HomeMy WebLinkAbout038-220-009I +
1
•
e
9
•
,EV
9
•
' r
kk
b•
�,.
n
•� �",.
fir+
�
•+ +° +
�L r
�•
... 1 . sT"ii �+';,� r
'•-` ��, h
y,�. "F"'? ."'rE ° ` +eV
e ,�-; ri r _.1.+ � � h',!`;? t � � . �c s s. -::
r[, a .r , r..n�f�d ;'F??•.
3
P 1410 COMMf'88ION 'St7MMARY SHEET ,XOk LAIyJ9 DIVt8t6I 15
APPLICANT Desnnis Linclberq Log#87'=04-06-'05
ADDRESS 1096 Mlc'ldl.eho£f., Late, OroVil le, CA
'OWNER Same
PROJECT DE-86RIPVTON llaiVer. Application. to divide%1128+- acres to . create
PARCEL I. YA.:CEEZ; Z "PARC 3 � .
8 parcelsy 7`0+-- acres, 376+ -acres, x.05+- aures, :99.00.+- acres;` 15 4, acres,
acres, ARCEL".13 •- acres, , - li til=- - .-rag"
LOC.ATIOIJ' between Nelson-Shippee Rd. and Ndlson Blavo Ad. ; West of Gage
Shippee "Rd. ; Nelson area
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S) 38-22 ' 9 , 21., 22 . 38 '2112
ZO14r&a A--40 GENERAL PLAID orchard & pROL'ECT CLONS?STENT?
GENERAL PLAN 'CONFORMANCE REPORT
DATE' APPLICANT 91GNATURE '
LAND CONSERVATION` ACT 'CONTRACTS?'
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED 4-6-87
AGENT/SURVEYOR/CIVIL 'ENGINEER: _ . Roper Associates
ADDAESS: p4be Box 885, Chico, CA 95927
D,' •l :'PLANNING DIRECTOR5 REPORT RREPARM
DETERMINATION
y CATEGORICAL EXV-ML TION M DAT��. PILED
AND ;DATE ;NEGATIVE- DECLARATION •- DATE` ADOPTED.
.MITIGATED NEG. OVOLARATIOW i- DAVE ADOPTED
�
`
-- _.
ENV. IMPACT TZEIw'O�:t,;k" ':�-� DA�.Zd'ERTIk'ILD i
STATE CLtARXNG14.O1J8V NO
SUB. COMMITTEE METING DATE
ADVISORY AGENCY HEARING DATEI2 47
ADVISORY AGENCY ACTION
APPtALED' APPEAL HEARING DATE
BOARD ACTION
CokojENTS VOR PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT'.
iI.
NCS l ..� C E O%' D� S' E�.M 2N.R..► a:, C�L�f
XO a Office of Planning and Research FIZOM : Butte County
1400 Tenth Street, R12 Planning Department
Sacramento, CA 95814 7 County Center Drive
or
�• Oroville, CA 95965
� '
—.X_ County Clerk JUL 3 f���
County of Butte
CANDACEJ. GRUBBS, BUM Co. Clerk
sU3a-YB:CX Filing of Noticoy gR, nn .0901hpliance with Section 21108`
or 21.152 of the Public ,Resources Code.
Log X181-04-06-05
Project Title APli Name
Waiver Application 38-22-9, 21, 22.38-21-12 Dennis Lindberg
State Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Tele0hone Number
(if submitted to Clearinghouse)
John Mendonsa,,;Public Works (916) 538-1266
Project Location Between Nelson-Shippee Road and Nelson-Blavo Road, west of
Gage-Shippee Road, Nelson area
Project De scr ptiori Waiver Application to divide 1].28+/ acres to create 8 parcels,
1 @ 70+/- acres, 1 @ 376+/- acres, 1 @ 105+/- acres, 1 @,-99.00+/- acres, l @ 155+/ -
.acres 1 @ 79+/ -_acres, 1 @ 132+/- acres, and, 1 116acres
This is to advise that the . Butte County Advisory Agency
(Lead Agency oW Responsible Agency)`
has approved ;the above-described project on July_27, 1,987 and has made
(Date)' _
the following determinations regarding the above-described project:
1. The project _,_—wild., X will not, have a significant effect on the
environment;,
2, An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project
pursuant to the provisions of CLQA,
X A Negative Joclaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of 09QA.
3, Mitign, ;on measures wore, X were not, made a condition of the
approal of the. project,
4. A statement of overriding considerations was, X,_,was not, adopted
for this projotti
'finis is to certift that the final BIR with comments and responses and record of
project approval is available to the genetal public at:
Butte Comity Planning Department
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95066
Date Received for. Filing rind
n w'
r
Pot, ing at OPR
Signature,.
Stephen A: St oetet, Senior` Pl.annei
84
Pdviged March 1986 n
. A ^Va.
:h Suite Fount
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORI'tfi
WILLIAM (Bill) CHE-FF, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
Talephohet 1916) 538,7681
BweCo. Planning ' Cbonm
p July 2$ 1987 RONALD D. MrELROY
JUL 3 0 1987 Deputy Director
Urati7�ty, CaliforniA
Dennis Lindberg RE: AP 38--22-091 21,22
1096 Middletioff 'Lane 38-21-12
Oroville, CA 95965 Waiver Applicr.tion
Dear Mr. Lindberg
At the regular meeting, of the Butte County Advisory Agency held on
July 27, 1987, the Agency adopted a negative declaration and approved
the tentative parcel map on the above -referenced property subject
to the conditions listed on the attached sheet:
l'no appeals are timely filed ---within ten (10) days of the date of
the Advisory Agency's approval ---with the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors; this action will be final.
When Lhe conditions of approval_are complied with, it will be in order
for you to file your ''final map" with the Butte County Department
of Public Works for recordation within: twenty-four (24) months of
the date of approval by the Advisory Agency:
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this
office,
Very truly yours,
William Cheff
Director of Public Works
Mondon8a
Assistant Director
jM/ds
att6thinent
cc: Planning Departmoht
Environmental Health Department
Roper Associates
AP 38-22-09,, 38-22-(19-, 21. 22, and �
Dennis Lindberg, Waiver Application,
38-21-1.i, 8 parcels be Nelson-Shippee Road and Nelson Blavo Load,
west of Gage Shippee Road. Nelson area. Eng-Lr,eer: Roper Associates
Public Works conditions:
1 Provide two-way traversable access RS -8 -LD -1 to each Parcel from
a county maintained road or state highway.
2' Access to be reserved in deeds as per county ordinance and offered
for dedication on the final map.
3 Provide road maintenance agreement.
4 Deed to the County of Butte 30 ft. right-of-way from the centerline'
of Gage Road and Nelson Shippee Road.
5 Pay any delinquent taxes or current taxes as required,
NOTE; In lieu of constructing the road at this time, or providing the road
maintenance agreement, a note will be permitted on the deeds stating that
Prior to the issuance of development permits, those two things will be
required.
Health Dept. conditions;
o Provide statement on the map and reserved deeds
for each lot
that ".Lots within this division are not approved
disposal."
Planning Dept. condition:
7 Construct a turn around area on, parcel 5.
Vf '\T.
Inter Depart a a amorandum
�QU�Zy
TO: Butte County Advisory Agency
FROM. Planning Director, -
SUBJECT: REPORT ON WAIVER APPLICATION OF DENNIS LINDBERG ON
AP#38r--21-1.2 r 38-22-9, 21, 2?.
D xm-
J7ul'y
15, 1987
This is a proposal to divide 1,128 acres to create 8 parcels
' site from 10 acres to 155 acres each. The present
zonign
ngis'L
A-40. The and Use Plan of the Butte County General.
Plan designates this area as Orchard. & Field Crops. The
'Safety Element indicates that this project is in an irrigated
unclassified fire hazard area. There are no specific or
community plans for this area,, although it is located, within
the Durham-Dayton-Nelson Plan now in progress.
The proposal does not conflict with County zoning nor any
adopted Element of the Butte County General Plan nor any
County; or specific plan.
The Durham-Dayton-Nelson Master Environmental Assessment
identifies Nelson Road from Midway to Gage as in need O
improvement. It had been suggested that a pro-rata contti-
bution to the road' s improvement should be made at the time
of application for building permits. The Department of
Public Works; however, was -not - supportive of this, condition. -
Recommend approval subject to the adoption of a.'Negative
Declaration with one conditions
1.. Construct a ct i-de-•sac at Parcel :3.'
DT: amG
cc: Roper Associates
Dennis Lindberg
I
APPI"NI)TX It
col,I
I:Nvriz�Nn>rN'rAtrllrcxr�zs'r 1�C)1t1`i
(to e cOmTtle�tcT bead Ag ency) Log It 87-04-06-05
AP i1 39-22-9, 21i etc
ILACl: GI� 10UNia
Dennis Lindberg - k ~{• �"�
1.. Name 0 lai�op Itcnt :...-_____.�--�-
2. Ividress of proponent and representative cif app'li,cixble)
1096 Middlehoff ,Vane tiz�v
Waiver Application
3. project rftscixlatictal . a. m
_ NI11. 1 C F1t�C C
PINS r1i11`131i Nlt
�IANI)A`CSaRY 1 i�lillNtih pX� �ICl'
a, 1)ae� tlx<� 1?a`o,aect have tile
lenttlotent
subst tntitx11v— ijii to �1'e<t cerade ltc
datalitY Of tire tIxviruitm
the ltni)ittt or tI iit:aulatI00 totatop Or wil'(11re lIbeloul SCIr-C ci
fish or w11dI i r l 0I
:tact tini,Il level .%, thrt,aten t.elint�nate a plant Or
txtima c 0tnnumity, rectuco t110 number 0Y restrict the
t{axtl;�r of t rtxt or
end, '06 plant a1 anatnal Or
clttnrncltt3 important r��antples of thG, intxlor periods
or wiCornia lttstory or prehxst0rv�
h, Uoos the pro have the potential to tcll'it'�`�'
S1,0rt-tiyrtn I) Z471 fits to( 1,0 1otltmemti.Of 1011oatttltte1
environnient;il g
c+nvII`Onment is One which Occurs t+tvt1:1
hj'ief Period 0'1` time xahil.e long-term � intlira..�'.4t�t
-endtarc i'llto the Cnture.)
e . i)Ocs the larolohtYtltctuittalawrlt vclytrlcansi 1c+rltbla?vi (Aµ
all) I hilited
lax`O t4't Ina.impact on two or mare Sep;arttC rrsralxt.'ie5
lstl,a tv
where tei-Inhoi00
sin. -III, lwhere l tcctaCtitetotal or those
itiao env rOnnterit' is sii,ttiCicant.)
p
- .
on
Flo I)n�*s thcl,isilbst htv�tl environmental vese effect; Oil humalrl> j(
will rause ;ullSttintia
hcyint;s, orcithor clirr�e I r i)alireetl;`'
1'1.1, 11i:�1'lyft lTNivl'IOIN
(Io hu. c�,�xnllletOrl by the Lead Agency)
On tile basis �o1° this ini'tixll� O,•"I"alltioi),
.lose(l project C 001,1) NOT have a s i,t;►ti Ci I� trired�c t
Lind the Ill' ol
'
on alai ctttvir0nmt�nt, tncl to N.iiCiA`l1;Vti T)i.c1.i�12A`l`iri)N t+ail gats 1 p`
l wl* find that ;althl"911 tilt' ltrolxOhOr�ed i'ta L1, notect Obi'�la slgnil'ican�tCt
eallt el*voet on °lax- trnvirontttent, t "+t
elt, t "Ic titi.'.11v t�Ilave been nd(led tobeeftlise the Atliv prtoject, c1�eNV0ATlt1'.
the ;t t r -arc lar, rl . 00
tilt C.I.Al"ATICx will I)e larcpared,
Ill -,I! Httcl titll projQet MAY have~ 4► sn};niCi.cant e�tcuitel,'
tiu I+nx�.trOlttstc+xat, ;anal an I:NVIiZC)lvDl};N1'Ai.
rNll'Ac1' 1tC]C)lZi is 1
}t�Nfis
�� Ill.l't�lt'I'1`I1iN'1.
4 1.987
C:,LINTY 01, 11a
1)A'11 Ma , ww..tr..
. y
Lelia 14 Ulb.'
Associ pahner �a- ,
y IV. ENVIRONMENTAL I ,CT5
xp anations at all "yesand "maybe" answers are required
on attached sheet(s)) YES MAYBE
NO
1. EARTH, Will the proposal result in significant:
a7-instable earth Conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or »�•
gvercovering of the soil?
c, Change°in topography or ground surface
J
d. Dest-uction,rcovering or mOdif' '4t3an of any
unique geologic or physical features?
e Intreas6 in wind: or Water erosion of soils,
either on or off-site?
f. Changes,, in deposition or» erosion o;f beach
sands, • or changes in siltation, deposition y
or erosion which. may 'modify-the channel of
a river:'or stream or the -bed.-of the ocean or
any bay, inlet o'r lake?
loss of Prime, agriculturally productive soils
gi
outside designated urban areas? r
h. Exposure o people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides , mud-
' -
slides ground failure or simila'r hazards?
Alit. Will the proposal. result in substantial
T_._ Air emissions or deterioration of ambient
y C
air q,U.ality?
b= The creation:of objectionable 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
in
direction of water, movements either
marine or fresh waters?
`b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
c,for off-site �� drainage improve-
vegetation removal* channel-
ment8,including
itati.on or culvert jnstallation?
..--.
d. Alterations to the course or floe of flood
e. Change in the amount• of-surface water in any
water bocly
f, Discharge into surface- waters, or in. any
water quality, including
alteration of surface•
but not limited to tempo attire, dissolved
7
okJ�B» or turbidity:
b i Alteration of the direction or rate of flowof
v
b. Cliangeund in thee uantity ox qui , lj .try' of iq,rothd waters,
w� th
either through direct addit'ons or
drawals, or through interceptiox► of an
J
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for publ,ac water sU µ lint?
j, Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such a5 flooding?
9.
a_ unange in tne a2versiryor species', ornumber
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?
C. Introduction of new species of plants into an
10.
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
S.
AMIAL LIFE. Will the proposal, result in sub.s.tkntial:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numl,;,:rb,
of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shell fish,
11,
benthic organisms or insects)?
,11
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique$ rare
or endangered species, of animals?
12.
t. Introduction of new species of animals into
an area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or movement of animals?
d. Det, et io -ration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
6i
NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. txposure of people to severe noise levols?
74
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce
significant lijht and glare?
8.
LAND USE. Will the proposal -result in a
suBstantial altoratio* of the present or planned
land use of an area,?
9.
NATURAL 9BS0URCE8'1- Will the proposal result In
substantial:
a, Increase in the Tate of use of any natural
resources?
bi Depletion of any lion -renewable natural
resources?
10.
R18X OF UPSET, Wil1 the proposal involve:
a. A risk olexplosion or the release of hazard -
bus substances (Including, but not limited to,
oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the
event of an accident or upset conditions?
b, Possible interference h an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
11,
POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location,
Zlistil' gfon, density, or growth rate of the human
population?
12.
HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
YES
MAYBE
NO
13. TRANSPORU.;SON/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal
re'su] t in:
a.. Generation of substantial additional vehicle
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
'
demand for new parking? --
Substantial; impact on existing transportation
c.
systems?
d: Significant alterations to present patterns
ofcirculation or movement of people and/or
goods?y
e; Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestriar,? _--.
1.4. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services:
a, Fire protection?
b ► Police protection
--~-
_
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e„ Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
Is. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
amounts of fuel,or energy?.
a. Use of substantial
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
the development
sources of energy, or require
of energy?
of new sources
16. UTILITIES. Will the p osal result in a need for "
P w �antial alterations to the
r
new systems, or substro
following:
a. Power or natural gat',,
b. Communications systems?
c. Water availability:---
d. Sewer or septic tank?
--
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
---
17 HumAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
a. Greatl on of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health) ?
to health
-X-
b. Exposure Of people potential
haiards7 _--'
the
18: AESTHETICS. ilattt�rtxcpvastaroosalxoru iewnopen to
ob9tr`�on of y sce
the public, or will the proposal result in the
open
creation of an aesthetically offensive site
to public view"?
-4�
.5
YES
MAYBE. NO
19. RECREATION: Will the proposal result in an impact
y
upon the quality or quantity g
of existing recreational
opportunities?'
20. CULTURALRESOURCES.'
a• Will the proposal result in the alteration
'the
,
�
of Or destruction of a prehistoric or
4
historic archaeological 'site?
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physi'ca1
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric .or
historic building, structure or object?
,
c. Dees the proposal have the potential -.to cause
a physical change which would affect
unique
ethnic cultural values? I
d. Wll'the
. proposal restrict existing religious
or sacred uses within the potont al impact
area?
V. DISCUSSION QF. ENVT"RONMENTAI. TVALItATION
M
.5
DISCUSSION 'OF
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
AP # 38-21-12, etc.
lb-
Disruption and compaction of the soils surface is limited
mum
construction of access roads, and aparcelseasements.
through 8, ovezain�ovexing is
?U foot access road to serve parcels
size, this impact is n(L
estimated at 5 l/2 acres: Given the-
significant.
he p
significant.
le The heavy Stockton -Sacramento Association soils have no
identifiable erosion hazard.
parcels are currently under coi'ei:ract for
ide4d The original. four p `nimum contr,a.ct acreage is 40.
inricultural production. Mi
intensive ag the
Given the existence of the LCA
Avisioconn ist'notdaniic pattd �to modify the
site for race production, d1
:agricultural potential.
tawamount of
b: Normal operation of the rice fields is expected to produce ato
ir
acts on a seasonal bas's. The
onn ControlaDistrric:t creage lowGdven
quality imp the A
b, is regulated by permits
exercised by Air.
�dicty of the impact: and existing p
Contrr� this impact is not significant:
J-> nn With portions of
she property is located in Drainage District 1 . off-
1ots 1 and ? in flood contro districts. in the eventp necessary) it
site
be a
site drainage related
latedt toprequstentsho r improvements.
function of the D
5 During Winter
5d; This parcel falls Within the pacific Flyway:
ro ert. is used by the .Greater Sandhill Crane fob: resting
months, p p y species,
and f� 3•'
Sand -hill Crai:e are a California threatened p
anrraf- '� protection. The Crane have adapted very Well to rice land,
No change in the property�8
and its krtif icial Wetland habitat.
sui t abilitY for Crane is therefore exp
The General Plan des•=.,;nates this property as Orchard and ''Field
S. district: The division complies
Crop, with a �+0 acre minimum and LCA contract.
G neral Plan, zoning,
with the e to 8
ll�l6 Division would allow for the construction: of up s. full
residential units and anczease the ssorted agrpoputation Ofutal rthisrevery rural
development would in inimally i
coiru�tunitjr: The primary limitation to loca�xpansiveomeo Mhe osoilsehave
the heavy clay soils, which are highly
severe limitations for placement of leachfields:
al arcels being farmed
13g; Division will result in therateindianduincrease in traffiatof
separately. This is expected to g
septi ginger vehicles and farm equipment The`burham-Dayton-Nelson Mas
rata . - t'ributlon to Gage as
` _ to the roads
Environmental Assessment identifies Nelson Road from t4idwa
In need of improvements: A pro
improvement :should be made ,at the time of application for building
p
ermits This pro .tata share will have to be determined by the
bit;actor of Public vorlts:
��w
l4e: All of the roads on which the property front are within the
County's maintained mileage program. Additional traffic is not
expected to greatly increase the maintenance: demands. These roads have
a large unused capacity; existing traffic counts average 200 vehicle
trips a day,
i6a: According to the Durum-Dayton-N,-..son Area Master Environmental
Assessment graphics, a 115 KV line crosses the northeast property
corner. The requirements of PG and E shall be met in regards to access
under their facilities.
20a,IIa: Portions of the property have been mapped as having a high
sensitivity for archaeological resources; In order to determine
whether or not a survey should be conducted, the applicant should.
contact the Northeast Ii►formation Center at Chico State Univ Wsity for
a record search.. The procedure is outlined in our cover lratter. In
the event the record 'search recommends against preparation of a surrey,
the County will honor that decision.
Recommended condit'ion's of approval:
1. Note in recorded documents, division not approved for residential
development.
2: At such time that a residential building permit is requested,
contribute a pro rata share to she improvement of Nelson-Shippee
Road from Midway to Gage.
a
Applicant=
Dennis Lindberg Assessor's' Parcel
38-21-12, etc.
Log # 87-04-'06-05
DATA SHEET
A. Protect Describtion
1„
Type of Project= Reversion to acreage and land division
IDivision 4 existing lots totalling
2.
Brief bescr ptione of
1125+ acres into 5 lots of 70-376 acres,
T20N R2E ptn., Sections 23, 26, 270 36, north of
3.
Location
Nelson-Shippee Road, south of Nelson-Blavo Road, west of Gage:
4•
Toad, east of the Midway. unit per 70+
Proposed Density of Development- 1 dwelling
moi.
acres
Amount of Imperious Surfacing'= Minimum 5.2 acres in roads.
Road(s): Frontage on Nel son-
6.
Access and PIearest Public
Shippee$ Gage-Shippee, Nel8on-81avo.
pltPOsal: Septic tank leachfield
7.
a
Method of Sewage
Source of Water SUpplya Individual Wells
roads, 115 K`1 line
9
Proicimity of Power Lines Along major
crosses northeast corner
for further land divisions and development=
10.
Potential
Unknown
g. Envi"ranmenaSettin2.9
'h .sinal Enyirclnme nt,
1
r .
Terrain
General Topographic Character": Level
a.
b Slopes- 1i.
Ca Elevation= 125-140 A.S.L.
d. Limiting Factors: None'
soils
Types and Charaacter'istics= Stock ton-Saar am�eotu Assn.
a.
fiho t-oxtured claY to clay 168my very slow runoff,
sevare limltatlon for cultivation excepting rite,
b. Limiting Factors: Poor drainage, slow to very slow
l to i tat i ons; high shr i r►lt�-
permeab i l i t.y, severe septic
swell.
3.
Natural 14stards of the Land
Earthquake Zone= Inferred fault in vlcin'ty
a.
b Erosion potential= None
Ce, Landslide Poteht!614. None
d. Fire j4atard: Irrigated
5611 Potential: Highly expansive
5xpbhsive
4.
Hydrology
Surface Water*. oral nage/1 t^ri gatl on canals
a
b. Ground 14atera. Area of heavY giwoundwater withdraW61
_g�
� Characteristics'
Modified by irrigation
facilities
d, Annum Rainfall (normal ) 20-•22"
e. Limiting Factors: None
5 Visual/Scenic duality High
6. Good,
Quality: Good
Good , excepting ag . burn P
er` i od
7 Air Quality' -
E31 nvronent.=
B oloqcm
g, . Vegiet>at i on Rice land,
sMail pocket of natural vegetation 0c1
parcel 2• Greater SFandh i l l Crane; i n9
q. Wil 1�l i fe Hab i tat - vi i afar
com.=entrations,'California threatened
Cul +,ural Env i ronment -
chaeologlcal and ;Historical Resources in the area: Area of
10. Ar.
high archaeOlog= 'Ical resources Orchard and pi¢ld'
11. Butte County General 'plan designatson
Croy
12. Existing Zo7iri;c A-�O
i8. Exl st: i ng Land Uim on-site' Rice land
14 Surroundi ngi Area: e lands pasture to the northeast
a. Land Uses: Ric
b„. Zoning:
c.., Gen. iylan besignati'on: Orchard and
Jeltl160ops
d. Parcel Sizes: 4(1 to 500 sere; generally
e. Population- Extremely sparse
15. Character of SArea nciArovi11eFlOm12n
Omi1ea pistrict #100
164 Nearest Urban of Influence- Ora nage
17 Relevant Spheres -ti p of lot 1 is in
portion 1 rt 1 and 2 in flood control
flood control 45
1S. improvements Standards
Urban Area. NIA
19. Fire Protes=t i o
(State) P Ire
on #71 S+ ; #415 'i
Nearest a t County
miles- capacity
b, Water Ava i 1 ab l i. i ty • i I str i at
20 Schools in Area burhham Un i f s ed Schoo 1