HomeMy WebLinkAbout041-120-096'Log#85-12-03 -04
Newport Federal
APPLICANT-------- Chico, CA 95926
853 Man,zanita Ct,. , i
_ _---------�_
ADDRESS
OWNER_ Same--rttto(Cr'1
to divide 200 o,cres to create.»
PROJECT DESCRIPTION___.,
ai;cels,
► & L at 184 acre parcels.Ya�
4 parcels3 5 acre P --
LOCATION On the south side of Durham-Pentz Rd. ► apPraX. ,
one mire
East of its intersection with Clark R4a..,►
Pentz area.
(�1-12-�96
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S) » �., PROJECT CONSISTENT?, . _,_.___
174ONING� !,
GENERAL PLAN
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT DATE OF APPLJCANT SIGNATURE
CONSERVATION ACT CONTEACTS? ,.
APPLICATION RECEIVED
December 3,
Sierra West Surveying
A'OI N'l` rSUR,VEyOR/CIVIL ENGINEER: `---r
5437 Black olive Dr., Paradise, CA 95969
Al nin.
DATL PLANNING DIRECTOR" S REPORT PRE'PA12;D---
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - DATEFILED
ENVIRONMENTAL -
D'B TERMINATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE AI70PTED
AND DATE
MITIGATED NEG. DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTtDJL?. ~
ENV, IDIPACT REPORT DAT'EF C,ERTI "SE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
SUB. COMMITTEE MEMI'OG
•-��-�
ADVISORY AGENCY HtARING OMM 1. -1 - -� / �i j^
'' V
AD'�iISORY AGENCY ACTION . � ,
f APPEAL HEARING
BOARD ACTION
C0MN1Et�T'S'OR PLANNING DIRECTOR' S REPORT„
Mae
BUTTECOUNTY
G*RAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT
FOR, PARCEL MAP OR SUBDIVISION MAP
ltema ,1_4 to bo A001pleted by applicant: 'es -3 ly�zpfN)r?)
gib
1, Applicant Ntttne snd` address d r/� CHIc
2. Project Description
3. Assessor's Parcel Numbers) d� I '" "�l✓
4
Prr�posed Use/0�en�...-.--�-
The following items are to be completed by the Planning Department:t;
Current zoning A -2 A-0 j7 Ian) Conservation Agreement s
General Plan Designation G-- Re �1
Applicable Conditional Criteria:
Agriculturali•-Residential
1• Agricultural. Compatibility
2 Water & Sewer Capacity
3► Adequate Fire Facilities
4. Road Capacity & Maintenance
5. Access to Commercial & Schools
orchard & Field Crops
1. Predominant 5-10 Ac. Parcel Size
2. Vicinity of Urban Boundaries
3. Agric. viability not impaired
Not Applicable
YES NO
Culto Co, Plarninq Cnnim,
Orovillo, Galltoi'ntq
Staff Determination: Project does _ does not:
substantially conform to the General "Plan and zoning.
Staff SignatureDate „ 1 rr�•?-- ns`
AS THE APPLICANT FOR` THE REQUESTED LAND DIVISIONi Y AM AWARE OF Tilt MOVE STAFF
bCTEPM RATION REGARDING THE CONFORMANCE WITH THE; GENEML�PL(�N AND zONxNc
.Dated:... Signature of Applicant,';,►'��i
l,D 1000 (revised 6-80)
:NV4
SII R" WEST SURVEYING
LICENSED LAND SURVEYING
5437 Black Olive Drive - Paradise, CA 95969
Plione; (9) 6) $77-6253
August 27, 1990
County Planning Department
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA. 95066
RE: Subdivisioh/Land Division Application for,
Horsethief Canyon Subdivision
Attached hereto, please find a copy of the Final Ma,p for Li ie
above refero-nood application. We respectfully request your re-
view of the map for Its oompliance with your condition(s) of
approval.
Please notify the County Public Works, to -olear the map for
filing and send a copy of correspandenoe to th'Ls office, if it
does not comply or you heed additional information, please notify
us,
Thank you for your prompt consideration of this matter.
Sincere lyo
SIERRA WEST URVEY INC
Robert G. Agozra-
Civil Eng i noer
Attachments t
TO:
or
X
SUBJECT
APPENDIX 11
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
r4
"FR
Office of Planning R earL 1W. Pl ty1n0i11g Department
1400 Tenth Street, om 121 7 Comet center Dr.l.ve.
Sacramento, CA 95 14 Oros LL'11c, CA 95965
County Clerlc
County of _ ButteREANO .13ECKER,Cunlyderk
17 Dqp*4
Filing of Notice of At ermmin on in compfiance with Section 21108 or 21152
of the Public Resources Code.
Project Title AP # Name
Tentative Parcel -Map 41--12-96 Newport Voclera;l
Staid Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Telephone Number
(1i submitted to Clearinghouse)
Public Works John Mendonse- 534-4266
Project Location on the south side of Durham-Pentz Road, approx. one
mile east of its intersection with Clark Road, Pentz area.
Project Description Tentative Parcel Map to divide 200 acres to create 4.
parcels: three 5 -acre parcels and one 184 -acre parcel,.
This is to advise that the Butte county Advisory Agency
Lead Agency or Responsible Agency
has approved the above described project and has made the following determinations
regarding the above described project:
1. The project will, S will not, have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant
tc the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CF -QA.
The EiR or Negative ►leclaration and record of project approval may be
examined at:
Butte Comity_rlarming Department
7_ CotttYt V. Cehter. Drives-OrOVilltl � _CA 95065 --_-�.
Mitigation measures were, _ were not, made a condition of the approval
of the project
4. A statement of Overriding 'Considerations was, , °� was not, adopted for
this project.
Bate Received for Plling 12--23-86 , "'�� :10 '�21,
Sig at, e
Stephen A. Streeter, Senior Planner
'ite
Rovised January 1995
t{i`a02
Newport Federal
Mitigation Measures
TPM, Ap441--12-96
1. Designate 50 fit. no-development area from the I7tt"]c of
Horse Thief Canyon Creek.
odWaY on the final map and dapIgnate 3,t
2. Map the Zone A merit area
as a no-develop.
Inter -Departmental MemOrandum
Tol Advisory Agency
psoMo Planning Director
tive Parcel Map for Newportedc'r,'l, on AP 4112.96
sueJscr Revised Report on Tenta
oATts December 16. 1986
This .is a ptoposal to divide 200 acres into 3 lots of 5 tt(,po"s each and
one remainder at 184 acres. The zoning U (Unclassified), W-1th a minimum
parcel size of 5 acres prior to adoption of a speei.fi,c r/3't,Ut�e+
`.The rand
Use Map of the Butte County General Plan designates tyFtis �rt'operty as
Agricultural Residential. There are no specific or rommum,11y plans for
the area.
This application is one on whish a Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding
envirotimental impact has been recommended. Clearance has been receivt�d
from the Health Department.
Since preparation of the November 3, 1986 Planning Direct'or's Report, a
revised map has been submitted. The previous map showed 3 five acre lots
to the west of 'Casandra Drive. The revised map proposes to create two five
asandra Drive and a third 5 acre lot ort the
acre lots on the West side of C
west property boundary. In making a recommendation fox approval on the
p6rvious parcel configuration, some allowances were made for the 5-7 acre
parcels on the east side of pr atertoDconsiderothehat the map parcel. sizesatobthe west
redesigned it would be
appropriate proposed Lot 3. To the west parcel sixes
of the property adjacent to the prop
are 551 acres, 640 acres under Williamson Act contract, and 606 acres under
Williamson Act contracts. Placement of Parcel. 3 in its current configuration
could result in an adverse impact to the use of adjolr-ng properties for
intensive grading. A five acre parcel Ys not compatj� � with the adjoining
parcel sizes. Creation of a five acre parcel may be growth inducing to the
adjoining large properties: Proposed Parcel 3 can not be considered a logical
extension of the rolling hills subdivision,
Recommendation:
Dezty the Tentatl.vk� Parcel Map application for Newport yederal on AP 41-12-96
ons 66474 (a) finding that the
proposed
in aln configuration igurationtedoesonotSconform to the t;enc ieai. Flan.
The fo,;t.owing Mitigation. Measures were submitted,
1. Designate a 50 ft, no -development area from the batik of Horse 'Thief Canyon
C,eek.
2 Map the Zone.A fl.00dway on the final map and designate it; as a no -development
area:
LMT t it
cc: Newport Federal
Sierra West Surveying
e n;
0
. _butte Cage
� ~�z r'f 1, 11 f � 1 � f I
_ 4 A r A D u� i A AI i y') A I i I G:� A l i 4 i
—� DEPARTMENT OF 1` 1J LIC HEALTH
DIVISION 0E ENVIRONM1 NTAL HEAL '111
November 12, 1986 p7 County Center Drive tj741 Clllait 1'1r,flil
Address O 196 Memorial Way pravlllo. California 9S9G5 hatodfaor tlrrrnig 95969
Reply to Chico, California 95926
Telephonw 916/891.2727 Tolophonot 916/534.4201 Tolephow 916/017,6308
Sierra Vlest Surveying
5431 Black Olive Drive
p; z ad se , CA 596SU".
0s;o.PtaMm
NQV 18 19a� RE: TPM Newport Federal,
h{orebai AP# 41-12-95
Orovill», Cd Penta Road
Clear Sirs
This department has advised the Butte CountyDepartment of Public Works
Land Development Section that we are prepared to act on the above
application.
Based on present infotmation, we can recommend approval or conditional
no-orova'1;
RgCOJ MENDED CONDI'T'IONS FOR APPROVAL
?rovi dea x.00'' leachfield free setback around exist- nct wells either
within rhe proner'ty or within 100' of the property boundaries ok1
2. Show a 50' leachfield setback from the d;raiizaae way on parcels,
l 2, and 3.
3. Shaw a 100' leachfield setback from, the highwater line of the creek
on parcel 4
4, Show the usao'i.e sewaue disposal area proven to meet the
rerrui,rements of the Subdivision Or,di'nance on 'parcels 1, 2 and 3.
5, Prove that the required quantities cf domestic water are available
to parcels 1, 2., and 3.
If you have any questions regarding this letter; please contact Tom
Hucr1jeit at the above listed address nr telephone number between 8;00
10:00 A.14, wee`kdays .
Very truly yours
hoard J. Snyder ';YX . R, S
'Division of Dnvironmental Health
W18/fni
cC f P7.annin�t Departfient
Inter -Departmental Memorandum
TO.' Butte County Advisory Agency
FROM: Planning Director
SUBJECT, Report on TPM for Newport Federal on AP#41-1,2-96
DAM November 3, 1986
This is a proposal to divide 200 acres into 3 lots of
5 acres each and 1 remainder at 184 acres-. The zoning
18 Unclassified. The Land Use Map of the Butte County
General Plan designates this property as Arg-ricultural-
Residential. There are no specific or Community plans
for the area.
This application is one on which a mitigated negativcs
declaration reqatding, environmental impact has beenrecommended. The applicant has been unabts to comply
with Health Department and Subdivision Ordinance
requirements.
Recommendation:
Find that the applicant has been unable to meet the
requirements of the Health Department, the,application
has been pending for an extended period of time, and
deny the Tentative Parcel Map application for Newport
Federal on AP#41-12-96 in accordance with Section
15109 of the CEQA Guidelines4 In the event that the
applicant can comply with the Health Department
requirements, then it would be appropriate to approve
the map with the following conditions:
1. Designate a 50 foot no development area from the
bank Of Hotsethief Canyon Creek.
2. Map the Zone A floodway on the final map and
designate, it as a no development area.
LT:jmc
tc.6 Newport Federal
Sierra West Surveying
r � `
R � S PRofESSIONAI ARCH/Eoj0 iCA BuffeCO3i�►��nr►;yC
�i � SERVICES
�. FEB �. �1 LyUb
Oroville, C01(jorpi
Butte County Planning Commission February l(�, 1956
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965-3397
Subject: 1.1. C. Horning Subdivision Archaeological c' .
Dear Planners; ,�taxvcy
On February 3, 1986
Paradise, I performed ' under contract to Sierra tOt�s-t Surveying of
vey of the 15 an archaeological rece,; search and on -sig a sur
acre M. C. Horning Subdivision shown
Surveying tentative parcel ma on the
within Section 26 P as Parcels 1, 2, and 3, Serra West
township 21N, Range 3E of the Cherokee 7.51
parcel lies
graphic quadrangle. 'the property is adjacent to po-
Mile south Casandra DrveUabouto
Of Pen'tz Road,
The survey was a complete and s,
the } sCematic recoll1aissance
Property was traversed by means of
20 meters apart; Ground surface visibilit parallel t in which
denseimped transects spaced about
subsur£acesexposuresd the vieiv in Y was mostly good
places; X was able to observeseveralexcavation made for aalong a small creek and in
or prehistoric culturaloresources was eviobsde d, what appears to be an
a - cvhatsaever of historic
A complete report ,,
that meets the p of thin archaealogical survey
requirements of the State Office rvey has been
Two copies of this formal Prepared:
to ical anal re ort of historic Preservation.
g Inventor p awe on file at the Cali Ion. Arahaeo�
vets �`� NortheaSt Xnformat ori Center
y, Chico, and one copy is on file with S•' California State Uni
Black Olive Drive, paradise,
Sierra rest Surveying] 5487
The report explains the
vey in relation to CEA
graphic, and historic backgroundnsurmpatiesnatretal Purpose of the sur
results , archaeological, eth.no
of the study are given includ- Provided- Complete
field survey methods g results of , and
absence , and survey results. the records search,
of cultural resources on the Eased e apparent
retort that archaeolo property, x r,- thtotal
�£ development archaeological clearance be granted
Asa th !'!!'d within the
t�crk of the ptopeirt tesla strpulation that
an than locus should ccaseruntilsanitarchaeolo xst 0"Itu
evaluate the resource presence a.f � cal resources,.
men,, and make appropriate recOmMendat,10,18 foraitsntreat-
xf you require anport
of the formal re Y additional 1.
'nfarmation or will► t ,
, please feel Free to contact n,e, a f .rsive a copy
Very truly yours;
-4
d1tAED iA4YtR 6635 OUa9P We Alfrep FarberY, '�'�rediseI Ca. 596 19161 V2-
II[Al NEVtItSEWM11NDtk 3181 Gbdmah Aveh3164
ue; Chico, Ca. 56g26 4 i9151' 342_
02ya
-L" -Ai., SURVEY OF THE
PROPOSED M. C. HORNING SUBDIVISION
BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
8 rePort by
P atESSIONAI Anch t.IOGICAI SERVICES
6635 Quall Way • Paradise, CA 95969
AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE
PROPOSED M. C. HORNING SUBDIVISION
BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
by Alfred Farber
INTRODUCTION
M. C. Horning Las applied. to the Butte County Planniij& Coimission for
a permit to subdivide a 200 acre property, so as to create LhLrQL3 five -acre
parcels for sale as residential
Plots, Acting upon provi63.uj1s of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning
Formed prio -site survey be per-
COM"AiSsion. re-
quested that an archaeological records search and on
r to ruling on thu, PP-rmit application, Accordingly, action
behalf of the landowner; Sierra West Surveying of Paradise contract-dng with
Professional Archaeological Services (PAS) of Paradise to Uodqrtake the
records search and archaeological I reconnaissance of the three five -acre
parcels and to prepare this report of the results of the study,
PROJECT CONTEXT
Geographical and Environmental Setting
As depicted on Map I (Project Lccation)$ the 15 acre project area it
situated in the southwestern ? Of Section 26, Township 21N, Range 3E of the
Cherokee, California 7_151 UgGS (1570) topographic qUadtangle, Horsethief
Creek flows j"Ist a few 'meters to the or t of the proif"'t area Which lies in
the center of Butte County, The project area is about utie-half mile south
of Horsethief Canyon on the edge of Sacramento Valley about 400 feet above
mean sea level. Messilla Valley is about one mile to the east. The town
of Paradise is about seven miles north of the project area, while the town
Of Orovilla is about nine miles to the south.
A seasonal c.+ -k that flows approximately north to south and eventually
flows into HorsPtJ,3,Q1 Creek digects the parcel, and a knoll parallels the
to the west. The ct�ek, Yinp cut downward about two to three meters
to badroe�,. ,i, an impervious bqd
G 4 L L)t Partially consolidated el,1.1y. Vegetation
includes grasses, nettles, and a oak 110-ar the Creek, 1. Several small
trees have been planted on the propevt"
C" !'Id surrounded with pt,otective fen-
citig i Animals observed during the sur4-v t, hide several qp(t%g of birds
and a rabbitj but it is presumed t1 C,L
iced this vicinity. that marry animal SPLI(Atio once inhab-,
There are obvious and 'recent signs of the prosi
,r, -o
.tock on the
parcel, and 9 few down fenceposts were observed, There Ttl itv, rock outcrops
but there is an abudingasalt,undance of small., streamworn pebbles of '-AawL. quartz) and
igneous rocks inclb
o
Exposures to subsurface soil strata were afforded by L-, 'treatn :,°ut;,,
rodent burrows and an apparent excavation for a foundation plitform, Titt„t
red -brown loam appears to be uniform for several meters dowtlward, and tjiore
was no evidence of a midden deposit,
Ethnographic Background
Prior to the arrival of Euroamericans, this ref- n wog Inhabited by
the Northwestern Maidu i:ndians; These people occupi:(•.f the
the Sacramento Valley and adjacent pohantern side' of
rtions of the Sierra Nevada foothi1),t
from about Sutter Buttes in the south to a point several 1111les `orth of (11icc,.
They apparently shared common cultural and linguistic 0174,1ns with the N01,,th.-
eastern Maidu who inhabited the upper Feather River drainta80 area eastW�11,(l
to about the Sierran crest, and the Southern Maidu or Nisvt7an who occupit+,�
portions of the valley and the western Sierran slopes to the south of the
Mcrthwestern Maidu within the Bear, American, and Yuba River drainages
Collectively, these three Maiduan-speaking divisions constituted one oC rJvL
language families within the California Penutian linguistic stock (Riddell1978;:370-372).
The Northwestern Maidu are also known to anthropologists as the;Konkow.
They arc believed to have been divided into several local bands . The br�t�i
that inhabited the valley in the Chico/Oroville vicinity was called yhe
Michoopda, Their villages were situated primarily along the banks of metjop
we tex,,tays ,
Archaeolo. .al Baclrground
On the basis of several series of excavations near the project area,
and particularly in ilearby Messilla Valley, a tentative sequence of prehi,s-�
toric occupation. of this area spanning tits last 31000' years or more has been
developed (Olsen and Riddell. 1963; Ritter 1970, Markley 1918), The so, -called
Oraville Locality prehistoric sequence begins with the Messilla Complex which
is thought to date from 1000 t,C: or earlier to about A.D. 1. This ancient
and tionsnrn1th'erSLerraral Nevadarknowrtnasarh2een Martip�d with coeval tnanifesta-
omplex or Martis Tradition,
and With squall}* ancient cultural traditions of the Central Valley such as
the', ndmiller Tradition, However, according to Olsen. and Riddell (1903:52), h
the '..,,intermediate geographic: position of thin
as a distinct comploxp, ts$e: clear fess�lla) complex.
In the. foothills coupled with distinctive elemEnts clear]. establishes it
Ritter (1970:173-174) identified four complexes that apparently post
date the Messilla Complex in this area. Prom the earliest to latest, they
are the Bidwell, Sweetwater, Oroville, and Historic Com lexu'3,
Complex represents the Maidu who were cucoufttered here listod , Tl,y,hriandoboth
Ritter (1970) and Markley (1978) speculate that these four U0111P.Axes repre-
sent an unbroken sequence of Maiduan occupation, More recently, Farber (1982)
has implied that the Messilla Complex might also represent ri Maiduan boeup.1:.
tion or that of a closely related Pent,tian-speaking culture,
i:istorical Context
One of the earliest European incursions into the upper Sacraments Valley
was led by the Spanish explorer Cabriel Moraga, who in 1$C,21 explored the
-2-
lower reaches of the Feather River. In 1820, Captain Luis Arguello led an
expedition into the foothills east of the project area and gave; 1,he Venther
River its name (Farris and Smith 1882:144-145). By 1828 and throughout the
1830s, Hudson's Bay Company and America,l For Company trappers were active
in Konkow territory throughout Butte County (Wells and Chambers 197'3:128).
In 1844, Mexican Governor Manuel Micheltorena issued a(*varnl land
grants 'w:thin northern California including the large tract: In presant-day
Chico that was awarded to John Bidwell. Bidwell settled on his Chico estate
in 1847 (Wells and Chambers 1973:128-129) In March of 18401 Bidwell dis-
covired gold along Feather River, and the rush into Butte County was soon
on (Wells and Chambers .1973:,129).. The Konkow, who in 1833 liud suffered dcv-
astating malaria epidemics ane. lost perhaps 75% of their population (Cool:
1955:322), were unable to resist the onslaught of gold rushers and were soon
overw'n e lme d ,
Conflict between whites an,r the Konkow was probably initiated in 1843
when a party of travelers fired on the Indians (Bidwell 1906:75--79 as cited
in Riddell 1978:385). During the early gold rush years, a rancher named
Pence, who lived close to the project area, and for whom Pentz Road and thq
small community of Pentz are named, became famous (or infamous depending on
one's point of view) as a self-appointed Indian fighter. In 1851, he hung a
Konkow for allegedly stealing cattle, a crime for which he was sindoubtedl,y
not tried or convicted. In 18;53, Pence led a reprisal against the Konkow at
Dogtown (now called Magalia), killing about 25 people. During the same y0ar,
Indians were alleged to have killed 10 Chinese miners, and fence led a party
of Chinese and whites in the killingChambers 1973:217). Duri.n:v the '1850s and 1860s, most of the survivingand
of about 40-60 Indians (Wellssd
a
Konkow were removed to the Round Valley Indian Reservation, and the county's
"Indian troubles" eventually ceased (Wells and Chambers 1973;221-222),
A number of industries arose in support of the miners including stock
raising, lugging and saw -milling, transportation, and massive hydraulic works.
Ranching is still the primary industry of the project area vicinity.
VA0JECT RESULTS
Records Search
y'
A rest++ds and literature search was performed by the author -tt the
California Archaeological 1hventor Northeast Information Center, California
Stat+:: University, Chico. The purpose of the records search is to ascertain
whether any cultural resources had been recorded or are known to (!XLstt4ithin
and adjacent to the project area, The records search also renders Informa-
tion concerning previous archaeological studios undertaken in the project
area vicinity and provides a bibliography of :archaeological and hi.qtorical
literature relevant to the area.
The records search revealed that the project area lies within a rich
but muutwally explored archaeological district centering around Net;sil.l.a
Valley ana the adjacent buttes and canyons. About 18-19 prOli8t6tic sites
have been recorded in the vicinities of Steamboat hock and Clear Crelek and
Cory Canyons located about two to three miles to the west and northwest of
the project area. Two prehistoric sites, CA -But -275 and -276, lig: about
two miles north of the project area. 'These are village sites possessing
pi eposits that: were recorded
bedrock mortar stations housea.ts, and midden d
in 1966 by Riddell and 'Ritter.
To the northeast, toward and within Messilla Valley, t:l'ttare are at
least eight recorded prehistoric sites within about three miles of the
project area; All but one of these sites were recorded in 1964 and 1971
by Humphreys; the other was recorded in 1981 by McGann. 'Cliese. sites in-
clude villages with housepits and middens, rockshelters, mkl bedrock mortar
stations. Three of these sites were subjected to stnallr,(nIa test excava
._i.ons by Humphreys, but unfortunately, the results have liever been formally
reported (William Dreyer, Assistant Coordinator, Northarant. Information Cen-
ter 1986:personal communication to author).
Two prehistoric sitesi village site CA -But -315 recorded in 1971 by
Humphreys, and CA -But -527, a bedrock mortar station recorded in the same
year by Stringfellow, Thompson, and Hill, are situated near Dry Creek about
one mile south of the project area, With the exception of these two sites,
virtually all of the prehistoric sites in the vicinity lie within the canyons.
and Buttes rather than in unsheltered tracts of the valley floor.
Field Survey Methods
The entire 15 acre project a;ea was subjected to a complete, syste-7tic
on -Foot survey. The parcel was traversed by means of parallel tra►,sec,ts
spaced no more than 20 meters apart. Transects were walked in zig-zag
fashion to maximize ground surface coverage Special attention was given
to the knoll adjacent to the small creek and to subsurface exposures offered
by the creek and a foundation excavation in the southwestern part of the
project area.
Survey Results
The field survey failed to reveal evidence of any significant historic
or prehistoric cultural resource
Recommendations
Giv _,n the ,a'pparent absence of significant histr• -ic or prehistoric cul
tural resources within the 15 acre subdivision, archaeological clearance seems
warrented and is recommended. However, should subsequent development of the
property reveal any r-eviously unobserved cultural remains such as artifacts,
structural features, human burials, hearths, or 'midden$ it is recommended that
development should be halted on. that locus itrmeda.ately until a qualified arch::
aeologi.st can be consulted to evaluate the signficance of the remains and
recommend appropriate treatment of them,
-4-
REFEREINCES CITED
Cook, Sherburne F. E ,apology
1955 The epidemic of 1830-1833 in California
41.
}�tavt; sitY
of Ca1.�03�326.nia PuHerlceleyns
43(3),
Farber, AlfredRidge, Novgda County►
1982 Archaeological
excavations
Chationlof£theMa tlo and Mesi.11a
California, program,
complexes, publications o the RCalforni California Stat(,'
Anthropological Papers Number 3
Calico.
Farris, and Clarence L. Smith
of plumas, Lassen, and Sierra Counties, Ctrl�clrn.
1882 History Berkeley),
(reprinted in 1971 by Howell -North Eooks:
Y
Mark11978RiA cha
Butte Co1.11"�-5e ).
Archaeological excavations in the Or thesis,oville LDepartment of Anthro
California, 1975+ Unpublished M.A•
pology; California State University, Chico.
Olsen, W. H. and F. A. Riddell
1963 The archaeology of the leaches and estern iParks aArchaeolog Archaeological
California Division of
Number S. Sacramento:
Francis A. n Handbook of 'North American Indians Volume
R adell, _ 37o -A6, gmithsc -ian
1978 "+aide and Kankow. i Heizer, ed,,pp.
California, Robert F
Institution, Washington, D.C.
Eric 41. culture history and culturf
Ritter,
e1970 iorthetn Sierra foothill archaeology'-
Archaeological Research
at Davis publicatiof
process. cente,c £ux Archa" Davis •
Number 2.171-184, University of Californias
. L. and W, L. Chambers Berkeley, (first
Wells,
Harry
11'0,3 History of Butte. County. 11awe11-:North gooks,
published in 1882)
5
MAP, I
Project
Locati
fnf
�., j
` I pUg7 1r �
Ito
11
4M I
1C 5 �4
pri
it
i ;
$pr-lriRa ,i1' Da �M tl m PO w
lean eekLOO
, "�•"._. � :��i{41 t� « ro-
a Isa e 24 > n 1"
a" 1 SOO , I
2 i 1
—� . �' 14r' ✓`'V r a '14itsviaVal hY
Sch tN
Penh
64
v, 1 1 Storage W. 429 � �`
1 I 1g
rrrz
27
400
r
EROJECT AREA I Par141 eoit ;)
jj r
1. y y 'Nabinha y
SM 371 V °• ",•..,;,, w� +�'t � ,r'"„r
S.
e,
35 41,
We
es
l
lam
J� .�
a� r F 10 a�stl4
CH8ROXE8 OUAORAI' OL
GALII`ORNiA--BUTTE COQ
7.5 Mit4U`rt SERIES (TOPObgAP141C
. . . . . . . . . . .
E e
E to
WEST
I.IC",CNSED 1,AND SURNrEYINGCA 959G9
111:37 13lack olive Drive - Paradise,
P011c, (916) 877-6253
January 1 1966
WuOir Co. Mlann1n9 C+o
orovill®, GalltornIs
County of Butte
Planning DepartmeT1t
County Center Drive
oroville, CA 959 5
Attention Laura Tuttle
RE: NewP-12-96
t Fedral Parcel Map
AP
Rear Laura: 10o 19�3e✓ t we offer
In response to your letter dated January
the following agree to a.50° no -development area
banks -
Item �1�Es F, G: We will ag
orsethief Canyon Creek to protect the creed banks.
from H e of AG ]and. cannot be con
The loss of 15 acres of this type clients are leaving 18�
sidered detrimental to this area as my
:acres undisturbed
Suitab�.e drainage facilities Will
thee$utteaCounty`
ed
Item # -S: ro'ect, as required by
on any r�eW roads in this p J
Departmant o£ public Works. suggestion as a mitigation...
Item #3-D J: We agree with this
measure. ulrements of the Butte County
We Will meet the requirements
to �e1J-s and, septic to
Item ',. --b: Watex �loWin
Environmental Health Department Greek) asg Gell as ;any
insure Water quality
ro
drainages Within the p perty
In the R011ir g Hills
living `Dining AG gees were
oLtind that tuned people ad J lands
item �:
We question resp ses riculture of th acl oink ng
Estates The type of uses in ars With this ty'�d of range
favorable. concliE�ions • noise levels are 1ow,
makes t'or pleasant livspraying off' Chemical s,
lana, there i,s no sp y g
e uip�.ent use are .almost nonexistent•
and q
M
0 A
0
NEWPORT FEDERAL PNC
aANUARY 16, 198L -
PAGE
g8L.SAGE 2
TUha people at Rolling Hills Estates have also indicated that
the have y I g ,
y .- not had an problems with governmental servl.ces as 1t
is a .low crime rate area as well; as a 1014 fire Hazzard' area When
proper precautions have been taken on each homed to.
children presently take the bus to school and
district does not foresee a discontinuance ofthis sor sce.
.rvice
Item #11 Expansion will occur, but with large tracts of
Williamson Act, 'Lands, open space will be protected..
item,#1 -A• The parcels will be included. in tho ro .
tenance that presently exists. ad main
r�tem L 1 : Again, this has not been a problem for area x*
dents, The Level of governmental services has been, and is, esiM
adequate to serve their needs according to residents of this a
Item ro il
De artment—. -- 'roof of water is a requirement of
p - � e the
as cat with their of'f'ice on these Outlyinglth
areas, as it ma,y save your Office time in exploring this.
Item #16 -Db The Butte County Environmental Health De
dors a very good ,job of insuringthat the septic areas partmcnt
protOct 'all ground waters, are safe
with the tau
Item -#17-A: Again, as in Item #16-, we Urge tie County Environmental Health Department. OU to check
Provide you with a last of requirements for land d.visionsetoWill
Insure safety ,for our streams, lakes, wells, etcetera;
Item #20: We will provide for a curve Upon clf�
the other environmental documents listed abovUp arances of
Sincerely,
TRW .'rk
SIERRA WEST SURVEYlga
Thomas Wrinkle
1'
A1'171N1)I K 1;
COUNTY OF mm-lrF
CNVIROWENTAL CHECKLIST FORh1
(to be complete by Lead Agency)
Lot it 85-12-03—b4
t3ACKCROUNO AP 9 41-1.2--96
NEWPORT FEDtRAL
1 Name of proponent .__ y- -
2. Address of proponent and reprOsenta%ivr (if app'I.id°rablo)
Ne�vport_Federal P..__Sierra,_j_es:t. SUI.I'Vt
853 Mar zanita Ct: 5437 Black QliVCj, Driye
Chico, CF, 95926 Paradise, CA 95968
3. 1),r•o j cart d-esC riptiOn Tentative Parcel Maw
11, r1ANWOrtY V1,NDlNGti 01: SWINIFICANCh YnS tIAYBR NO
a, hoes the project htive the potential to degrade the
duality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below Self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant o7
anima.d community, reduce the number or restrict the
range or a, rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
of' California history or prehistory?
b, Hoes the project have the potential to achieve
short-term benerits to the detriment or long1tet°ru,
environmental goals? (A short-term impact oil the
environrnont is one WhiCh OCCLIVs In a rel atively
brier period of time while long; -term imjMcts will
enduro into the ruture.) s�>
e, Hoes the project have impact-, which are Individu-
ally limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A
project may impact ori two or more separate vesourcos
where Chc impact on each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect o r ttae total of t)Us
impacts Carl the environment is signiricant,)
d, Hots the project have environmental errecta Which
will cause substantial adverse eireets on human y
beings, dither directly or Indirectly"' ..
I'll, 1111"'1'f,R INATIONCro bV V01110ett'd by °thd• LLc,Id Ag1cy'1
Oil tho basl:q or thi.. irr'itial crva.lu,rtia�nt
1✓IV1: !"incl thv 1 rulrcawtr,l I',)1t1j cl t:ttt11,I) Nt)'r have a�6f, rl l icant er "eLt
can tile vnv l ronmc�rat �, ;111d a NlatAT I Vt; llUCLARATTON, w i 1 I by prepared,
�1 UWE find that al :laugh 'tho hr�crhosvd project could INVO U sigtli 'i-
cant orreet on t.hr Cnvirorimtra,t, t•1le", Will not b(! " tilllni.rieant
orrect In this case her,uar;r thePlt'I'1tiATION h1i1A:lOWI.'I ►loseribed, on.
the attaches] snIert avcl bvVrr add0d tO 01Vprnjc�ct. A N110ATTV1;
DI-CLARATION w*11 be prepared.
T/li't; I'Ind the proposed project MM havd, a signirlr attt orrect on
the envirorrmeat, and an 1'1NV'l1kONWiNTAI, IhIhAC`I' RE.P RT 18 tretlui,r0d.
L1A'I'}:; O'alitzary_ 1,0,r .1986,.�.�. .,__ �.
C6�tIN"1'Y 01' t3tIT`I 11, 111LANN I NO 1)BPAllrw.-N`r
By
zeura tltt'lit
Assn"e Pla:
Rev iewo t by,,
-
JACTS
I;V , LNVIRONMENTAL S� es,, and ''maybe" answers are required'
a y
•xp _ anat� ons o
on attached sheet (s) YES
MAYBE NO
--
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant:
conditions or in changes in
a, Unstable earth
geologic substructures? compaction or
displacements,
(�
b. Disruptions,
overcovering of the soil.?round surface
in topography or g
-
�.-.
C. Change
relief features?
covering or mojif ication of any
d. Destruction,
unique geologic or physical features?
in wind or water erosion of soils,
e. Increase
either on or off-site?~---
in or ersion of beach
f. Changes
hangion
estin siltation, deposition
s ands , or c g dify the channel, o, f
may
or erosion which mo
xiver or stream or the bed of the ocean o,,
a
any bay, inlet or l.al;e?
agriculturally productive soll.s ,
x
g, Loss of prime
outside designated urban areas? geologic
t,
h, Exposure of people or proper
as earthquakes, an dsgides, mud-
hazards such
Slides, ground failure or similar hazards?
24 AIR. Will the proposal result in s bs aniial:
deter
Air
Z—. emissions or
air quality?
The creation of objectionable odors, smoke
__..
b.
or fumes?
c, Alteration air movement, moisture, or
of
in climate,
X
temperature, or any change
locally or regionally?
proposal result in substantial:
3. WATER. will the pits pn
the course or
a . Changes i. currents, or
direction f water movements in either
� ction o
_._.
marine or fresh waters? 'Patterns)
b Changes in absorption rates, drainage p
unoEfl
rimprove-
or the rate and amount drainageSurface
Need. for oil -site surf
channel
C.
meats, including vegetation removal,
installation?
itation or ctalvert
d, Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
e, Change in the amount of Surface mater in any
water body? or in any
f, Discharge into surface Waters, includh.'np
alteration of surface water quality, -
limited to temperature, dissolved
but not
oxygen or turbidity?
the direction or rate of flow
glteratxon
g of
of ground waters? of ground waters,
in the quantity -
......
h. Change or with
either through direct additions
interception of an
dxawals, or through
aquifer by cuts Or excavations?
otherwise
is 1.Reduction in the amount of water.
for water .supples?
X.
public
available p to watev
j, Exposure of people or property
flooding?
related hazards such as
YES MAYBE,
4, PLANT LIFE. Will th
— C - . e Proposal result in substantial:
a, ange in the diversity of species, or number
of any species of plants (including trees,,,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of ani ,unique) taro
or endangered species of plants?
C. Introduction of new species of plants into apt
area, Or in a barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species?
A
10, RISK OF UPSET, Will the proposal involve,
a, A HsT- o�r- explosion or the -release of hazard -
Reduction
uductiOn in acreage of any agricultural crop?
ous substances (i,ncludi-igj but not limited to,
Oil, Pesticides, chemicals or 'radiation) in thLi
8.
ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. C ange in the diversity of species,
an emergency
response P14A or emergency evacuation plait?
or numbors
of any species of animals (birds, land anUvi3,;
II, ,POPULATION. Will the Proposal alter the location,
i0ii,
U19tritu n, density, or growth rate of the human
including -reptiles, fish and shell fisho
12, HOUSING. Will tile proposal affect existing housing,
benthic organisms or insects)?
or create a demand for additional housing?
b. Reduction in the numbers Of any unique, rallo
or endangered species of animals?
c. IntrodULtion of new species of animals into
an area., Or result in a barrier to the migra,tion
or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish orwildlife
habitat?
6,
NOISE. Will the Proposal result in substantial:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
bi Exposure
of People to SOVere noise levels?
7.
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce
919711ficTE-11"I"ght and glare?
8,
LAND USB,Will the Proposal result in a
substan ial alteration Of the
Present or planned
land use of an area?
9.
. NATURAL RESOURCES;
4 Wi!! the Proposal result in
substantial,,—
a. Increase in the rate of Use of any natural
resources?
b. Depletion of any non-renewable n3 -Viral
resources?
10, RISK OF UPSET, Will the proposal involve,
a, A HsT- o�r- explosion or the -release of hazard -
ous substances (i,ncludi-igj but not limited to,
Oil, Pesticides, chemicals or 'radiation) in thLi
event of ail accident or upset condition's?
b. Possible interference with
an emergency
response P14A or emergency evacuation plait?
II, ,POPULATION. Will the Proposal alter the location,
i0ii,
U19tritu n, density, or growth rate of the human
population?
12, HOUSING. Will tile proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
1
YES: MAYBE N
Lae sal
13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. will thy. propo
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking? l transportation
c. Substantial impact on existing
systems?
d. Significant alterations to present: patterns
of circulation or movement of people and/or
goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
.i
f. ,lcrease in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
i4. 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?
47 Other governmental. services?
15. ENERGY. Will, the proposal result in: 7
a t.se of substantial amounts of fuel.or energy,-
b. Substantial isrreasnr.require development
n existing
sources -f energy, Quireth
of new sourm of
16. UTIL____i��• Will the propsal result x� a need for
new systems, or substantial al teration5 tv; the
following. g.ower�or natural gas?
b. Communscations systems?
c. Water avai,labil ity
d. Sewer or septic tank?
e. Storm water drainage?
f, Solid waste and disposal?
" H Rkj HEAL`iH, Will.: the.: proposal result in..!
C-rea n` of any health hazard Or potential.
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential heal.th
hazards?
18 , AESTHETICS Will. the proposal resvl t . in the
o • struction of any Scenic pvx5.salor viewsult tlne to
the public, or III the Ptly
creation of ari aesthetinally ofCeiisi"ve site open
to public vital?
X
X
2
I
X, E.S,
M NO
19, REMIATION Will the proposal: result in an impact
upon trie quality or
quantity of existing recreatJonal
Opportunities?
._�.
20, CULTURAL RESOURCES
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site?
b. Will the proposal result 4.n adverse phys: cal
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric err
historic building,
'
structure or object'?
c. Doethe proposal have the potential to caus
a r,ysical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religio�tq
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
V. DISCUSSION OE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 41-1:2-06
See attached.
J
Old AP 41-1�-906
lbovt All properties are served by existing access road*,
C)veroo,vering will be limited to homesites. OvercoverinQ Is e,04-t;lfilOted
at I /a acre per parcel , i acre tota I - 1*1 -ie rolling terr'alli will
require some grading for building pads. Grading will ho llmltoo by
the prom ixItY of bedrock.
1ef: On-si,t-0 soils are highly su8ceptibleto erosion, Vroslort can
be Minimized by observing a 50 -foot no -development area (,Tiom
Florsethlof Canyon Creek. This setback will provide SOM0 protection to
the creek banks.
.1g: Wyman soils are hl9hlY suited to extensive range U06v Lands
south and Host are under Williamson Act contracts fOl- OrMall`10,
160 --acre minimum. The project will convert a minimum Of' 15 acres of
Productive soils In the heart of zIn agricultural comrourlItY* Orovilles
i2 miles distant, Is -the nearest urban area.
Bbe Surface water runoff into Horsethlef Creek will
cross the
Gyre I nago f 8c I I I t I es wl 11 on I y be requ I red where access r ct
t� reek ( i - c. , ParcP I I ) -
�4d�j: The Creek 18 a mapped Zone A floodHayi This floodNay shall be
designated on the final map as a no-deyelopment area.
6d: or), Creek supports both an anAdromous and warm water fishery.
1mpropet- Placement of wells and septic alone its tributaries will
adversely affect Water quality and fish habitat -
e, The laid Is zoned Us Unclassified, and designated
Aoricultural-Residentl8l on the Gene"raI plan, Without specific ZOMIMP
bt- an oreo Plan) 20-8cre parcels can generally be found 1-•� comPlla!100-
With Qnclasslfled toning, 0 finding of conformity relies heavily 00
General plan pblIcles, As noted 00 tho Conformance Report) the
project do09 not Meet two Of the flue mandatory findings- Rural
rosideni--lal 18 hot compat.lble with aorIcultUtIal OlJ9r0tIOhs4
The property it outside of an urban area we
coMmorclal
ser vices, governmental servlcet,high schools and eMployrnenb are
avallable, Compatibilltv With f'Ire standards is que.-itlontkble, The
nearer:)-' year-round 9taffod Plt*0 station is 12 Miles OWOY a w Ordvllle
and Durham, butte College is volunteer only.
'lit ExpahSlOh Of an uhlrlcorpora;ted i_,Ommuhity Will be Promoted by thl,g
Mapk
13a'. Addo-st to 'Parcels it off catsamdraj a 1pl-4lvat:0 gravel road.
f=uture owners will be responsible for road MOInteM811CO
k', -
r
14t As noted umd�--P item 81 tl'o Me8t_'est staff6d flr'e "AtlolI 15 12
miles away. Allowing growth outside or urban areas Implies 0
comm ItMbnt to provide oovernme, Ito) !services, 1-6dotion"depohdont
slorvltds -- poildet fire, animal control — cannot be provided 06st,
efpoctivdly In Outlying troat6 As the Community Orb"i the demand for
all ooydrnmaht8l services and need for Infrastructure IticrOOZOst With
the ptegent taxet idn _I, e County ahh afford c Ot
and revenue structure, the
6
to provide ari increased level of services.
16cs Proof of water must be demonstrated..
1 6d o Shallow soils will limit installation of septic t,�Onj<s Under rio
circumstances will septtcs or wells be allowed within the floodway.
17a: A health hazard would result if wells or septic$ worse located in
the floodway
20 Butte County maps indicate the site may contain arelwaoological
resources. A survey will be required on Parcels 7-S.
Applicant: NewPort Assessor's Parcel it
441-12-96
Log # 85 -12 -Oa -04
2616-5bg—PT
A.
1. Type of Land divisioni
2. Brief DesV.IrlPtiW-I'- Tentative Parcel IvIaP dividillo 199 acres t
and one p.W-Col at 184
create tt,o, cue p,,,'. QO Is at 5 acres each
acres.
3. Locatlon�' 01-i the south side of Durham-Pentz Robd,
approXimotel y I Mile east of its Intersection with Clark Road i.
central 'autte.
4., Proposed DensttY of Development.' I d.u. per parcel4
S. AmoUnt'-."Af ImporvIOUS surfacing: 'I ar-re additional .
66 Access and Nearest Public Road(s)"- Frontage on Cassandra and
buriham-,'Ient2- Disposal: Septic systems--
7. Method oaf Sal-izge
D. Source of Water Supply: individual wells -
9. Prox'vmitV of Power Lines: To original parcoli.
10. potejjti.aj fot-- further land dIvIsOorfs and development -
Extremely llinited by shallow soils.
13. -eniv —roaw-'qwlw�q -WMn
Terr�► I n
a. Goheral Topographic character: Rolling grassland.
b. !-1.1 GPe5-
8%$ 20% along treek.
r- 11
c. .levatlan
3215-400
d. Limiting tactors: None.
2. Soli8browm�
a, Types and Characteristics. Wyman Series, 40
slit -loam, moderate to slow permeability, well draInAtIpi
high suitability for range U"4 to Ins"Ilation
b4 LI'mItIhO radtOrs: 80i's are not conducl"
of septic tanks,
8. N8twral Ha-Abrds, Of the Land st of potontIO11Y
a. Ebrthquoko Zone" MOdOrOtOs 2 miles ea
5l:
faults
b. Enos lori pot0heial: Hloh,
d. Laodslllde Potential" NOnO-
d, 1vire Hazard: llodGratoo
eW Expanstvr� Soil Potential. Nome.
4, HVO-o 1 OQY
a6 surface Walter-- Two branches of Dry Crook (Horse Thief
Crook) cross 'iho property,
b. Groundwater; Unknown resource.
",g �
•
Drain
into Dry Cr 01#
c, Drainage Characteristics. B5�40".
d. Annual Rainfa' 1 (normal)* -
Creek } 3 a Zane A}roriWay
e- Limit t,,, F=actors=
Quality: V}star of Pent
z'fnthiiiY
5 visual/Scenic Good.
6. Acoustic Quality:
7. Air raual i ty Good a
B_ lo,vira m nt.
Vegetation Grassl and, f
ew rema 1 n i rig oak trr��+ r introduced
8.
eucal yPtus ' in Dry Greek
q- Wildlife Habitat F}sherY
onm�er��t
H1 jah
Inv 1 r i cal and hi stor•`i cal Resources i n they area
1p- Archde0109 General plan desF
Butte County gnation
11.
AOr i cul tura i -Res i dent i al • dat^r1 OM.1 1 whol esa l a
12 Existing Zoning= U
Land Use on -Site.
C`?>� 1. Homes i to s
1�. EKstlrti9
nursery Area land
14. Surrounding Rural residential,
graznG
a- Land Uses"
b, Zoning*'9ne
U, A••160• a
Gen : Pian dAgricultural-Rssldentlal, Open
c . es i t i CyM
and Grazingr4ernal Mder 2i70W6C10
d,, Parcel Sixes= Pocket of 5-act'e eaa
e, Papulation: Sparse. Open G��az1n9 land,
15. Character of site and Ville °12 +/- m11es• Mosquito
A6, Nearest Urban Area; Butte County
i7. Rel avant Spheres of T of l uence
Abatement District. Not appllcablo
l�. Improvements Standards Urban Area' 5�lCe% Miles eastx
{q» i✓ire Protection SerCStatoi Pira Station`
1s63; 1� m} 1#
'
8. Nearest County M11
es south.. a� } ty only.
b. WaterAvailability= Eine cap Drovillo Union High
20. Schools in Area iOM
Golden Foather UMe
School,,
-9-