Jahti ry 24., 1986. , a .__ i'tt11NI'101) i}U'}"CI:, phANNTNO Tf},}'Alt"ft;If:NT
Did �d, t ix
eab sssociate
Plahnex
ttev } ewt�tl by
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL I ACTS
Exp anations o all °'yes'► and "maybe" answers are t-equired
on attached sheet(s))
YES
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant;
MAYtE 140
a.
Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures?
X
b.
Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
XG
c.>
Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
x
d.
Destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
K
e,
Increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or off-site?
f.
Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
X
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition.
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?. _
X
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?,,
2; AIR. Will the proposal resit in substantials
a:
Air emissions or deterioration of ambient
air quality?
b.
The creation of objectionably: odors, smoke
or fumes?
. C.
Alteration of air ,movement, moisture or
temperature, or any change in climate,
locally or regionally,?
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial;
a.
Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements in either
marine or fresh waters?
X
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
C4
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
meed for off-site surface drainage improve-
k+�,
"'—
ments, including vegetation removal, channel-
ization or culvert installation?
k'
d,
Alterations to the course 01� flow of -Mood
waters?
e,
Change in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
X
f,
Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality, in�lt:tdxng
j
but not limited to temperature, dissolved
,_
axyg�r, 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 through direct additions ar With-
drawals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
X.
i.
Reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public; water. supplies?
X
J:
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
YES
MAYBE NO
4.
PLANT LIFE, Will the proposal result in substantial
a. c range in the diversity of species, or nu;nver
of any species of plants (including trees,
crops, and aquatic plants)?
_ X
shrubs, grass,
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
X
or endangered species of plants?
Introduction of new species of plants into an
c.
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishes
x
ment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
X
S.
ANIMAL LIFE, Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
(birds, land an; llialg
of any species of animals
including reptiles, fish and shell fish,
X
benthic organisms or insects)?
.---
o. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rate
or endangered species of animals? •_
Introduction of new species of animals into
_
e.
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 ,.esult in substantial:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
levels?
b, Exposure of people to severe noise
1.
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce
sign�f�cant 1�ght and glare?
--
8.
LAND USE, Will the proposal result in a
su stantial. alteration of the present or planned,
land use of an area? -----
9,
NA'i"URAI', RESOURCES; Will. the proposal. result in
su Stant al:
a. Increase in the rate of use of ally 'natural
X
resourices?
b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural
resources?
---
lb.
RISK OF UPSET. Will, the proposal involve;
o, explosion or the release of hazarci-
a`; rxs'
ous substances (including, but not limited to,
Oil, pesticides chemicals or radiation) in the
event of an accident or upset conditions?
fe with an emergency
b. ible interference
emergency
reISpOble
res plan Or emergency evacuation P1911?
11.
POPULATION, Will the proposal alter the location,
fistri utTori, density, or growth rate of the human
population?
12,
HOUSING. Will theroposal affect oxisting housing,
or create a demand foradditional housing?
,13 ,
TRANSPORTATION/C.IRCULATl0N. YES A1A�Y B NO
xesult in; Will the proposal
Generation of substantial additional vehicle
movement?
b. Effects on existin g Parking facilities, demand for ;iew es, or XL
parking? ._
C-
c. Substantial impact on existing transportation
d. systems? X
Significant alterations to
of circulation or .movement present patterns "--- X t
goods? People and/or
e. Alterations to waterborne
P
rail or air traffic?
f. ITICrease in '
raifi4 ha���rd8 .cc°i0A
bicyclists or Pedc:striar„s? to maOr voh--
14. PUBLIC SERVICES,.� G-
ivill the Proposal have an ef.oet µ
upon, or result in a need
governmental services; for new or altered
a. Fire Protection?
b, Police protection?
c, Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
fac
e. Maintenance of —�-
roads? Public facilities, including -�-
f• Other goVernmental services? �(
1.5. ENERGY. 4
Will the proposal, result
Use of substantial amounts of
b. Substantial increase in demand Upon r energy?
:sources of energy,upon existing
or require the development
of new sources of energy?
x6 UTTL�ES. Will the r�
proposal result in a need for
new systems, or substantial alterations to the
follow�.ng
a • Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems
c. Water availa.bil ity
d= Sewer or septic tank?
e . Storm water drainage?
f. Solid wasto and disposal? ".
17. HUMAN HEAL mFi . Will the
a. Creation of any healthohazardOsal rorult in;
health. hazard � potential
b. Exposure of people mental health)?
hazards? p ple to potential health
18. AISTHETTC8. Will the
o Fstr�on of" any scenicpvsarnrult in the
the pti�blac or will 'the proposal result view in open to
creation of an aesthetically ai�fensxira site the
to Public view? pen
x
K
Sc'
X
YES
MAYBB NO
19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?X
20. (CULTURAL RESOURCES,
.=Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction of a°prehistoric or
historic archaeological site?_
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical
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
ethnic cultural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious
-"~--
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 28-22-04
See attached.
A EVALUATION AP 28-22-04
A ATION
1b,cjeof,Sb,f: The subject property is located in an area of high
erosion Potential. Preparation of an additional homesite) driveways
and areas for accessory buildings could lead to at' increase In
clated erosion and siltation Of nearby
stormwater runoff and asSO standard erosion control me8sureg '�v-'hould
streams. Utilization of s
protect the environment from any significant damage.
5d- The subject Property Is located In an area of critlC.01 winter
deer, habitat. The Department Of Fish and Game has recomMended that no
new Parcels less than 40 acres be created in such areas. i'llo area has
been somewhat compromised by other parcels In the 5- to 10 -acre range;
however) this project I . 9 located on the edge$ of thatof devleoroelopmentparcels
and
would I-epresent a further encroachment into an area .
Comments have- not yet been received from the Department Ole Fish and
Game relative to this specific project.
8111'. This project 0111 represent an increase in density in tht:,
vicinity and could lead to similar projects in the surrounding area.
GenerallPladesignation for this areaaOre parcels
Is
The Butte County allow down to 20-.
Iculbut-81-Residentia, whin ch will
Agr lop smaller parcels; In order to dove five different conditionalt. The criterion requiring
criteria are required to be presen rvices and schools does not appear
reasonable access to commercial sc
to be presents In that high schools and major commercial services are
located In Oroville, approximately 15 to 20 miles distant. Adequate
fire protection is also required. Long-term fire proteetLIon in this
riable- The Bangor Fire Station Was schedulOd to be
area 10st 10 constraints.; but was funded through at least
closed d� to budget con
of ant y Bangor Fire Station but other funds became available. Continued
Fiscalration YcArof n 1986 when additional
operural Fire
ttal-lon8 In Butte County is questionable for the future. See
01$0
Item 14.
IS,., Though not significarl, this project will represent am
incremental Increase in trtaffic On Darby Road and La Porte Road,
Neither of these roads meet County standards for Public roads.
J,t! This project will represent an incremental increase in demand for,
While this project In itself Would
public get -'vices in E-1 rural area' go, additional development of this
nnotreprbsellt a 919111ficaMt lnct%eaelng
typo, if continued) would require additional public services b
provided in these rural area
sb
This could Include JmcreasOd fire and
8 reuirem c
buses being
police probectlorl') an Increase in the number of school -her
pq
,rovjded� and
ent for additional parks and
governmental services as well as maintenance to Public facilities
lhtludlne the reads.
ty Is, located 11-1 an area of high archaeological
20: The Subject PrOPbP In order to
gen8ltlylty, An archaeological survey Is necessary
determine If tjOHIficant archa0Ological artifacts exist on site and,
If to) to develop aPPrOprlate mitigation measures*
M � -
II MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a� See Item 20
g�cste— d hq i t �c3a i on 1�JPS
1 UtIlize standard erasion control measures and construction
practices to minimize erosion and other construction impacts.
Retain vegetation except in the actual areas of physical
development for roadways and building sites.
2• tNo mitigation measures are proposed at this time regardingimpacts to wildiife. When comments are received
Department Of Fish and Game, ,appropriate mitiaatioµno
be suggested, if possible.) masUres w171
S (No mitigation measures are
arrchaeologicai m acts. proposed at this time regarding
Impacts. An archaeological survey is necessary in
order to determine If significant archaeological artifacts exist
on site and) if so, to develop appropriate mitigation measures.)
Applicant: Sharon PeVy Assessor's Parcel 4
28-22-04
Loo 4 85-12-23-04
DATA SHEET
A. Project Description
1. Type of Project: Tentative Parcel Map.
2. Brief Description: Dividing 10,75 acres into two parcels of
5.39 acres each.
3. Location: On the west side of Derby Road approxitTiately 1 60 0
feet south of its intersection with La Porte Roads east of
Sangori
46 Proposed Density of Development: opment: 5 acres per dwelling unit.
,5, Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Minimal.
6. Access and Nearest Publie Road(s). Property fronts on Darby
Road.
7. Method of Sewage Disposal". Individual septic systemt,.
S. Source of Water Supply: Individual wells.
9. Proximity of Power Lines: To property.
10* Potential for further land divisions ac -%d develoPmeritt None
under existing toning
B. m-vironmentel - -
Sgttin
Physical Eny-Iron ent:
1. Terrain
a. General Topographic Character." Mountainous foothill area,.
b. Slopes: Generally 6 to 209 slopes, Some i'latter building
sites exist; Some areas are much steeper slopes,
C.o Elo-Vatloh: Approximately 1100 feet above sea level.
d. Limiting racto.e-s: Some areas of steeper slopes.
2. Soils
a. Types and Characteristics. Sierra Soil Series, generally
well drained with moderately slow permeability. Soils
generally from 40 to 150 inches deep.
b. Limiting ractort'. Ar:Oas of slow permeability and steeper
slopes.
a. NAA�ural Hazards of the Land
a. 5arthquaike Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII.
b, Erosion Pbtahtial*. Very high.
c. Landslide Potentialo Low.
d, Fire Hatard: High.
O's txparlsivOl Soil Potentitilt Low.
4. Hydrology
aw Surface Water". None on site,
b. Groundwater,tt Unknown, potentially limited.
C. Drainage Characteristics: Property drains to the
southwest towards SoHell Ravine and to the southeast
towards HbhcUt Creek,.
"8"
'AW
d- Annual Rainfall (normal): So to
em Limiting Factors." High erosion Potential.
5. Visual/Scenic Quality: High.
6. Acoustic Quality; High.
74 Air Quality: High,
molosaical noir ung n t
8- Vegetation: Westerly portion of the proF.,ierty itl Populated
with Interior Live Oak, and California Bluck (Jak. The easterly
Portions of the property are 0eneral1y qe,,as... and assoc,
herbs, and Valley Oaks. ated
9. Wildlife Habitat." Critical winter deer habltat for the
Mooretown Deer Herd.
ent --
10. Archaeological and HistbrIcal Resources iri tflp
archaeological sensitivity area. area._ High
11. Butte County General Plan designation.
AgricUltural-Residentla'j.
12. Existing Zoning: A-5.
IS, [~Xlstlnq Land Use on-site: One single-famt
14. Surround119 Area:
I lye "Awe! 1 )no.
a. Land Uses; Scattered single"family at rural
densities,
b. Zoning: A-5.
a. Gen. Plan des ignat lons t Agrjcultura l-Rw�jd,�i
d. Parcel Sixes: Generally 20- to 40-acre-p`lU'S* ptial.
araels,
Four parcels ranging from 5,4 to 9.5 acres ;.�xjst oh the
east slue of Darby Road In the general y1cIr?Ity.
e- POPU)ation. Scattered.
15. Character of Site and Area: Rural I foothill anon.
16. Nearest Urban Area" Oroylljo, 15 to 20 miles
17- Relevant Spheres of Influence-' None.
18. Improvements Standards Urban Area: No.
19. Fire Protection Servite."
a. Nearest County (St�tto) p1re Stationt OahPOT - Stat I orl 455
(fuhdeA at least through Fiscal Year 1486)o Station #75
CvOluh�':90r> In Hohtut) 15 +/- Milos. St8tlol #72 In
Palermo) approximately �a Miles.
b• Water Availability.*
I F:�Ire tankers only.
20- SchoolsIn Area." Bangor Union r=IeMentbry School
Oe-OvIlle Union High School District.Olttrlct and
U -M
a
)-�-'
Staff Signature i � _ Date -2--&—loo'
AS THE APPLICANT FOR TttE kl-'QUESTED LkND DIV1810h`, I AM AWARE OF VIE AtiOVE STAFF
DETERMINATION REGARDING' M CbNFOIUIkNCE WITH THE GENEitAL PLAN.
Dated S'igna'ture of Applicant
G. D. A.
Enginten • $0oyors Y Planning
220 Grand Avinue
Orovllla, Uliiornial 05066
LD 1000 (revised 6=50) (M)'03�2066
BUTTE
COUNTY.
>NFRAL
PLAN CON'FORIMANCE REPOR�
HAP'
i Aulte 0). planning Como,
FOR PARCEL MAP
OR -SUBDIVISION
NOV 4 1985
Items 1-4 to be completed by applicant;
RJ►oviJln, Collisrnlq
1
Applicant Name
2.
Project Descriptionir /�'i •
3.
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) "22-
•�
4'.
Proposed Use /-4-51/"�---�-
`1hd
following items are to be completed by
the Planning Department;
Current zoning A � r
Land Conservation
Agreement /d
General Plan Designation AG-- iexf/
Applicable Conditional Criteria-
Not Applicable
Agricultural -Residential
YES
NO
1. Agricultural Compatibility
2. Water & Sewer Capacity
3. Adequate Fixe Facilities,,"��'+�'.�.�
has Road Capacity & Maintenance
�-
5, Access to Commercial & Schools
,_r
X-
Orchard & Field Crops
1. Predominant 5-10 Ac, Parcel Size
2. Vicinity of Urban Boundaries
,....
3. Agric: 'viability not impaired
Staff Dettrminatiol Project does �,
does not
substantially conform
to the General
Plan
Comments r y N ,�
,MvEc►R 5
-
Y,6A 2 VK, .
u , .
rN t _ R�►sNv
/Ki2 t, Secase. ��
ac.0 t/r 'er%
AG Fes' a s. C.. Wyk EA-
a
)-�-'
Staff Signature i � _ Date -2--&—loo'
AS THE APPLICANT FOR TttE kl-'QUESTED LkND DIV1810h`, I AM AWARE OF VIE AtiOVE STAFF
DETERMINATION REGARDING' M CbNFOIUIkNCE WITH THE GENEitAL PLAN.
Dated S'igna'ture of Applicant
G. D. A.
Enginten • $0oyors Y Planning
220 Grand Avinue
Orovllla, Uliiornial 05066
LD 1000 (revised 6=50) (M)'03�2066