Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
042-010-057
... �.. «. kS bs J. Ln. 1�Z.t:rF_T ptak,NNIVIG C jarties & Geraldine Paiva �7-06-0 13.93 Carmen. Lane, Chico, CA 92926 .._.. *.�,.......,*.�-.. ..�.». Same�«�:.,.....+.�.,�,- ....:._....,, to divide �3 acres create Tentative Subdivisx ol� Map...k.�-,.» ].2 Z2.5, � � 12.7, 5 3 5 - 5 parcels, -12. -.r-,..,a ---- N.R.R. ,... .,. Bell Road anO nor o� S .P c Road south o o�; , M e r�. d i ars r ,_.._.:...»-�---..._...��,,. �, ..�..._.'-....• ' area.��.,�.�,.N�......�..�....,.».»,...�:,�,�..� ,.»..».�...» 4,racks Chico .-_-.,.. .� �.. ._.. to ASS880RO S PARCEi, _ F._.�..,..rv.».,,..»....�.,..:�...»..,,..�..k......-�.-,.,,...k.�. orchard & PROD'LCT CONS I$TENT?1...� LgNxNGA--5,_ ' A-10 GFNERAL PLAN_Pie3-d-eTops— May 13, 1988 Gi�NF,IYAi, PIZN C;ONVORL�ANCE PEPORT_ DATE Ut'ApPL C Nei GNATCIT�F No 4,AND CONSLRVAT:ION ACT CONTRAC`i'5,,2-- �-- ..,._..—. rTu1y 7 1988 Sierra West Surveying' rY'O CjVTL 'ENGINEER: ...�.....� AGI�,T,��t�hV� � CA 95969 �..a Paradise, 5437 'Black olive naive, �`.....�a..a ».. �tEi'OTtT OA'1TE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S CATZGORICAL tXEMPTION»...� » .r rVIATTON i�EGI�"�'1V'E nVCLARATION DATE MITIGATnO MEG, DLC LAVAT,�.0N w T.)AI'V' ADC)P'SiF�D" CNV . Z1'Ar"T2�I�C)F"i' DATECETJ T� Ca°;" i ' 7ry� yy ` r y �,y�y nr.i.r�+w-'+rs'S INW-i•� +•w, rnY ... �. rw .n Y" .. 1 ( i ti T�Ar,�'I,, _ ,. / � �[Y� �� 1 W V✓ • �..Y.�-Lw. Wi i.r 1 n R.1 ' d 41.V r E rII..E ADVIASOUi (; 7 it Jkl)V'1: C it�l AGVN(,x AC"t� tC)lY ,._.��. l.:w .�a».� .,„•r... •.Y�......�..«�„ ».N..,Y...~..Y;.-. AF> 1 iAL HEARING .;.,;yayfi..r,a.,,.r..H.rab+wwli+N+,rrN:e.�•s.:ru. w.YY+.u.rww .«,, r_.tw wF.' c, ��1I•'Il 'li;;'U t PLANNING D1TtEG'xin t2�;�}�1R'I'��, ry'w.riot.iWwiNY.M.Y.M�YYLri+..i�kY+.Y'•`�a`"� 1 ... a- ”. ... .. GEI'TE1ZA1, PI P.iV CCNFC3I�MANCE FOR PARCE MAF OR SUBDTVTSXQtl MAIa Itema 1-4 to be completed by applicant: 1. APPLICANT NA1,M AND ADDRESS. ---_ .rnz„s. = ..py\ V -A_ 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION; 3. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER(S); -7 4. PROPOSED USES t.r�' t••57 A 41(— The following items are to be completed by the Planning Department: CURRENT ZONING: .b - LAND CONSERVATION AGREiatENT: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION; X— e` Coad{• 1 Criteria; AGRICUTrTURAL-RESIDENTIAL YES NO It is recommended that you perform the It Agricultural Compatibility following checked itt+ms: 2. Water and Sewer Capacity ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS CI{E;CK L Adequate Fire Facilities BOTANICAL SURVEY 4. Road Capacity and Maintenance GEOLOGICAL SURVEY S. Access to Commercial and Schools ORCHARD AND FIELD CROPS i. Predominant 5-10 ac. Parcel Size / 2. Vicinity of Urban Boundaries � �< 3. Ag. Viability not Impaired X StaffDeCormination: Substantially conforms to: GENERAL PLAN: 1. Land Use 2. Conservation 3. Open Space r 4, Safety �{ 5. Noise —� 6. Housing >c; 1. Q� Circulation ZONING: �c`rt r-'r,.1Zrnr+ COMMENTS : '{`V.s. ro 'xx�•- WITHIN DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DEVELOPMENT ZONE.. WI:IiI1 FLOOD PLAIN: YES NO WITHIN ARZASP,ECTFIC OR LAND USE PLAN: if Yes,�(j V Name of Plan WITHIN URBAN RESERVE: If Yes; Name et ResekVe AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN: 0 • vt), Lrs,i t .5 Start Signa bate- AS ate AS THE UEST APPLICAT THE CONFORMXNCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND —Fog -11M -REQUEST D—LAND' D ZONI N,I AM AWARE OF IHE ABOVE STAFF G. Ul RMINATION REGARDING Z Dated `�� Signature of Applican *This report will expire and be discarded yix (6) months from the Bats of the staffysipniitune..,t .RIECEIVED Li) i0tlb _ , .. Sed-s7)CHAT � . T�'d-°�Z�C�"..- FARM MANAGEMENT. AC,. �-EMENT THIS FARM MANAGEMENT AGREEMENji is made and entered into this day of between '7�n 1989 by and Owner herein) and P herein) with reference to the following facts, A. Owner is the owner of that certain real property located in Butte County, California, more pavticUldrly desCrIbed in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("the Property" herein). orchard, B. The Property has been operated as an almond It is the intention of the owner to 'subdiNiide the Property into five (5) parcels consisting of approximately twelve (12) acres each for the Purpose of sale to individual purchasers, Each parcel, will contain a designated site for a residence with associated space for related uses Including animal husbandry. It is the intention of the Owner that the remainder of each parcel will continue to be operated as an almond orchard. C. Mahag-er Is experienced In the Management of almond orchards, owner wishes to employ Manager for the purpose of continuing the operation of the Property as an almond, orchard as it Is presently constituted and at it may hereafter be divided. It Is contemplated by the parties hereto that this agreement will be binding upon the parties hereto and upon the subsequent owners of the Parcels into which the Property it ttbalvided. "O%itnorll at used herein shall include such 8uboequeht owners of the Individual par NOW, TH9R9VORE, the parties agree at x-bllowt! 'Term of Ac ,fr eement Owner hereby hires Manager and Manager hereby accepts employment as the exclusive farm manager of the Property as an '11MOhd Orchard for a period of ter, (I years, tbM-M6hcing J. 19V and ending on rf-o", 6- 19—no subject to earlier termination as hereinafter provided; 2. Status of the Partir?s The parties acknowledge this a grr y only a management agreement and that efnent constitu�; r� the g Part4es are not venturers or partners, nor shall Manager be joay�� an agent of owner, or be deemed to 1 Manager is, and this 4gI.Opment is intend r by the parties to create the relationship contractor only, ff an independent 3. Comnensation For its services, Owner shall pay Manager a sum equal '4 to $ ©.gyp per .acre pet q fi P year for each acre being g farmed. The parties acknowledge that the exact acreage being farmed as of the date of the commencement of the term shall be'deter Sierra West Surveying. After the Property as bxeen subdivibdivi by .and. to the degree that Portions Of the o sded designated building sites on t'Ke subdivisionap o within the have been removed, the acreage shall be adjusted by parcel map surveying, rampensat, on shall be y Sierra West Y'' g C paid to Manager quarterly, on a calendar year basis. 4. Services to be Rendered Manager shall devote sucis effort to the performance time, attention; skill and of Sts duties far d caner as are t accordance with required for the care of the orchard on the property in the usual practices of Ltsbandry in the community; Said duties shall include. Ca) The care and maintenance of those portions of the pro under cultivation for almond orchards incl.uding,� but limited to, peSt control Cultivation, irrigation and frost coplant nutrition, pruning, ntro1. (b) The maintenance and repair of the irrx _ systefn gataon (C) The purchase and planting of any 1ecessar fire to replace any trees which have died. Y es id)Harvesting, hulling and hauling of all era ss P fie) Marketing of all crops and he contracts far the sale of all crops. gotiati or. of 2 (f) Maintenance Of accurate records of all activit�o§ in the care and maAntenance of the Property: (g) Th&, hiring, discharge 4hd supervision [it P ersonnel necessary for care and maintenance of the property Cltll for the harvesting, hulling and hauling of hil crops= (h) The securing bol It of adequate liv4urance naming owner and Manager as Insureds. The collection of -all. revenues from the propexVj h V maintained bank account� and the deposit l tereof in a s(,tparatel �) The payment of all direct and indirect expeW',et." 3 revenues, to the of agricultural operations on the Property from evenues extent available. of annual budgets carC, (1,-) The preparation ts for talmond. orchard, maintenance and operation of the 'property as an (1) The giving of notices to owner of the need for additional working capital required for the maintenance. Care and operation of the Property as an aimond orchard, in excess of revenues.the (m) The giving of reports to owner concerning c aition of the Orchard and any problems which may develop. on i I -m(n) gubmission to owner of all proposed contracts for approval Of the sal'-� 01.' crops for the review and approval or dis -1 owner, (0) Manager shall use its best judgment and, effort but shall not be liable to owner except for gross negligence or Wilful misdon6udti Governmental Redulatiotig 51 Manager shall use its best efforts to Otply with all - state and local authorities requirements lederal� irtttion as an almond jurisdiction o,�,er the property operty and its oy)L orchard including, but not -limited to, all rUjos and tegulatiOnt I �4 of employees, employment of pertaining to hiting and discharge I other aliens and the use and disposal of' PeDt'c'des and hatataous Substances 6. L3mitat3on of Authority anything to t I he contrary set f otith Notwithttanding ,3 herein, Manager shall not, without the prior written consent or approval of owner, remove any trees, other than trees which have died, or plant any treesother than to rep)aco trees which. have died, enter into any contract for the sale Ot- any crops, or purchase or enter into any contract for tho purchase Of any equipment or material having a cost in excc-oln of Five nundred Dollars ($500) unless the purchase of rmr-Ai equipment or materials have been included in a budget previously approved and not subsequently disapproved by Owner, 7. Budget Manager shall prepare an annual budget, bass-xd on a calendar 'year, which shall project all direct and indirect expenses as hereinafter defined and all revenues and establish reserves for the replacement of trees, repair and replacement Of equipment and contingencies. Such budget shall be submitted to Owner for review and approval or disapproval not less than thirty (30) days prior tothe commencement, of the budget year. in the event of d'8apprk,)val by Owner, Mahager and owner shall meet to d5scuss those budget Items not approved by owner, It is ,icknowledged by the parties hereto that budgets are only an estimate and that Manager shall not be responsible for any variances therefrom= B. Bank Account Manager shall establish a separate commercial bank account In Manager's name as Trustee. All fw,,ids bel0r)9,+"'*rIg to Owner, whether advanced by Owner or received from opetatiOn of the property, shall be deposited in said bank accdixxit, only one account bL��L-d be establish6d regardless of t 11 hu k! but if there �,jumber of owners is more than one owner, recokel�shall be kept to : reflect each owner's interest ineach at.-rounti All withdrawals fro'm said bank account shall be mad" only by Manager or by ManAger's employees who shall be duly bondo(!, 0, Sooks of, Account manager shall keep coMp".Ote and accurate records On a activities and expenses and cash basis of all tranr-actidI�ati revenues in the care and operv-.tion of the property. Books of 4 account and other records shall be kept apt Manager's principal office. Owner and Owner i s designated re prLy sentativc shall, at to all reasonable times, have access there r and the right to inspect and copy any of them.. Manager shall prepare an annual statement summarizing the expenses incurred during the reporting Period and comparing such expenses with the budget for such rota reporting period.After the property has been subdivided; plete and accurate accounts shall, br- kept separately with respect to each of the Parcels, When expenses are incurred or records received which are common to more than one crf the Parcels, such expenses shall be allocated among the affected Parcels in accordance with their respective acreages under cultivation. 1Q. E3:pes As used in this agreement, the term "expenses" shall encompass both direct and indirect expenses,. Direct expenses shall mean and refer to those expenses which are directly attributable to the operation and maintenance of the property as an alm0hd orchard; includ n Preparation and planting, Pre cultivating, fertilizing, frost g fungus control; pruncontrol lrrigation, pest and ,ing, har�,est1n g, hulling and hauling and maintenance of the irrigation system:. Direct expenses shall include, but not be limited to the following; (a) Direct 1;oor costs: (b) Payroll taxes and beriefits (c) Cost of materials. (d), Outside Services relating to the property, (e) Miscellaneous rentals and util the property, ities relating to (f) Equipment costs, at standard rates, .includi:n maintenance, depreciation, fuel, travel time, etc, g (g) The then prevailing custom rate charge 3n the area for harvesting the crop, Indirect expenses shall mean and refer to those expenses which are inch rectly attrzbtltable to the operation and maintenance of the property as an almond orchard. Indic ecti 5 • expenses shall include, but not be limited to, the followinc,': (a) Supervisory labor. (b) Vacation time and bonus expenses. (c) Costs of insurance and surOtY bonds Expenses shall not include man400ment and office costo or any proportion of the costs of the ot,'ljCes of Manager. 11. Revenu s "Revenues" shall encompass all amounts received as ,a result of Manager's operations and actiV -A on the Property, All expenses shall first be paid from revenues and then to the extent that revenues are not sufficient, from funds provided by Owner. Manager shall utilize the revenues from the PrUPeTty in the following order: (a) Payment of Manager's compensation for the current quarter and compensation for previous quarters to the extent not pada. (b) Payment of all. direct and indirect expenses as specified herein. (c) Establishment of a reserve to cover anticipated e following crop year. expenses f(dth )The balance, with the exception of the balance of the budget items .for reserves for reaair, replacement an' ccA, ingpnr.ies, to be paid to owner foilow;ing the end of the calendar year. 12. Termination Without Cause Either party may, without cause and notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, terminate this agreement at the end of any calendar ye .ar by gzving the other party at least three (3) months advance written notieo, paid termination to be effective as of December 31 of the year in which said notice is given. 13 Termination for Default the. terms aric) If either patty violates any of t conditions of this agreement or fails, in the +5pi.ri0n of the other# to reasonably satisfactorily perform its duties hereunder, the aggrieved party shall deliver a notice of default 6 0 0 to the violating party. Thereafter, the violating party V have thirty (30) days within which to cure the alleged dotaIll,t Qto respond to the notice of de �,aul tr except that it notice of default relates to the failure On the po.rt t'j)c4 of OW11"T. o pay necessary funds to cover the ex the Of the Property, Owner shall have ten (20) days within whichtaz to curo Gu aJ1t3t,,,,,j default or respond to the notice of (It� q,al.Ilt. If t patty shall cure file alleged default wit1lin . bcs VIOL"', the appropriate I Period, this agreement shall continuesmr an though no dofault Occurred, If the Violating party falls to cure the a,110 default within the appropri � ate time period Or faliv to respond to the notice of default within :such party matperiodf then the aggrieve d y terminae this agreement upon termination written notice: Such shall not relieve the Vjolatj obligation to t ng party 0, any termination. he aggrieved party arising prior to L suc?,, If the violating Party, with* alleges in writing that It has 'not# an fn such period, default, act, ICOtmitted, an act c)j, then the aggrieved party may i 1, thereafter deliver I demand for arbitration tu the vArbitration zolating party-. 14. . Within ten (10) days after del Of arbitrat, jia demand f or aon, the Patties will attempt to agree agricultural expert to whom this d1S-, decision and Whose decision will, spate Will beupon a qualifiers submitted for hereto. If the Parties be binding upon the parties - are unable to agree upon a qualified eXpert within the time period 'provided, 'ma -j Count -Agricultural Commissioner to thereafter teqtest the Butte Co either party apPOInt a qualified expert to act as an arbitrator. otherwise provId Except as ed herein) the arbitration shall be in accordance With the rules of the AYntArj(�ah Association, Arbitration aatldh, The arbitrator shall have tho pow immediate d' at to resolve the zsPut6, but shall have no power to modify any of the terms Or conditions Of this agreement And shall be bound by this agreement, Upon request Of either party, the arbitrator shall also have the 'Power to decl, dispute arid 1,1hich p d6 which party Was at f alut In the arty Was hot In defau.1t, I � Thertmaf-ter, Upon 7 demand therefor by the party who is determined not to be at fault in the dispute, the arbitrator may torimin:ate thl rr agreement. Each party shall pay half the cost Of arbitrat3r,, including arbitrator's fees. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final. The award shall be in wr. I t Inn and cop t r, thereof shall be delivered to the parties and (z)1t,ll be in w4r t, form that a petition may be filed with: the Hutto County Superior court to confirm the award,. 15. Compensation Upon Termination ,In the event of a termination of thio agreement for any reason, Manager shall be entitled to the compensation described in paragraph 3 hereof, prorated through the date of termination. 16. Assignment This is a contract for personal. services. Manager shall not assign any of the rights or obligations under this agreement :.thout owner's prior written consent. owner shall have the r, ,,it to assign its interest in this agreement to the purchasers of any parcel of the Property and shall requs,re such purchaser to assume the obligations set forth herein, Subject to the provisions hereof , this agreement shall be binding upon'. the parties hereto and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and ass-gns 11. Indemnity Manager shall indemnify and hold owner and t�.? property of Owner free and harmless from all claims, losst:s, damages, injuries and liabilities arising from the death or injury of any person or persons, including employees of Manager or for damage or destruction of any property cy properties caused by or connected with the of this agreement by. Manager, its agents, servants, employees or by any subcontractor employed by Manager or by any agents# servants or employees of any such subcofttractbri This indemnity is limited to any amount in excess of insurance proceeds otherwise available to Owner,. 18. Totices. Any notices required or permitted to be given by 8 either party to the other shall be in writin deemed given when delivered in and shall',,, addressed. a.� three Person to the party to whom it (3) days offer being depasIted in the Unite.(j States ma31, registered or certified, wi , prepaid, addressed to Postage fully he parties s follpwst To Owner: To Manager: Either party may,by noticegaven a subsequent notices to be t any time, require different address or bothanother to another individual or to a . S Afitorneu'se es If any action or proceeding (including ax�bitratian for Provision) shall be b° monies due under this agreement or for nought to recover any g or on breach of the terms and cenditib,4)z ereofaccount of shall be entitled to receiver reasonable attorney, prevaxlzn 5 Party Of its costs of suits ney s fees as part Own eY` � r i.: t"Manager t r. NQa.'S OF mExE r-z rr T' rm: MAR O 1 190 Office of Planning and 'sear'ch 0 j 11400.Tenth Street, RoomUh21F c = Butte County Sacramento, CA 95814 MAR 1 1989 Planning pepigrcipririt: or 7 County Centra; belve --.,X- County Clerk GA�t= Co. Clerk Orov il,lu, CA 0 905 County of Butte QYDeputy Filing or Notice of Determination in compliance W H1 Section 2' 8 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. 1J.0 Project Title AP li Name Tentative Subdivision Ma State Clearinghn—ns Number P 42-01-57(ptn) Jame, Geraldine }Paj- a; (if submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person �1�e111:111),111one Numbcr Public Works Department r-0ieCt Lo- tion �olZn Mendonsa East of Meridian Road, between Bell 5387266 Southern pacific Railroad tracks, Chico area. Ro�'c and the T'roj�:i �scri t' p on _ -tative subdivision Map ciividi -- 5 lots of l2. yes etch. �c to create This is to advise that the Butte County r-" Advi..ory A encs has a (Lead Agency or Responsi le pA yj ------ approved the above described project on February 27, lg8,� and has made the following determinations regarding the above-described) 1. The project _ ws11 X Project environment. `" --will not> have a sgnacant Pfe, onhe, Z An Environmental 'Impact Report was prepared for this pursuant to the provisions of CGQA Project `X A Negative Declaration was Provisions of CEQA, Prepared for this "Project pursuant to the: 3= Miti8ation measures Were,,iuere not, made a Condition of the approval of the projectect.. 4, A statement of overriding considerations i; for this 'project. — was;` ,waa 110l, adopted Thi;, is to certify that the final EI;R with comments and responses pro. ject approval is available to the general public an pC nses r111d record of Butte County Planning bepartmerit 7 County Center Drive Orovillei CA 95965 bate Received for filing and Posting at OPR y a 4sitatu're — -- 9 34 � Dill Turpin sehior Planner Title t dVitod March 1og`6 Q ''fir, . - ! Cnnr7irx ClrNSED LAND SURVEYINGiTgNiEC 13.lack Olive Drive - Paradise, C iiiii� r X16) 577-6253 A 95969---�-�_� �""! .'1i1 n zz— February, 19 port, AP adlvision Bute County Plannn 7 County Center Dx'Cre Deft Crov"le, CA 95965 Attn. 8411 Turpin bear gill, e Oe hereby request rn'?Ironmental all xteh$l o 11o�t co pletad the tame to co COM MPlete the Ag -lease Paxva Subdivision, the Thank Agreement, We have you dor your consideration rrt ,� ha� matter, Sincerely, Th omas }•t . G1r:lnkl e TAW/kah Inter-Depart p Memorandum ro: Advi:sory Agency '01"Z7, Fa4Ma PlaIllin J Director. su0JLrcra Tentative Subdivision Map.. of James and feral +�Arrr �T"Uar' dine P �10, 1989 aai,va, A:P#42-01-"7 This is from .12.5 Proposal to divide APom 2. to 12.7 acres �'� acres into , 1975 each .'he present Parccl.s s:�rrga.ng �n size Land Use Plan 1 and A-5 adopted june 14 zoning designates this P, an element of 1966, g s 1,10 adopted Gxeerl xs area -the But Tho Chico Urban Area Line, as Orchard and t`ieid crop, Ccl�erc�l n Unclassified sa' ety element p, 1ocyLc' -tan Fire indicates that thx cl went ° the Plans for the area, Hazard; Area, There � .t5roJcct is in to-H-1 the 1►-5 and are no specific or community count A-10 no County wide land use element on this property D'yl'an• As such 0 and 1982 prod the 1979 ver the policies of Chico Urban Y carefully to determine thetae General Plan Area band Use Primary policies governin have to be revieWed Orchard PPropriate parcel and Field g division of this size• The Parcels of 20 Crop discussion propertY are Orohaxc? and F, acres are general] �n the land found in are conditionalld Cro y considered co use element. to P designation` Parcels of nsistent with the act-divide proper C ndes ent, Three criteria h 5 and 1 0 acres each j parcels; 1, designated Orchard and F have to be met in ordtx� vienxtY. 2. Predominate 5 field Cro vxab:iiit Vicin t and 10 acres Parcel p into 5 and lit y not impaired. °f urban bound�5`esr 3. sizes mpa�red in the the Project as' As discussed in the Agricultural asethe m. �conditianal cr proposed does not in, stud the parcel boundaries�teria have not c°mply with Y 'under The rnediais s�.s Lhe avera been With tgith ` the aeneralo 1 � 3 mikes parcel ge Parcel an 1000 feet taut to the is 55.9 acres size �s g0 plus of rural south and 4 City limits acres, is not res�dentaal southeast aru located' within the deveiopment The property is <ear Creation of 12.5` iMmediate viuinit and new estate ��ns Of this acre lotsax- v,°f urban by lois Y surrounding Parcels. agriculaurals�Vi but Of possibl wild. .impair the Division of ls. xabilt n� this propert Policies of the y is also subject o , iw ~cy of Butte Co Chico Urban Area t17e adopted uses L•he Land U80 Plan. Green lands in linty to conserve the Chico Area that Protect pot arl:%1 is the nide o the Chico Area a are sa.lua t�ctl; on $ut.�:e Green Emil It sh.. ►� 'lila a Count mmodate . ocr�urs � y to acco futttxc U��ban�ll be the �r�.culturaJ, ill the Chico Area of Butte fi�olicy of Urban side of Count /Suburban (j.tprywl°,h that the Chico Y on lend Fl �.l,tra.ed 3 n the bivis on as trOP08ed does Green Line Use Blement Orchard not comply wit (Land nd Bso 1,4 *1 tiicnt Area, hand and �'ie11 C utlMc� Count Page 73) Use Plan Green Line .xoP Policies Y 'Land Policies: or tho Chico Urban 1. Critical to the determination of non --compliance with the Generdl Plan and Community Plan was impact to Agricultural viability Contacts at the Agricultural Extension office of the USDA and Federal Land Bank indicate that the minimum economic unit fol' almond operations ranges in size from 20 to 60 acres each. The subject subdivision would create parcels of 12.5 acres euil,if clearly an uneconomic unit. The initial study had discussed the project as division Of 196.72 acres into 5 parcels of 12 plus acres each and a 133 acro remainder. After preparation of the initial studyt the record of survey was recorded dividing the 1906 acres into it parcels of 85, 50, 34 and 2'.' acres each. This tentative subdivision map is a further division of the 27 and 34 acre parcels. Aft Archaeological Survey has been prepared on tuh.Ls ptoperty one isolated artifact was uncovered. The archaeOI05i8L concludes that 113:.n the absence of temporally or functionally diagnostic at- tributes, the flake has very little, if any, sjgniricance." Archaeological clearance has been recommended. The application was received July 7, 1088 and deemed complete August 7, 1988. Pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, action must be 'Laken on -this map prior to Tebruary 7, 1989. Butte County tnvironmental Review guidelines proN7ide for a go -day extension in the event the applicant requests it and the county grants it if at extension of time is warranted, the; new deadline for acting on this map is May 7, 1989: RtCOMMENDATION'. A. Find that requirements of CEQA have been completed and considetedi and B. Find that the proposed land division does not comply with the Butte county General Plan and Chico Urban Area Land Use '3 Plan as required by Subdivision Map Act Section 66474,, and C. Deny the Proposed subdivision #Ap42-01-57 ptn, for 7ames Paiva. :In -the event the Advisory Agency finds that the map as ptOPOSUA does comply with tht,-- general plan then the zbti011 is as MOTION- ' Accept recommendations of Planning, Direct.orIs roport dated January lot 1989, make the findings listaet utd(_A:r A, and inclur all the conditions Of approval t-OIIQWihcJ 1-t.'em C' A. Find thatt li An initial study was completed in coopI.Jance with CM, 2, 8nia study and Comments received thereon identified ljoteh-bially 81 dnificarit environmental offe(its that th(' project may have had. but: F 4 a • Revisions in �h e project plans or agreed to by the a licant prOP08als made by or mitigate Pp WOULd avoid such effect F; .,nvi effects to a POIAIL where clearly no significant environmental effec]l.:fa would occur, and b. There is no sube� :"ant:ial evidenc(a before Lho Count that the Project as revised may linve a 81rJh1ficant effect on the environment. 3. A proposed negative declaration has ))00 compliance with CEQA and is approvedin 011d adop dop(,l,(-+d ,, Vind that said negative declaration toget,ilor with any commPnUi received during Fhe public I-cvie and considered; w process 110.ve been :eviovred C, Approve the proposed Tentative creation of 5 parcels of 12,.5 acres lOrslargterpeachaonow L}le AP#42-01-57 ptn,. (Jaynes Paiva) subject. to the following conditions. 1. Apply for and diligently pursue a development agreement to provide V,,e continued agricultural of the props production 2• Designate a at no develop Southern pacific developto thea from the „aslrovcd track. Designate a 50 foot no dry , „opmo;�t arca from t he A7udcreek levee, 'evelijpment includes toe of the roads, homesites and excavtzion 4, Designate the strip o,, land parcel 5 as a no dev�� lProv: ti.;.ncl d� e��wo: ; tp approximately 70 feetywpL ..nand r117 1' fee �a ong is feet hong., 5. All lots to comply +,Ath the A-10 and A-5 zoning districts, c04 'tom Wrinkle James paiva Ong%BUM SIERRA Department of Anthropology California GLENN SISKivou California State University, Chico ArchaeologicalC ��p �AssEN SUTTER Chico, CA 95929 Inventory Moaoc tEHnMn PUIMAS TRINITY (916) 855.6256 7 SHASTA 3 y " r November' 2 1988 Buffo Co. 0Or►tttW zo: Butte county Planning NOV 4 1988 #7 County center Dr.. Oroviilb, California oroville, Ca. 95965 re: Pai.va Subdivision AP -42-01-57 Gear County Planners, A review of the above 'project has revealed the follryding: X Zile area ind3 sated as s t vein the espproject nt ; boundaries is considered to be archaeolog y XX gaSy access to tlatural sources of wager Flat meadowland or flat land near water Scuth and/or east "acing slopes Previously recorded ;sites in the vicinity Other: We strongly recxxTrne>id that an archaeological reconnaissance 1.)e conducted of the area by c4 gaalified archaeologist and appropriate mitigation measures prepared. A known site or sites has/have been previously recorded in the project area. Project operations will have a negative impact on these Mural resources. We recanne-nd that a qualified archaeologist be contacted to assess site cofiloonents and prepare a mitigative proposal,.. X Other: A survey of alio I,aar,,ip 'n portion or the pj-ojoii i. area shoWd bc, suryc;re pr"Lor 1-0 on. arik you for the opportunity to review and cmvient can this p0 5 il. Please let us know what: decisions are made regarding the project. Sincerely, be . MakbLo Rowta Northeast !hformatiW Center Coordiciator SIERRA WEST SURVEYING LIC13NS131) LAND SURVEYING 5437 1.11110 Ul ve Drive - Paradise, CA 95969 Phoma; (916) 8776253 eui}e Co. CWM 0 CT 2 5 1888 orovilie. California October 25, 19(;i[1 REt Paiva SuW14i --ion a port. of AP 41111* 0 1-57. Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Croville, CA 95965 Attn.: Laura Tuttle Dear Laura, In response to your snvironmen.tal checklist form ,dated August 9, 1988, we rest-nd as follows: I. We did not respond to this checklist form due to the errors within the report as indicated during our phone Conversation of Sept. 23, 1968. S `.•lad the impression that the report was going to be revised, in any came, T am sorry for the delay. 2. We submitted[ a request today for a review from the North- east Information Center at Chico State. 3. We would tend to agree with the staff, at the Federal Land Bank that 60 Acres is the minimum economic unit for agr _ cultural purposesiAs pointed out in our phone conversa- tion, we are deal ng with two existing parcels, one being a 37,5 acre parcel and one a 25,4 acre parcel, As we discussed, it is possible to do a development agree- merit with the County as well as a lease to continue to keep the agricultural production going, We aro willing to work with. +°ou on this can�:ept 44 As We agreed to in the original waiver application, a 400 fogt residential building setback from the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks has been reserved in deeds, 5. We would also agree measure to the suggested mitigation to set back all roads, homesites, and the toe of the ,levees. excavation fast e to Should you have any questions regarding this matter, Please call or write. Sincerely, Thomas R. .Wrinkle 0 TRW/kah S' APPENDIX F COUNXV QF Bux:M ENVZ1_.ZpNMENT.AL C3ECKI:,IST'OI`C (To be completed by Lead ,Agency) LOG No. 88-07-06-01 AP NO. 42-01-57(ptri) C. F3ACI�GFtOJNI i. Ntmte of proponent JAMES & GERALDINE PAIVA Address of proponent and representative (if applicable): 3- Project description- Tentata ve Sub-iv6 s on Maw I, MANI_i/+�'I,Cp�Y'XNYZNGS C)F STC�N'F�CAIVC'E I. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the onstironmeht, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or, wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the raAlge of a rare of endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples Of major periods of California history or prehistory? x. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term benefits to the detriment of long-term envirotment.al goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts will endure into the future.) 3. Does the project have impacts which are individuall.� limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate retoilrvea where the impact on each resource is relatively small) but where t">a effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is signitictant:,) A DOL18 the project have environmental effects which Will cause substantial adverse effect's on human beings, either directly or indirectly? y til , !7L^:'J is initial 6y (To be completed 'by the bead Agency) . On the basis of t1Kis i��titial evaluat:ch. 1/wE find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect, on the environment and a NT;GATIVE 15gCL.4t;ATiON will be prepared, L, . 1/WE rlmd than 41l'hough the proposed project COULD have asignificant effect; on the onvironment, therm will not be a significant eftoct in this case bacautio c11e MITtO 'LION MEASULS degctibnd ort the attached shoet have been added to 1,11ct pt'a,ject. A NMATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. r/WE find the proposed project MAT have a significant et'fe�t on the environn1011t, and an ENVIk0*1 aNTAL iMPAC2 REPORT is required. CtOONTY OP BUTTE, PLANNING DgpAR114FN'1' DATE., Aust .9, 1988 13 ... Labra Mi _T tle� Assodiate p�aririer Reviewed bp 7".AXE =MP.AC Mxpinnutions of all "XES1+ and u MAYBEn will theanswers are required on attached shoi)tMs) proposal result in significant: n• conditionsr Unstable earth nr chars b, bisruption changes in geologic substruc`-�r D displacement, compaction tures? c, Chane or overcovering of the soil? $ in topography or d. ground surface relief features?. Destruction, covering B or modification of any unique geologic o --.m� a, lnc.•ease q eolo In wind or water �r Phyp,i.tal f• erosion of sni s, x} er on or off site? C:hcarlges in deposition deposition or or erosion of beach s M tr the bed of erosion which may modify the has, or ^han$es in silty any bay, inlet c channel of a river or Jana g• .Loss of prime a lake? sL'rnam areas? 8rir-ult;urallY productive sails outside des, -.-.. h. Rxposure of people or gnatedurbtlll landslides, mudslides property to $eDlogic hazards se,chearthquake,,'''-- 2, AIR. , ground failure ov similar hazardsas •---," `""�.,. Will the Proposal result in a Air emissionsdeteriorationsubstantial: A or date •""~ ,---... ��� ri,oration of ambient air quality? b• The creationof act` ob J xonable odors c. Alteration ,smoke or fumes? climate of locally Yeement, moisture or temperature, ti ~~ , locall gionall 7 3, WATER•any change Will the proposal result ee in in substantial. A' Changes inr currents, nr the [nurse or -`" �---_ tither marine or direction o fresh waters? f water b. Changes in absorptionmovements in OF surfacerunoff?rates, drainage patterns C. Need for off- ' nr the rate and amount removal site surface drainage improvem� nh to th zatinh tr culvert installment.►, Including d� Alterations to 8 vegetation the course or flow of e` Ghan$e in the flood Waters? amount of surface ---� bischarge into surface any water body?' Water ill a quality, includin Waters or in an ~- yr turbidity? including not 119litud to e alteration Of surface rte" temperature, dissolved Oxygen or direction or rate Change 1.n the of flaw °f ground waters? direct add quantity or goalie o ground cuts 0Wltitns :or withdrawals y f ground waters excavations? eitl.ex through ltrou or 'thrtuglt ihtaroopt,ion of an a9 lfer i• Reducl,ion 1n the IL suppXieti? amount of water otherwise available for .f, Exposure of c. public wat0t " - P nple or proper. to 4, PLANT' LTE y avatar"related hazards such -- ---_. Will the proposal result in substantial: as f lua(l,l,.ig�� a. Chan$e in the diversity of Mincludih'` 8 trees, shrubs p ae.,, or )lumber of e, keduction of elle ,grassy crops, and aquatic species of numbers of pl.ants�7 plants. Plants? any unique, rare or endan ere c. Introduction of g d species of d, the normal rcia eplehishmeni of planitsspeto at area, or in a eductior► in barrier to aetesgo or My agricultural ckop7 3,: TRE;. will Che proposal result in substantial% YF5 •1A }iN` NU . 5. ANrMAI� or numbers of any species Change In thct diversity of species, es of animals fish and shellfish, organisms a. (birdsy land animals including reptiles, �� g or insectct)7 Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of V } tom• b. animals7 introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to .M C, the migration or movement of animals? y d. Oet:orioration of existing fish or, wildlife habitat? r,gISE. Will the proposal result in substantial' --�flr– a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of 'people. to severe noise levels? LIQU ANL GLARE« Will the proposal product significant light and glare? a3.Nei D USF. Will the pxoposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. OALU & RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in substantial a. Increase in the rate of use of LMIj 00't:ut4 "urros? w b. 0opleti.on of any non-renewable natural resaureF!R, f lORISK OF U PSET,. Will the proposal involve: n, A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, lr° chemicals or radiation) in the e not limited to, oil) pesticides, of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference With an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? OTULATION, Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or 1t growth rate of, the human population? 12. l{OUSING, Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand 1i fox additional housing? 13, `TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION, Will th; proposal result in., �y a, Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement? ---'� b. Effects on existing parking e eil.ities, or demand for new parking? C. Substantial impact on AXisting transportation systems? d, Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or mot,iement of people and/or goods? s. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traff.10 f. Inctradn in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedediriansl t.1t, plltlLiC ti'RVICES, Will. the proposal have an effect OPon, o,r result i,n t► nh4Y f Nr"" new or altered 9W/e.r►tment services A6 Fire protection? b Police proteeticn? di schoo is d. Parks or other recreational facilitied? e, Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? -=-� f. Other governmental services? `- 3,: P �4- 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in yf S MAYi1T. t(�3 a; liso of substantial amounts of Evel. or energy? b. Substantial increase in dem:+nd upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of rtew sources of energy?( 16.. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? e,. Water availability? d. Sewer or septic systems? e. Storm water drainage? f. solid waste and disposal". 17. HUNAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? _ IS. AESIII TICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. RtCREATION. Will eupon the quality or quantity—of eesimpact tity of existingrecreational opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES, a. W.111 the proposal reitult in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or histos•ic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effect's to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object?' ^ _, c, hoes 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 areal y x IJ_CSCUSSTONN' CtL:- EXV=Et7NMENTAL; EVA -T VA.TTON See attached. �4- 01SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP4�1-0257 lbk' Cleve lopmerit of homes ites and driveways is est U,ioted Lo removo, one 001IL'o PeVI P_jr1CeI For OLota'l of 5 acresi This level of and dist-i-iptiern Is a slenlFlcant Incoease from the one homes l i d W� 1 (,I I Ilow Id I)v,1ve been anal cipated on the PtIoPerltY. g, 4d" The entire parcel Is 196,?2 acres. OUL, of thal ()2.9 r_q,Mros are I I -Iva I VF_ -d I n thO SUbdivision. Stit,31vislon mance ls vtoo Iio,ated *111 the riortl')Ihiest pf-oparty carrier.. Two different I-eSoUrCeS Wf�,V§ deterinine the soil typo of this property. Th cc� U.S, - fll,tw4mentl OF Ae)r I CLI I tUI- ' e, BUI-eaU Of` Soils and Chemlst-ry,p level opetl tp J*jrip for t.N�§ Chico area, published In 1926. According to bhl�,. map, sollsi, on slto are Farwell Clay Adobe, 2-3 Feet thlck. Farwoll lu a dork-broHn tiay "hi.cry checks Anto blocks whasndr'-Y. It. has, 8modar�43t.o l."Worily Of organ Ic triatter, a smooth suirfact-, arid Is Well Sul ted to r1lae.. 'I i)e So I I Contervab I on Ser -Y I ae pub I i shed a SoI I Sr Map 11'1' 196*7 wh I all was 1 OQnded to be a Comp I I at I on of the 1926 mbP. Apcoi-d I n�j Lo, the So 1, 1 Loni��erlva t i on Ser1V I Ce ,, so 11 s ori s l,be, are Conejo=BerrertdoiE:. ' Th l 80 11 1 s a f I he- textured c I ay 1,,o c I ay I oam w I th good dra I riage, S ub, -q.o 11 per-momb 11 I ty I s 81 ow to Moderate I y s I ow. rhe moderate :to high shrllrik" tiK a I I behav I or restj I is I n sever e I I to 1 tat I oris to sept I c I each f I e I ds., jj:rte sol 1 capak i 1 1 ty class Is 11Xi So 11 0 1 asses 1, I I and I. I I zwo 0,oj,is I der -,ed pr I me agr I cu 1. tura I , SLI I tab 10 f oi- I nteris I ve pooduct; 1 on, The :Sr I tzib 11 1 ty a f Whe , so 1 1 1 or age, I cu I bulnal purposes I s ev I dont from the v:!,,,,jStIhg land UZOa young almond orchard, and s0rroumdlng land arses; it) ti-te Immediate vlclnlry, the soils have lbeers used foi- cf,)rn, r -ow or ops and al=rlds, on a dIfforent prolet,t;) Joe Connell of the AsarICUltUt-til txbenslon I UIce determined that 20 atret� S the M'Irrill-num, ecohomle unit. An C-Corlomic urn li, is too mititiarum' parcel _SIZe Which :Will Support n typir-181 �.njrijly of foura, witi-jou-t a Nat evet�yonj�f bgrees on the 20- W."re flcure, howo-Vere 'SIL6Ff at the Fed.,_6 I I Land Sank, whiah 0v81Uatp_5 aar.iLUItUt-al I'aaris arid uses 60, acres at 0 rule of thurtib, Clearly) the, divIslon on a nL-ar-200-ac're parcel It -Ito I'lve 112-1/2-aare I obs and a I arl�gitt t -t -ma I n6_� Vill 1 1 �Zompl,,otb I se tlnt� 18118 f or mor I au'ltur-al I: -it -1 -of produclt I on y create no) -Ocono'm I t un I t and pr6v I de f at tie j,,MtrLjS I W residential uses' In an agritulbut"al ea, The positlori of tile 62 acres which aro, proposed Foo dlylolori Is fres loned tto Make divislon of the 00 lbtlee ( I �8. 8e.) aCt-e$) 089 1 el` 1; ` we ,FUWr-e . I DIVISICarr pirld dove loptodn.t i� 1ll rehiove thiv lot fl-orri S�JriCLI ItUrol produatlcarr r Is ;n I h:: Development on the too-, of bho lovee I"My uridercut. tho I ovoct aril dosttib I I I =A6 I ti, 1000 1 no to ground s I uhip I Mg. Roa(j homes Ite -id any o%xa8vbtIons `"hoUId ljtlt�_k a i, UM n I Mdt ave I opment pi of 50 f oet from the toe of tho- 16vea. 8b'� leve I opl;n �_-Ijt at the propozed dens,l�y shoold hi6vq I I kt b 1 o 1 1,2 at) y I mpact on the dt-�o I titga�� I-Og I Ine, evev er°it aMud Creek I s a Zone 'A t 1 00dWay subject _o rer:urr i ng l� i gh"-water, , F'1 aodwatars through this prbperty are cam,l etel c wr ) th I n the l evees . there I s no.Flood ,inazard In the i mmed i crew 1 c 9 �) r:y 4a: rrees will be removed l''Or-, the Ac1;ua1 design of the houses, s' zea and��umberr�d�fouabrar) j1011,O tbe1 I l removal ne 1'1ow ihl.lch of tl'IP, prC�po *Y Wr I l l need to be c° i r,w . w removal I s a prr I inary I m •at c c1. pact o r deve 1 opment 'i n tyre uncia rt "FIs , s ecoi ar3nt,Y i mpacts i na 1 udp compact I on of 'the to i 1 `s sr.rrfaCe candor heavy act i v I ;»y a meas . This darter,•,. t i or°t will l l water-redr ice l r't > i 1driveways r veli a scfnd and I I<x Irrigation gat i art s,, ger7erate drrlst oresetice of hon es w i th l n tl're orchards ��ad �noC eaase tefrrl:r r tr.rr The the farmer^, as rias i dents bocome more andymore corker Wed Ivththeir fore e�eposur,e to ct lett, I Ca t , E=arm examp i e, aer l -a 1 s ra i n pr act 1 ces May need to be moil f i ed; t: or p e g may I rage tis be abandoned In re vor of ±�r•r�r rn .i spray 1 ng o;� West i rz 1 des, Same agr i cu I tr l"81 chem i ca 1 Supp 1 ens l..,av+ ref a yds are i'tnmed f ate l a 1` es i dent i a l d+= ye i bi�merrt . Y diadem r;. to. " se to se I 1 �,,� Farmer's whose 1 ar fib • The sowth ter aper{ y line 1 ne , cutarm l n.erus wits ► the 5du khern Pacific f a r l road s Thi stretch o the ra 1 � •cad track head i ng out of Ch i cry, i s W i th I'm a 15E -II i 1 e -per -hour zone , No l se i eve 1 s w i th i'n 800OPef"atIchs exceed 55 decibels within the, f i rptge}nOeq rafPteatd sby rdaeiclluoi s -Peet. The OUtte County General plan No i ae E1 etnen t, > rrrrf pal Icy of the eUtt✓e County '�'1annlrg Comhris's1 on dictate that res i cien tr i a l deve l OPI'llen t not be subjected t.o mo i se levels i n aces 60 deb1bels. Eutur^e exposure tb no, can be redraced through the ase 01 se tb;�cks C 0 0 farm screens or buffers, or mod I f i ed constr uct t ren techn I goes : cc�rtlb I n at i on ra t' afcao.t set.uack and rxtt-a i t5 ter 1 rr� tea 1 1 �r�d ceiling Insulation shoo I d t 000era tabl e level, "Gttuce Interior, rno i se to all i! x Tlllr' land Is des i gnatod Orchard e F} e l d Gr~ rps n °tl-re Ch ► ea Land Use t� la an C. mien t 6f the 8u lite Gt�r_1n ty General r Plan* co rba he 01 "+~hard &. 'Field Crops des i gnat i bn c sr �warce u s 1 zo . ab 1 1' st•res 20 acres as the M I n I arum i three �.r 1 ter i a errs liter,- and 'I `0 -acre ptrwce l s cyan bo predom I nant tb ,i s 1 l y cutis i st n C The t:hrce cr 1 ter i a ar*e : (`1 � tQ 1't7 --acre rt)arµl�al el s In vicinitY" C2? vicinity of o3 " 1000 feebout OF the pencelaild �bouhdarlre�ural 'Via not _� �. 100 t+'eet� o�f the Y itntaalr�= ` tJ. l�iitirrr`I Vires : 1 i� rnr d i an the average parcel s I ze I � Ct parcel s h,�r� i s b-3,95 a.cr�e fess tlr gtr ?t7-act°e 1caks does riot c xamVplV wlt1� r;h�e h i �lor Item is tr Ian int o I i rii 1 t gar,, 1 crct �rci thr•ea rn l l es tri I»Ntirp ty CUS_g r ck 3 grid W11 s�irwa s�ar,r�i tr and 5*10uthreasia, '�rl. Ewesi a1►d y i s s auN11 01' t rel ih t }-r0operty I S near, ,�r"eas of r�ur•a 1 r es i rrlen t i a l Cteve l opmonll F#rid mejAl est al e l o rws a but i s rir. t. ua i tl i I r1 the i rrrrr,ed 1 a to vicinity cr f Ut�,bar�t boundi.,r 1 a 10 and, 4dy division into lejt!s of less than �4��todr��cac�as (do pat i on pwhich rt 1:10,r ice I Y r.,rse c i ear 1 y uu i l l ca4rte ani ecdl�r k*, i a l 1 11 I I bn taarae I tau lie subd I v }died I n tt r°i n ecc�rn len i s units. U i v I ,s 10l7 ache i c, h s Nil 1 l rrrpa l r ttwe agl- i ru l tura 1 v I alp i 1 i ty or ',,lit and y sLrrrrrund t o pr�pere es: D i v i s i oll as, pt{opolgad toed not C rrtp 1 y w i'tir t*he rWtt to Noun tit Genorwa 1 P 1 an , 11 - Divi .:,,1 t5n and development w 11l permit 'the tca-►strrur's iu i r.,,ra 0;7 O 1 e- f gi i l y r e-- i dances Div 18,i car"► 01 1 1 ope-.1 ►gip c 1 ►' y,p:i �� �r� i � ►a i i' �►r�� t s � lots, ol- ►^ural ra�rjci~lettes. Dgvisi'crtl a.1W11.r1d r►t,1. affect i r'�lar l to L11l o growth 'rate of the Chico PO>~rul -t i want but will t I r.,.l 6rs I n Of thQt pr"iPul at i an over,a 1 artier land apl' a 13:x- The typ i Cal z $-1910-=faml 1y Douse within thr t `r ► ��%s+ I"1 erre i r►y1 ter°°�� 0evjeratq--- 1 n . 7 yehi l e tr ► pr> prer- '$ay - Future t:raf f r tt'1ereforle r.1 'r:,QCted t;,„ total ` 3 to 71 trip.. per day, t1 -,sf � i r�,ir�r►�r ti�itn the y i 0 i n l t:y ar-� a�� f of 1 ews : M,ter i d l an Road) SOL'th +W.� C 119'J 1 � oa f Highway 32 y 900 A era ge Daily Trf l r,;: (AOT,); eu�l l Roan a rr+r,,r t.,h', or Mu l rr o 5aO ADT. Tr~a ff i C cOunts In the rtrca r,e f 'J eci: vary low E Rr°k i rel 111 14'11 don,-it1ens and l.arid use patterns Drsurl+,-'Y reluircmcr7f, r,►i'i 1 di n'►i ►,111rra1 _mount or t-►1 den i no alono the iln1 1 Road frQntMaoo with Or' oppr %-41" i a' e Sur-race �►eter i al f Tho e.*,act s'tan�lard �w i i l'� t,,m� dataar�rrri rrrad Ery l,t,r, C >�;t ar trrtr�r t o'fi 1"ub l i s Works, s, I taa =Y The propertyare -.0 l t is theyonly the ;motor►KavaOS of a 1 ab l lei fai � F i rca protect I Uear1 vloL ri 1,11 1 k:r carr-ted to the Sconei n COF w atur -1�enrdorl . SY rr -1501'Ji nra Of h 6 ,ra k Hit, d of supewv i sores y a condition on ;th i :� wrap will be to ct�n t►.. i t�ul:r, 1,1000 peer cap: ' i nto the water tender fund. i *it ► F The property i z beyoi`id the limits of the urban ar°�ea, cr] I,at g':- wth I' az been anticipated,. Lorr at i cr� dep,cridta'rr�„ i�ry i ��: �D,p�..ha ate, .orad fire pro t c';zt 1 Ora ;aro x tren'01 Y ti-lin, in the, n�jr i +z u l a ur l r ,{ trt�:teaLly tho er'v1 L..•e, prov i derz- focus on theif-bin 3r�t dons of can be, --ter ved erfiLiin rtly and i a�._'d rani l + er�al rr►,�rai 1rr ►t«lyrn , r^ m,3y Qervot-aty domand f+,a" i v-,;c i11r:%t I i`E t i rtraLuz' of P 1*✓c'l l cr i� 1?F �' 1 �Ewr1t:1 Bit de'veI k.kpmkl -:n Vl1 1 i ba, t�ubjet:3 t 1,0 t hLB T-' 'meat C"hI :':: Uri1 tai qtr ^" c;'1 ald'r.l!„,na1 trafi rflci; 16�«.t"e #r# 3't itT�lf3.'lrY��k k9r?1"> oi1.i£3 dE i�r'afS"Y,f . 1 1 �,�, �., ,►� t 1 11 1 n� teat � �, � i �c short tel`m r re4-3dw0r1e, r4--qu i rud On MOP 1 l 1 ��`fwrYt i rrcr ea:>e� tool' ntenante #sr�w�+��:. I P m L.=',t i IW sWs t. r,l t k prr�p r a rJ tf s r"vc t'h l a 6o) d; Ind1'w rdum1 tae is and z on. It 3e d vend the I I'M it c� sninurti. yr 4i a1r '-� r� eir rµ « >7a�' �r'ut 1, ;►f' I,hr€r Chlf.-�yw� ,arm a`a has bc;, -�h k.''=C ipl epi Or ut i l i �C.d b rdu�6��1 ,.�7 �iEQi, lrl 4�'fli�"? t1a 4�rwt e a$ai►ia'i^,1Fw,,IPaA"k yE°*. "1a°a �1 §w i y w * � r rt'f'`�r� rE7, t ` °ra D r� er�� a 1 i rar�rrl �r `up�tra� K -1, ra i vr��t, i'r � a DI'ri C. 1'k►�1, it F'w"^mirartrl !A-'.rMff fit: iwt'w, 1,111i11Cwr"wiiNwy Emil] Lx'i in L' IrrE i'1wlti+iu a4' 1Tt lr :arte� e,irr,rr7lq ,: R 4, �ai�tf it ,,,,r- nets a full, oar rvi,aer't ;� r•.il warv�ht��lrl+ i.' o r o,11u 1 r"9Wmve r1l; oi„ } ht 1 �%; m oil. . M C A TCIF2 i 1 t I-N ! � Edetermi �m, do en' i ►pact tO CAM,C�r�a��-�1 wi l 1� ��� with►Y,elE rrlti the r�e:�rrlt'� -ha r�.c�or-�iz zcar��c:i-, have -7 :, w c' .; ",0rt term bene" i i;, c�' the project,, i all caw i ng. �•, � r,1 .. i Y �Ytn toll t #.rt i i Ze h i s '� frar., � F�rct�erwty i n the m;nrIr14_r in .tuh t ci- he �, Mt Pit A 1 oot;r- er^rt impact cf tf , s project t i s the �i ;vision a� fir: Baa r rl, . i c� t i � �{ Y i CA, l r t cul parr^a1 tea► cel Into 1 ar: e eek �ilWb 1 al car rwt,rr s7,i r �richre�-iMrr� i,' only a matt. �r Of t 1 mo be rot � �.he err as ,P� t � i � rc#rrr a,rr,d Ftwcant r T cul tur o T prOduc'r i crr•r » e►rria a l ca f caret a 'd e unty v i r��t i ca f'd 1 t by tile a0r^' t c4I T hu,^a 1 aeon omy t aures l c,u l iW ur-•a l biwratr i ry ugr,r i pment repa i t untui,1 i es u i r rnr~rrk and oavllr=r r�d t r- Conver's i cry 01-' a01 - 1--u l tUr j 1 land o uyasirP"Cyed ifft-a`�rl6�Lie z,y5tem .'-�1tic Sat Y°V l is*; r"-1" ray Faasic �rrr�r"�tanr�y »~erv'r ccs otN#r�„.i as r�'a 1 1 ce and Fire. E��y ��� i l�r� k:h� L -10r 1 cu l t-ura i lands north and wC t O F Ch i �dc l° :�T'�Y Cle n _ ��" 1nl srtzr a rr^ict ltur`�a1 i'evelop.ment, e i r�-eat*60 OF 101 � th-I', s1zeri� h0l. rim ga 1 i 7 kt i loll the Q ,chard h� t r 1? artlr I -#t Y i 1 n r r.� 1 d i` #"'c r en+ r` I Br, des, I on at I n. that the esu i tin" A -5 torr t r'1u§ At,t:.i tin U,.,e i Plan. l hi c:#:rrr ctrl c rrtil y -Gr nor rl Plan Ind I�h' ccr Ltr��an r{cr Lind 1J as "1 an . Iir'r i :� a iurt l renhc P1,.irr or°n, r "_ 1 erptiad r^y, ; easel y cY deLer°tn'i rta u ab1 policieo,h1, rr r-aral a 1 1 r,' o taa!-'C.01 size'-: zee O this lot will t~iA°w �r'r. 1 r..��� . to r�c:r^a 1 i' 1 an a t ono az neighboring ;tsar^ce l t; area in r due = b 1a w t th h{, 0nd are In - large � � � �r ^ aoreaO-03, and the ab'i l t t y of i #,� C�3r�nty t'. �, r �uv i t1Ya ��ar�d T � i ctn,� 1 sery r e arrd 1 rifrostrc.#cturo to r� s. I dunk: ��1 dove 1 crt�rrler G ho-, dee n changed, D 1 v i z 1 n +t i�h�te r >~ai ray i tMt 060 -acre cowl d be round COMPatible with the Gonrs.r-J P1 t,n on t1v ad�r1 r�a or hr Fr^a1 Land . i rx.y achy Ks 1�yr1a-, un 1 t t4hY 3 l� uthr t< S r;c i 1 i :° i dr r d to be an economic T, s 1 n t iso ,� 101 d be l i eye ro arrrev, o bx ar�i #nc� rrt'r Q un i t � 1 t i z better o #err on the � i du oi= ':'Iu i �, t � tlAr+w d l v t !z t c)r1 s_,-c)0tes r:.rr r #c+riY i s ur4r i t r air t' AM "i on,:, ;aw r.:c#ld iy�rr conai,...Qt"Cld f0vorably, aP'c�rl.wl± i i�,rG r 1 ,'Cat backs a 1 t r°# ad homez i tes and t oh W!' Feet, fr ori 6P the 1 .. het ba. k hou�35 ' tee, a rt'#inamum a r 40t Tr'rrr Mfr+z crttrwr'1 the bK i:he r"t 1 rw+ �3d tr°arpi:n' i t In OXtra i nsu i t' n rt rM' noz.and ka. 1 l x tO ;: t Omual-o no i s _�. '��btwai� k.t�e r� �a11.��.�t;` .�r�r•�rd� b . y t Y a xa C w# r t�nAN�"R# wh �r I�a�or rriaf� t oa i Ccntor l l �'rzrr •rr i .:r 1��� i�4r� i �r 'r' ars � r"I rt r;'c#� � r rrY "all r, +' vw't' r.wu . i C1 } Pi f f l `cf tlt i . James CakMa I dl -!e Pa h gra.' AI rI 'I!�t1rxiEal,ri Log !1 f",� i,; f (►1 }�. PROJECT L)l 0SCRTPTXON 1 . Type r)l' Project:: Tentriat;. i ve Or tlMad A �+ i � 1 est t 1�1:.aI t» R- Briet~, Ocscrlpt ion: Divi I'm of 6-1 ;;crrTw lflti_, ac:roz each Location. East of Meridian IRoad be t sNe n Bt t l 'l Road xarr tJ the l Southern Pacific Railroad tracks, rh l o. Proposed Oens- i t.y o r 'Qevet opmen t 1 dwe 1 1 i rt+) � tr'r I L par Amount of I;mpery i o Surlfac i hg: M l -n I mal . G. Accoss and Nearest. Publ i c flca;ads Parcel I fronts on Il at"I r -W itt Road and Oo l 1 Road @ctycei, z 2-4,ffront on Oo 1 t Road Parer 1 r I' wrI have Private k:.'.. .-wa-s� { do Bel'1 i. r+tethbd of Scwabe Septic tanks and 1 each" i e l d;; . S'eurceof Waborr Supply= Individual wd t is. Proximity of Power Lines: To or'h a i nal parcwa 1 10. Potonta i al for curt her Land Division- and Dovel opmontW ; wow Id r2ur{r°t1t± ;�-tnstruct1 c,m of 5 zIngle- ram 1y ro iddrv�*,-' ,)r10 OUtt.11.111+ i t . 01 s .i 'r" l ROt!h;,-,'ENTAL, 8leTT ( NG 1 Terra l n a.: Oemeral Ttt000r- apt-ric Character! LQvc i valley 1 and f _ b a ziac ' rs'd by Mud" Croak and 1 oveos b. W'epe i1oollolble ~ 4 L°1evat�ion* 14t'-1!; iweetw above Oea Luve1 y M t: irtcluw4iro,„ levoc, eleryattons, c1 L i m i tl'na ltactor s � Norio So i 1: ra , Typom anci 5'arwo l l Cloy Adobe :2-3 fo;r 't ) clat-14 tir 6wrt t i oy wh i ,,;h uhor l' -� Into wl°torr dry . , FMkjder ntf a EU;-.';r'lIY '-Jr rhe t' i t1S t t r;.� 'attl 44t tdr" eu ' md .a1 b. L i rrt t i no rac ur u; In I Imitod gar-oa:�; r _,t i I i Ttr,,.t'yr % li ur-t tw- l n t rl' Y -orara:nted L�+o ,:'gfi w:iIrct'�rit°;>>. Ivlw iaa trtiri.,�,� i 1'.lu«'tfa °t t �rrr pot erfwt.1 a l .., Very Eaoinrsur- f.a ne on d s uk- ! tut f a� 3 Nabu�r++�ai Mozar,,ft, of the Land 1:-arbl'�t't��>rakm Zone I�ipG'�w"ttn'.-, ''.k.�, �. 13 r-r..'}+'C7 s.. an ��"y'lL'i t None {L..'fon'yE���rya in ��Ihh py in Lohds l de Olot o t i al C I roc: Hzi2arUric l ns,: � fl ad , e raspan 1, yo Oo i 1 Pry tenit.I al * Moderatc a lIydre� l tsr�y ° , r. ur dace Water. lWlucl Cr Leek crOOZ--- property al orttj Parc�a l :; end. 5. b. Cr0undwaLor. averl 1 es nro '.)l: heavy Sroundk4a#:ef, , IAI I thdrawa i Dry l nage Char*a � yr i st i s -G: S"Outhwester 1 y -,Is ohool.. r 1 raw . d. Annual Rain fal 1 (normal ).- ,0. =,0. Limit int) Factors None. . / i ; �.ra l .'C.�c�►� i c� Qua l ty E- Xce l lent rrr i ir'r I g ra+ Ac ousts 1 c Rua l i .t:y o rc doo Y Air~ Qual i y- Good. poor dePGnd I n4 v,�rr tr" a I rl Operations. C3 cs_�1 cad i cal Cr��r i r�nma�i elaet at i on " a ; w I y your I Marx I l .i m I-• � m r* I t�rar' I ar=e i r�rw CreLtk W l 1 cit 1" a Hab i tat:s MRcIpL-ors, � qu ie�rel s ,and W,,her" sural l rrtR�rrt C,__.r..,i,%r.rra l Crry 1 ror�rrlr�rtl 10. a�nahaeol b,01 cal, and H i s�i;ori cal RosOur. ez� in the Area-. Low 1 1 4 Outta Goun#sy General Plan i7r s1 gnat; i C5r`I = C)r-ch rtir� & I~ 'r c p r r_a �r . 1,23. Cxi ' ;Inn Zorr tno; A-�5) A -'I 0 13_* Ext t.,t i no Land Use 'tan $ I t e; Orchard. 1 a SUrr?�und i rra Area a. Land Usest Par;ttyre sche r y res i Tera s l , rrx ane 1 l c F:�.f b„ Zoning. A-54 A-101 x'-40. r, 00n0r,4l Plan Ci s I Carat: i ons> Orchard a P I o l's.! Crops. F'€arcol $1zes: 8�0'--acrwe mver�asoi 92x5.95 -acre mLt- l ars within 1000 t o-ot Poi' u l a•t; i on . sp r c* c_ - 1Ci. I^tarac t:t;r of site arrd Ar^tMa Intanzi�v a r�i u1 ur a, 1 a 6�r gar+ Ut-lban Area ''' I '1 ro r Ch I co n-1 .'. miles scrut<E+ nasi: . T ri f l uemce » CSA *-4 4 t Mud Iwreek Drs n oi3e 1'9�,r 1 ro, 'Prio Ubc- T oh Ser*v i co Urban Area*' ; ns . Im rovomr.:n i#w Nc rye t* COWMt;y to Wato, r Ava i I ilb i 1 f twy - I d %�,rr nit i ori I zz I � ia 'L,Irt i t" 1 oKl htmro Te yroz, ANCHA90LOO10AL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED PAIVA PROPERTY SUBDIVISION REAR CHICO BUTTE COUNTYO CALIF09NIA Rn i PROfESSIONAt ARch1f0t0qICA1 St-MVICES 6635 Quail Way 'pamd1so, CA 95969 91GM72-MOA 1 PrIop .red fox, 819,711A WkST 80AV TWIG 5437 Bladit olive brie 1Para ll e Ca.t1torria 95569 ARCHA90LOGICAL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED PAIVA PROPERTY SUBDIVISION DEAR CHICO BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r V A 5 PROfE5510NA! ARckA0I0C11Cl11 SERVICES 6635 Quell Way , Paradlse, C,A 95969 916/872.3164 prepared for 8191 9A VEST SURV9YING 5431 Blaok OiiVe DriVe tpar6dibe, Oaliforhia 95,969 NOVEMBER, jg8g r r TABLE OF CONTENTS IHTROIUCTIOA . . . Project Personnel . . . CULTURAL AND EVVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT . . . Geographic and Environmental Setting • . ♦ . Ethnographic Background if,chaeological Background . . . . Areal History . . . . . . . 7 RESULTS' OF THE INVESTIGATION Records, Search . . 16 . . Meld Surve • T Methods . 16 r . . . . . . . . . Survey Results 17 . . , . . 17 RECOMMENDATIONS . . 18 REFERENCES CITED . . MAP 1 Project Vicinity and Location . . . . 27 . . ,< r r r N N r i INTRODUCTION A su,bdivisi,on has been proposed for approxir t, ;y 6 acres of almond orchard (hereafter referred to as the ;gust west of Chico, Butte County, California. Pu,rsuantprojecttoreathe requirements of the California Environmental and local ordinances, the Butte County Planning Department required an environmental review of the Project prior to issuing a use-permit. Among the environmental issues included in the environmental review were cult-ural (i.e. historical stnd archaeological) resources. ri)ltte County Planning Department California Archaeological Inventoryconsulted with i n Center, California State University, Chi co,o to determinewheL'h�r o the project area possessed sufficient archaeological sensitivity to warrant an archaeological survey of the property. The information Center conducted a records search to ascertain whether the project area had been previously to to an arehae,ological investigation, to determine whether any previously recorded; sites, State Historic Landmarks, or properties listed. on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) occuPY the project area, and to evaluate the archaeological sensitivity of the project area. Due to thepresence of Mud Creek within the project area and the proximity of the: property to previously recorded archaeological sites, the Information Center recommended that a complete archaeological sur,,tey of the project area should be performed: On behalf of the landowners, Sierra West Surveying contracted with Professional Archaeological Services (PAS) to conduct an archaeological investigation of the project area and prepare this reportof the _results, The investigation tbP records search, a review of ethnographict histori al,luded and ® a,r•chaeological literature relevant to the osi-foot complete archaeological reconnaissances f tithe' and ct area. project Project Personnel The archaeological field with the survey was undertaken by the author dssigtanee of Carol NGarber and archaeologist Neal etienschwander on N-ovembel, 4, 1988. The author is sincerelyr grateful to Neal for donating part of one of hia rare days oft' to assist Us, r 1 1 CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT dO ographic and Environmental Setting The project .area is located and comprises a portion of .Lot just west of the C,l.ty of Chico, John Bidwell Rancho 57 of the third subclJ.v tt� los of the Bunte County, California. The entire Project area is now under cultivation as an almon(I or,ryhal,d, ,�hQ property 1;�es in the southwestern 22N, lt:�nge 1E (MDM), and a quarter of Seatiort 18, Township USGS (1951 1 6topographic P g pPpears on the Nord, Ciilirornia 7.5 Location) ' 9 9) to o ra hia quadrangle (see It occupies a portion of the Rancho ArM�Op 1, Project which eventually was acquired by Chico founder John 13idwell. toyo del Chino,. hamlet of Nord, established as Colb 's The its present name :n 8 g Y Landing in 1858 and given 1 70, is about three miles northwest of the project area, and was originally founded as a connect the Chico area to Sacramento via the Sacramento The river is now confined to a channel about five ning point to the River. Project area. miles west of In its pristine condition (i.e. Europeans with livestock and prior to the arrival he Vegetation community that characterized ethe ed plant species) the California Prairie (Burcham 1981: Project area was the Ktlahler 1977; Munn and Keel 79-81 ; Heady 1988: 492 et passim; Primarily of perennial bunch 1959)' This grassland consisted being purple needlegrass grasses, the most dominant spea.ies (St1iQa �ulehra) and nodding needlegrass (St1 �a cornua) . Some of the beardless wild rye associated grasses included Y (El mus tritieoides), a sod -forming soh -bunch grass,:: as well as June grass melic (Melica im (Koeleria erstata) --4ar— feeta), deer grass "-`-"'-- t California fe auee (Festu0a Ldahoeasis (Muhlenbergia ri ens), ), and bluegrass LLE-1 scabrella) Several annual grasses and present in this association, a Variety of (orbs were also Perennial forbs A , number of both annual. and including clover flowered profusely during the rain johns (Tri.f01ium trident at gilia Y season, y -tach (Orthocarpus (Gil.fa tricolor) (Or.thocarbus -- eria.hthus), pur ie ' purpurasaens) tid ti p owl s clover eyed grabs (Sisyrinohium bellum) pg (L--aVia 1' atyt3lossa) (Caloohortus s Brodiea s ---- ► bluer ----------------. spp.), ), and various wild onions SPP -* Mariposa lilies spP•) (Buroham 1981:80_) Barbas (Ailium Vernal pools or "hog wallows11 y eastern side of the formed in doprcrjb joss on the. Sacramento valley fl where impervious hardpan existed beneath the ground surface ciraina e. aels in spring) B As water evaporated from these vernal thereby restricting a characteristic vernal flora appeared ppeared which often included grassos (Lepidium latines) p o l y (r`Y t—__________ g D o-- g r hyssop s o p l o o s e s t r i f e or grass leuooce hala)t d'ownin fa ( j, navarretia �Naaretia yssonifo flower (Mi m_ ulus tricolor ninrria 21 ans) � tploolor incl ltey- __), Psiloaarous brevis mousy and many 2 0 11 0 0 U 0 FE 0 other apecies (Burcham 19.81:79-81; Heady 1988:492-49`7; Heizer and Clsasser 1980: Appendix 1 Holland and Jain 1988:516-520; Ho;l. 1962; Storer and Usinger 1963) Beginning around the 1850s, the California Prairie who transformed by the introduction of domestic livestock and both wild and domesticated plants from the Old World. Grazing and agricultural practices of early settlers favored tho roplaooment, of the native perennial bunch grasses and their asrjoUiatod flora by introduced and native annual grasses and ot;tor plants Particularly dominant in _these altered grassland3 are wild oat (Avena fatua and A. barbata),, bromegrasse's ( lromus spp.), introduced bluegrass(Poa annua), tarweed (Madia otttiya), false brome (Brachypodium distachyon), barleys (Hordeum le orinum, H. hystrix), nitgrass (Gastridium ventricosum), ntrc>auced fescues (Festuca spp.) such as fox tail, silver hairgrass (Aira_ earyophyllea), Napa thistle (Centaurea melitensis), barb goatgrass (Ae flops triunc alis)I and many others (Burchaim 1981:173-185, Heady 497-498) With a flew notable exceptions (i.ei wild oat, soft chess [Bromus moll.isl', and burr clover r1ledicago h spida]), these plants not only constitute poor animal forage, but they possess rigid barbed awns and other parts that injure grazing;animals when they become dry (Burcham 1981:110• The pristine California Prairie once supported large herds. of deer (Odocoileus hemionus), pronghorn antelope (Antilooa ra americana),. and tule elk (Cervus e_lophus: nannodes'). Only doer now remain in some localities, but they forage ;t,n alfalfa fields and orchards rather than on the da iecated and L rbed plants of tod'ayts feral grasslands (Bur: am 1981:114) A so native to these prairies were the Beed-- ground squirrel (SPermophil.us. be,echeyi) jackrabbit (Leptis Californi.cus), pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni). Tile primary predator, was the Valley coyote (Canis ochropus) (Buroham 1981:114; Heady 1988':498). Another vegetation community that may have been present within the project area along Mud Creek (which is now an intermittent channelized stream confined by artificial levees) was the riparian forest community. Riparian forest communities in California have not been well described, in part because many. such communities were largely destroyed by agricultural clearing and flood control activities before they could be Oyntematically studied. Strips of forest that grow along foothill and valley streams are generally characterized by great floristic diversity. Among the common tree 'species found along stream margins are cottonwood (Pooulus fremontii), Willows (Salix sp'r).), sycamore (Platanus racemosa) and alders (Alms spp.) (Griffin 1.988:405; Kadhl6r 1977; Sudworth 1567)i The Sacramento Valley is the northern reach of the great Central Valley of California. The entire Valley oobstitutes an 3 elongated trough filled with thousands of feet o!' alluvial sediments from the Periodic flooding of t'0O Joaquin Rivers and their major affluents that aol1amento and Sari mountains surrounding the Central Valle emanate from the the general vicinity of the 3'• Among the latter in. Feather River. project area are Butto Crook and the Because rocks associated witri huriad beneath the deep alluvia, the precise the trough are of the valley is unknown. It is thought ogeglogical history comprised an isolated arm ofeous Period tho valley once perha sthe the. Pac'"O Oos.n beginning, Fossil marineninvart brateos of Cretaceous some 1140 million the earliest valley sediments. age are Year ago, Period, some Y the beginning associated with 50 to B g of the Tertiary seems 70 million years ago, the Sacramento Valley to have been quite shallow, while deeper water existed e the San Joaquin Valle Sacramento Vzlley has been to closethe to seat level to: S time, tly above in placer, and the sediments deposited over lightly and million years aave alternated between shallow the s last 50 basin. Mosediments from the mountains surrounding sediment, of the valla ding the utalley slightly above sea level today, the San Francisco Bay Area is since around one and one-hal' million been essA;a,, ally dry land o. volcanic eruptions at around that time resultedyears inthe formation of Of Sutter Buttes, located about i tion area (Alto and H ndman 1 15 miles south of the project 4 Y 975.1.71-172).. Sthnograohic Background The project area lies within the territory formerly hold by the Northwestern Maidu or Konkow Indians, who inhabited much of what is now Butte County within the Butte Creek and lower Feather River drainage basins (Riddell 1978. the Sierra Nevada foothills and 370-372). They occupied both Sacramento Valley from about Deer C,.-eek the. the ern the northo to oSutter Buttes in the south, The Northwestern Maidu were linguistically related to the River edrainage basinastei-I or nin much of what du who inhabited the Upper Feather. unty as far east as the Sierran ore.stf and the Southern MaidusoroNisenan who oceu; ied ' . p portions of the mountains and the Central Valley to the south within the Bear Yuba, and American River drainage basins (Riddell 1978:370-3724 Wilson and Towne 1978:381-388). Colltactively, these three Maduan-Speaking divisions comprised one of rive linguistic families within the Calif o2 'nia Pen ttialinguistic stock Riddell 1978.370, Shipley 1968), Kroeber (19.32) and Merriam (1966) further divide Nortkiwthe estern MaidU into local bands or "tribeletal+. A tribel.et also called a "Villages comm sit n of the inhabitants of two or �moren be defined as consisting Villages United under the leadership of the head man ly cof fthe rato- 4 t C prominent village. Each tribelet acted as a homogeneouu sociopolitical unit in matters of land ownership, reaction to trespass, war, and ceremonies. The head man was often assistod in his office by lesser officials and a council of eldero, _Mont tribelet leaders "ruled" by 'virtue of their wisdom, expapience, and acquiped respect rather than through any real autkiority. Tribelets were distinguished on the basis of looationt minor variations iii dialect, and internally perceived sociottt)litioal dfferentiation (Kroeber 1932:258). The Michoopda tribelet claimed portions of the $40),amento Valley around the present-day city of Chico, and are bel J dyed to have foraged within the foothills a few miles east or Chico (Merriam 1966:315) Major clusters of villages were al,tuated mainly along primary drainages. Even before the arrival of large numbers of Euro -American Settlers and miners, the Indians felt the effects of the presence of white civilization. In 1833, an epidemic of what is believed to have been malaria, brought into the Cal-ifornia Central Valley from Oregon by fur trapping parties, killed as many as ?5% of the native people in its path (Cook 1955:322). The Indians never recovered from this catastrophe sufficiently to ef'eotively resist the invasion of their homeland during and after the Gold Rush. The initial hostility between whites and the Northwestern Maidu probably occurred well before the gold rush in 1843, when a party of travelers fired on the Indians (Bidwell 1906:(5-79 Cas cited by Riddell 1978:385-1). Hostilities intensified during the oarly years of the gold rush. In 1851, a ramaher named pence, who resided in Messilla Valley about five piles east of the project area, hung a local Indian for Allegedly stealing oattle. In 18531 Pence led a reprisal against the Konkow at bogtown (Magalia), killing about 25 people. During the same year, Indians were accused of killing 10 Chinese miners, and Penoe led. a party of Chinese and whites in the killing of about 40-60 Indians (Wells and Chambers 1973:217), Along with epidemics and armed attacks, the Indians had to contend with the destruction of the fisheries And other resources by gold miners and the exclusion of Indians froj` prime hunting and food gathering lands claimed by white set`tlerb. They were soon reduced to poverty, and many became homeloon refugees in their own country (Castillo 1578:107-108), During the late 1850s and 1860s, most of the surviving Maidu were removed to the Round Valley Indian Reservation, and the countyis ttlkidian troublestt eventually ceased (Wells and Chambers 1973:221»222)„ Chico founder John Bidwell is often oommaklded for his kindnesa to the Indians. According to McGie 0982, Volume I, pg. 35) 5 eared for the Indians of the MicbO(-1Pda Bidwell wisely teaching them agricull.M a1. tribe on Chico Creek ,s of the white man. CY . kjsnd practices and other way. eytensively as paid laborers in his far f.0 g them Annie Kennedy OidW6 11t farming operations. His wife, d schools to t brought Christianity an the Indi ciY►N in their village on the Arroyo del Chico. A few pages earlier, however, MoGie ( 1982, Vol.uma 'i'., Pg • 1 it ) ns to noted that 'Bidwell had force ea village and ble community ia locate a0 "sChico abandon their traditional Creek. Another view of this seemingly idyllic relationship between NI offered by Castillo :(1978:108): white and Indians is In 1850 the legislature passed a law that seriously affected Indians' labor position. This law declared that the any Indian, on the word of a White man, could be declared a vap, rant, thrown in jail, and have ths with no his laborsoldat auction for UP to four mOlndial adult pay. This indenture law further said any agents could be or child with the consent of his P bound over to ,a 'White citizen for a period laws legally for subsistence only. These laws years, le.boring to marked the transition of thavendfree frvent e°toethe virtual slavery, they g exploitative ethos of America ns who soon took advantage ca of the situation. Nearby Indians were roundrd up, made to labor:,. and turned out to starve and die when the work. season Was over. i� . to Castillo 19781109), these laws fostered the "legal According t young women for kidnapping of children for use as servants and sexual abuse. Over 44000 Indians were thusabandoned the blaw ;�i�n about 1852 and 1867> when the state finally S - Constitution* deference to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.• than While the BidWells might have been somewhat more benign and others hard labor for subsistence wages, Christianity: of schools were small compensation to the ofd life ians fnrlt or tthel oss severe their freedom, their country, anarvation, and d way reduction of their numbers due to diseaso, st outright murder. as A few 'hundred Mas Ind th m are dinvolverl e in b in efforts mto Counties today; s,nd maany of revive thtl.t dative language and Culture ArohaeOlOgical Background The project area occupies a portion of the Central Valley Archaeological region, which includes the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys and the Delta area. 3oo the cme San a,itits have D y area explicitly linked the prehistory and the central coast Of Caiielsniintotheatpreh tthe o�ioraCultural based on perceived pa sequences of these regions. in central California is said to The study of prehistory H Holmes to establish the have begun with attempts by an' the state after it had -en antiquity of Indian presence the Sierra Nevada that Indian reported by gold miners 3 artifacts 'seemed to be diretvly associated with auriferous ("e' ls. Attempt to veriry this association were gold -bearing) graves 01:469)• inconclusive (Holme, 19 A somewhat more systematic and scientific approach to by archaeological and ethnologioal researchwas at01the initiated established Departmen the newly executed_ the first site University of California. Jones (1923) in the Stockton excavations tinder the auspices of the University area in 1900, but he soon abandan�e +nroductivdn site excavatistigations in the ons California region in favoz of more P in the Santa Barbara area and the Channel Islands. Uhle initiated site excavations of shellmounds in In 1902, ,regionFrom Yiis explorations in the the San Francisco Bay . he concluded (Uhle extensive Bmeryvi.11e shellmount (Ala -309), he co tion" from a 1907.36-41) that there was evidence of Flexed human primitive to a mated, withe the vancd Neolithic eulturee while cremation burials were assq the burials and well -polished stone milling tools lharaetef Uhle�s hYpothesized later culture. The evolutionary nature o ' two-stage cultural sequence created some initial interest among q, his cohtemporaries, but the idea was soon scorned, rejected, and long forgotten. ublished itt 19Q9�, 1910) conducted NelsoiY (1971 [first P Upper gtr,Ll!j several shellmound exoavations, and noted pertain apraren divergent traits that varied from the lower to the upp iota in the mounds. He hinted d at hat+o these ao�ltr turalt�tloovelopmPnts processes when he concluded oI a single populatIonts culture _ might represent either evolutionmeans of migration or a�)ngUpst or popul atiot� replacement by mein his report of the excavatiot'1 (Nelson 1971;154-157): However in Richmond, he of the Hllis Landing shellmOundats- horeCwas29cul:tural uniformity concluded (Nelson 1g10:402) although as it was from the top of the deposit to the bottoms only the uppexi half later pointed out (Gerow and Forc, of the deposit was Systematically examined 7 t s 0 11 0 Utilizing quantitative methods involving the voluNnO or ay 4VOM, weight of mollusc remains ill theandheCooku (19 +6) est,lmatOtl the Nelson (1971), Giff6) ord (191, maximum age of these deposits„ Their various estm�i�qu k�t�rtged from about 3,000 to 3,500 years. These estimates consi;ti:t�ai;bd tilt, ina], 000U� Cation basis for inferring the time -depth of abori,g became dating throughout central bon California esL' estimuntil ates of�othebinitijkl, GopManent available. occupations of the valley floor center around 2,500 O,C: Despite what appeared to be demonstrable evidoboo for the human occupation of parts of central California for ooveral thousand years, Nelson's assertion that there Was cultural uniformity from the earliest to the latest periods Of prehistorcangy became the accepted rule.. T developedopinin intot a v f irmionary b lief that was imperceptible gradually culture remained unchangedhwer observed between e sites e and areas cultural differences in spatial terms as though the were explained exclusively "ethnographic prese t" (who•interviewed acculturate athe view of alnaianorin derived by ethnograp defined all prehistoric the late 1800s and early 19OOs) � Schenck (1926) openyY California culture (Beardsley 1dicul )• scoffed at, and in fact, ridiculed Uhle's suggestion of �� till han progressive developmental chen sequence 1926:�1Q2)ltthature a cert cin lartPael%s though grudgingly admitted appeared only in the uppermost strata of shellmounds, g"d that inbaidian Use there seemed to be marked h dd differences differences were oasoribedto seasonal and lower strata. variability in the use of the sites through the ages. Kroebe.r arguably the tial anthropologist c lturein ohis time in prehistoric California, decle.red (1925most influen:930) California had remained "immutablen in all YesponseLntol the AS direct result of this attitude, anWho disappearance of the last generation e and B0 nativeof Inlanguages andheulture�, some vestige oPnowled.ge g University of Cali fcrrni 0 anthropologists primarily side central on salvage California archaeology ethnography. dittord and Schenck (1926) repori,ed the few site excavations that had occurredin the southern San Joaquin Valley up to that time, which provided evidence of What appeared to represent the material remains of the Southern Vali ey icokuts and their immediate ancestors. Little informatlf�',a Mas ot'fcred, however,. the antiquity of the find*+ ar irk•" cult al ahanpes regarding the prehistoric se Th : �.tnci Ixded (1926: 118) that Withinquence. 4 the in andient +,imes, although the Valley may have been,��iea't oacui5ation was material culture that oha"raoterizr-,d r, y w�1L sirlIndians o,e the last. virtually indistinguishable from that � � and civantity 0f century in retrospect, given �%�, ,yak» tyMoratto (19$4:177) evidence uno?)Vered by Gifford and ' r deemed it "remarkable" arrived at this conclusion. hat Gifford and Schenck oaui,d have $eards7.e interest in central. credited Walde °f Bay Area California archaeology Wedel for reviving However and Sacramento Va11er� gY with his what ' by that time, Rodgers sites be exO4vltions ha interpreted (1g',) had gindij. in 1934. Barbara as discrete culture reported cvidut�oe for strati area sites, and Olson periods b graphic context Santa recover d everal Santa sa, ported Rodgers within evidence ha ljnlieved to be hypothesis, S Barbara argq sites in a tri Pecifically, Olson that he Poferred to in tripartite sequence "Ported what Ol'"11 seemed temps a Earl of cultural When thio to indicate that , Intermediate, and Be, which cultural at the gradual Leto periods, linSUist were changes that marked 'evolution, succession not the result occurred (i.e' the perceived of nulttaral tribal or in the lY within F. Single u changes or Almoat simultaneous population). Schenck and ba with Rodgers, in sites wsOn (1929) reco and Olson►s revelations, within northern gnized a similar cultural follow�;d Lillard and Sari Joaquin Valley, 1 1 sequence (1939), Heizer Purves (1936), Li:llard In the Years that this train and Fenenga (193c;), and , In of thoubh�; based on Wedel ► and Fenen,�a and San Joaquin Valle excavations (1941 the, old n Valleys. As Beardsle within ) continued central. California that evolutionar Y (1948 the Sacramento Y change had later proolaimed, throughout Prehistoryact occurred The Cultural sequence developed was finch in and Y shaken. Transitional , Heizer, and by Heizer and Fenenga 1 oa and �'enen a ( 93 study n hard Late' peri 19391) Of both culture periods. The included Earl felt that the Ba The and sequence was based on Yr Central Y Area Se culture process ` the Valley; quenoe aerierall , and 34 was the three k'enenga attempted to Y dlplica;ted :that of the based periods correlated dem that on nasal and tc� a different that each of Sacramento and cranial indices human poperation t`6served nelta region s from burials that scant ite:;. Beardsley at eight indicated that there was evidence from Y (1954:!o4 Middle nonsiderabl certain noastal) later Earl (i.,e, T'rahs-i.tipnal Y more cont:[,, ,t sites Y and Middle pe r;tods ) and Late periods Y betF!een the than bOtv)een the 1 beSP, ite n data which awson+ mo�tioulous ocourred througdicated that; signifieyrith°a`is of strati ra n r g h time l.tural ■ , Schenck a °u When g phio gag, (1972:2) 1at.er �. rema hed ges had cautious aboutrOmarked that "if aautiouslY skeptical, 'middle', and 'ataking bawrson►s suggested Schenck had been less Years ea, and ,ll traditions mi ht equence� the +early+ g have been reaognited tett. 9 As the result of his excavations at. Buena Vista Lake,- Wedel. (1941) proposed a two -period cultural sequence for the southern Ban Joaquin Valley. The earlier period presence oWas marked by t1+e f people whose culture appeared to be leas developed than the coeval cultut es described for the Delta regi by Heizer and Fenenga (1939). Wedel felt that this early culture more closely resembled the. Oak Grove culture of the Santa Barbara area. (Wedel 1941:147; of. Rodgers 1929). The later Period at Vista Lake was divided, tentatively, into two phases, whichBuena were culturally distinct from the earliest period, ite the appearance of cultural succession and internalescultural developments, Wedel was he`si,tant to ascribe an antiquity to the findings. Y considerable While interest in central California archaeology was being revived during the 1930s and early 19110s, Beardsley was Preparing the first doctoral dissertation at the University of Cal,Uoenia, Berkeley, on the top e of California versions of the dissertation, which Was completedoin' 'Various Published in 1948 and 1- 1947, were 954. While Beardsley acknowledged that the terminologies developed by Heizer and Fenenga, including ;;ile division of the Late period into temporal phases, had been adequate for some time, and seemed in archaeological record, he came to p $eneral to reflect the ve certain s in this taxonomic system. Specifically he maintain.edhOrtoominga 1954:5): (Beardsley As new areas were brought into the picture, presenting divergent trait complexes Withih the same time level, it became increasingly apparent that elaboration of this terminology or substitution of a new system needed; lest we end up using them was e same terms yst different things in separate areas, quite In response to this perceived need, Beardsley devised what has become known as the Central California Taxonomic System. It Was purport3d to incorporate variability in time, space, and cultural content which none of the previous schemes had achieved (BeardsleyYet fully 195w 5). ;Craniea].ly, subsequent generations of California archaeologists have criticized Beardsley and other Inco meal evolutionists specifically for their failure to incorporate this variability ef,feotively into their taxonomic to systems (of. Fredrickson 1973, 1974). Beardsley► i'axon Were groupings faojes and nhor�onsn,s taxonomic units lnoluded tt it► rtpr'ovi.ncesn, that presumably represented individual cultural. olated �n tsoomponents Larger cultural units,:. constructed of several faoiep that mere apparently related, and which occupied distinct geographical territories, were called provinc,as. geographioal and cultural units, ']'he Provinces Were thusperiods (j, e , both Middle, and Late) Were termed' horizons HoWeveri since hoeizons 10 incorporated both facies and well as temporal units, provinces, they were cultural as archaeological "tradtionsn Horizons can be thought of as in the broadest sense of similar, if not related, cultures traits that define each temporal and eardslaultur95 al�un The diagnostic bead and shell ornamentation t it are that have types associated with Primarily Proven to be consistently With Brave lots, 330ardsley's taxonomic s s itive. Within Valley, Delta, Ba r, Y tem, the prehistory oiC the CWithin explicitly linked y Bion, and the Marin coastal tral occur and the temporal breaks that se area were all simultaneously in all Parate horAzons 194$; Table 1 1954:Table 1), of these regions (Beard,sley Beardsley various did recognize cultural differences these areas that he between to California , but these linked under the rubric " all of n "dissimilar en claimed 3' 1954, "Central environments (Beardsle •7), related to traditions", working on basicall Y uniform Around the ,same time that syntheses time cent]»al California Beardsley was Publishing excavation F Prehistory, three significant pro ects were underway in, the regio,". The West Berkeley 13hell.mound San Francisco Wallaoe and Lathra'P of the (Ala-807) was excavatedBby ArchaeologistUniversity of California in s from Stanford University excavated -,950. 'v.illa8e Complex site (SMa- the University under- the direction 77) during portions of 1951 and excavated b ° Gerow. The Ryan mound 1952 Y Wedr1 in 1935, by C. B. Smith in (Ala-329) WLs classes from Stanford University in 1959, 1960948 Lod by Gerow. , and by field' subcaitted One °f Gerow ' s students r and 1962, again. an M.A. thesis at Stanford in CoberlY, eventually rest,lts ��f the Ryan mound excavations. 1963 that summarized the several excavations „ The results we,. a not of these Years later formally The until several Lathrap (Gerow and Force 1963• Cobert 7 , `975), GerowS investigations y 19 3• Wallace and different conclusions hen those led to strikingly 'Wallace and Lathra a of Beardsle �� g Y while Cobert pi which seems attributable y, .soberly', and. Y and Wallace and Lathra to the fact that Within. the context ofizdardsle P to their data System' Gerow felt, that the y' s Central California Taxc;tomic refleot the cultural relationshiosota s stem did not ultiMatel Y accurately Y rejected both Beardsle that actually existed. Gerow synthesis of central Cal ifornia Y s taxonomic system aixsi his Prehistory. Gerow and Force (1968) maintained thatat Delta the obeli arttfaat Malley sit, dev� oiled from YPolog�.es a, which formed dthe basis ata recovered the Conti hand Central aaonom y� System, constitute California are useless for inferrin Ben to Y the timnwmar ars, but aontrar; g cultural relationehips,, Y, Cerow ins ;ted that during Earl and To the times, the various cultures that Y Middle hors;-oto Valley the were unrelated. inhabited the Bay and He tlerefa,Ne concluded thatF tta 11 1 1 A 0 0 0 D e two areas should be taxonomically divorced (Of. Bi0kel 1974; Ragir 1972)• Gerow felt that the Early Bay cultures represents-od peoples who spoke various languages of the Hokan linguistic stook, while coeval Central Valley archaeological remains repro.§anted the earliest penetration into central California by elleakers of Penutian languages. After : gout fiOQO 13. C., the cu) tt�wes of the two regions, along with their associated human populations, began gradually to converge, which Gerow interpreted as evidence for the gradual replacement in the Bay region of peoples speaking Hokan languages by peoples speaking Penutian languages. Aside from Gerow, Fredrickson (1973, 1974), Moratto (19811!207), and. Rx,gir (1972) are among several archaeologists who now consider +.he Windmiller Culture of the Central Valley Early Horizon to represent -the earliest appearance of Penutian languages in the region. Along with Gerow, Bickel, Ragirp and others, Fredrickson (1973: 1914) recognized a need to divorce: the. Bay and Interior regions taxonomically baried on the likelihood that the cultural sequences of the two areas were not necessarily synchronous or even relatable. Accordingly, lie developed a taxonomic system for the North Coast Ranges and the Bay region that was not derived from the Central California Taxonomic System. Vredriekson observed (1974:41-42) It seems e;M�ar that a simple unilinear sequence of cultural types (i.e. the Contral California Taxonomic System) does not provide an adequate model for understanding the changes which appear to have taken place. ..and that the transition from one culture type to another did not take place uniformly throughout she area, (bit) rather took place in different regions at different times. Archaeological investigations in the northern Sacramento Valley and the surrounding region gave the impression that while the earlier periods of the Central. California sequence might have been more or Less duplicated in the north, the Late Period representedan apparent departure from this sequence. This departure has been attributed to the arrival in Late Period times of the Wintu Indians ('Meighan 1955, Smith and Weymouth 19526, Treganza 1954). in the context of the results vi' these early iftVo tigations, research over the last two or three decades in the northern Sa0ro1ento Valley region has focused, to some extant, on the perceived displacement of ahtient lJolcan speaking groups from central California by later arriving speakers of Penutian languages. Baumhoff and Olmsted (1963)i for example, applied 12 n 0 both radiocarbon dating and glOttochronology2 Cascade Range foothills to the bast of the Saera Sacto ramento n the concluded that the Early Horizon y, and represented occupations by Hokan period in this r©g,on while was asso;iated with intruding Penutiansspeakershe Middle Horizon Chartkoff, Miller-, and Johnson thtmej hypothesizing that the (1970) elaborated on this cente,•d earliest occupations of this region in the foothills rather th?n on the valley floor: These 7 upations represented the presence Of early oec Hokan languages p, , whose adaptation centeret, around ales who spoke mobile pattern of huntinggeneralized, extensive use of hard seeds, which gathering. e These p mano and millingstone, Y Proce.lsed h people made relatively Their utilization of the vallmeans of the y minimal and sporadic. Sometime around �' floor was Penutian groups began to arrive ;from the north 3000 B.C. established in the , and became firmly "preadaptedn to the valley. These naoples were somewhat food valley environment, and Were oriented toward processing and preservation. around the harvesting Their subsistence centered and and processing of acorns (with the mortar to pestlej and the preservation of salmon. They Were thus able , which iuses of these rGsources into surpl Year�rou drstamplesse � ich n turn relatively large, semi -sedentary communiti ., enabled them to exist in people are thought to hale displaced the Hokan speInetime, these mar�rinal areas of the mountains and deserts (Chartkoff Mi more and Johnson 1970; cf. Kowta 1975; Ritter 1970), , Millar Edwards (1970), who excavated sites located along Creek on the western edge of the Sacramento valley, Thames a three-phase cultural sequence. also proposed 0,e sequence the ih named gstono the earliest period in observation that the Nmanoeand Mmilling,gtone werPhase" based on his th4s period (between about 2,000 and evalent during mortar and pestle were not. 5,000 years ago), while the subsequent Tehama phase introduced until later. The mortar r ry i pestle (ca. A.D. 1 the mano to 1000) included both the consider,.. to be transitional between nthe m Northernone, and was Phase and the terminal Millingstone Complex. phase, which Edwards equated to the Shasta The (representing the Wntuan intrusion into the region), Shasta Complex Was thought to have been oharacteri�ed b presence of the mortar and pests y the Of the mano and a alonr3 with the complete absence investigations mill 3tigstort The result -s of Edward i s Miller, and Johnson (197 support for the model of Charl,koff,. X1970). ys Glottochronology involves Comparative statis anal sis of language vocabulariestical. divergence of a to determihe the Age pf apparently related languages and to estimate the age of first contact between adjacent, but linguistically unrelated cultural groups, 13 n :More recent archaeological studies, however, have Rtitrongly indicated that the mano and millingstone were used in the northern Sacramento Valley virtually into Historic timGa (Dreyer arid Dead 1982; Farber 1985). While much has been latirned in recent years about the prehistory of the northorn Sucrament Valley, theve is currently much controversy over apeoifio archaeol.ogichL issues, which is perhaps an indication that there is yet much to be learned about regional prehistory. Little is presently known about the specific prehistory off' the Chico area. A prehistoric occupational sequence that ostensibly represents Maiduan prehistory has been developed from excavations in two localities in the western foothills of tho Sierra Nevada. On the basis of archaeological investigation Within the Oroville Locaiit y, which includes nearby Messillc. Valley to the south of the Town of Paradise, a five -phase cultural sequence was indicated (Olsen and Riddell 1963; Ritter 1970). The most recent phase is represented by the Historic Complex that clearly exemplifies the material culture of the ethnographic Northwestern Maidu. The Oroville Complex occupied the protohistoric period from about A.D. 1500 to 1830. The Sweetwater Complex predates the Oroville Complex from about A.D. 800 to 1500. The Bidwell Complex date's from about A.D. 1 to 800. Preceding the Bidwell Complex is the somewhat enigmatic Mesilla Complex (Ritter 1970:173-174). The Mesilla Complex has beencompared to the contemporaneous Martis Complex of the Sierra Nevada Mountains on the basis of similarities i.n lithic technology, although Olsen and Riddell. (1963:11, 52) still found sufficient differences to consider the Mesilla and Martis Complexes to be representative of two distinct cultures. Markley (1978) and Ritter (1970) agree that there appears to bi+ an unbroken cultural sequence for at least the last 2,000 years in the Oroville Locality, suggesting that all four of the post -Melilla Complex expressions might be ancestral to the Maidu or a closely related cultural group. The evidence indicates that during the last two millennia, the Indians of the region were becoming increasingly sedentary and economically specialized, and were developing increasingly complex sociopolitical institutions,. Humphreys (1969) described a three-phase sequence for the Bollards Bar area located to the south of the Oroville Locality in what was formerly Nisenan territory. Bullards Bar I represents the earliest phase, and seems equivalent in age and character to the Martis and Melilla Complexes, Bullards Bar II, dated roughly between A.D. 500 and 1400-1500, ueems to be somewhat equivalent to the Sweetwater Complex of the Oroville' Locality. Sullards bar III is the most recent archaeological expression, and is presumed to represent the material remains of the ethnographic 'Nis,enan. 14 i rl* 0 0 I Recently, Farber (1982a, 1982b) presented what he belieVd to be evidence that the Martis Comple= 1s confined exclusiV01Y toi the eastern slope of the Sierra hose Nevada, cultures that during occupied t��b early period of prehistory, allied ed 010 western Sierra Nevada slope were more closely lthe Martini Mesilla Complex of the orovi]'..e Locality than t Complex as it is expressed in the Tahoe Basin rogion• Farber also hypothesized that the Mesil:lri Complex might 1'opr'es rotated remain► of ancestral Mthe aiduan culture l that of Othoosre aarIhers cultural group that spoke a Penutian language (cf. Clewlow et al. 1984; Elston et al. 1984; Peak And Associates 1983) have reported the results of site excavations onthe western slope of the Sierra Nevada that gener4ted apparent supporting evidence for some of Farber's hypotheses. Areal History Among the initial penetrations of the upper Sacramento Va ey region by Europeans was that of the Spanish explorer Gabriel Moraga, who in 1808, explored the lower reaches of Feather River, perhaps as far north as Suttor Buttes. in 1820, Captain Luis Arguelloled thea �, atherition Rivernitsthe name ©(E'ariss sand thills of Orc�wllle, and ge Smith 1882:144,-145)• By 1828► and throughout the next two Company American Fur Company trappers decades., Hudson's Bay and were active within the region (Wells and Chambers 1973:128). in 1844, Mexican Governor Manuel. Mieh'eltorena issued several ]Nand grants within northern Califoi�xtendedPeter 3.Uto�noi^thernen Was wButte a grant on Deer Creek, putt of whichFarwell and Thomas Fallon County. That same year, Edward A. settled on the Farwell grant, the eastern boundary of which cuts through present-day Chico: Willi Dickey received the Rancho sent - del Arroyo Chico grant of 22 21 r by in eBidw ll.heart �f In18117 day Chico, which was later acquired he Bidwell settled on his famous estP;te in Chico. in 1849, purchased the property from Dicltey. immediately to the south of Chico, Samuel 'Neal and David button occupied the Eaquon grant (McOie 1982r Volume I, pp• 34-36 Talbitzer 1987:20-�21 Wells and Chambers 1973:128-129): Butte County was incorporated on February 18, 1850 by an act of the newly commissioned state legislature. `aha original Butte County embraced all of present-day Butte and Plumas Counties colusa along with portions of Lassen, Tehama, Sutter,5and became counties (Wells and Chambers 1973. large By e evident that the area was too large for the Butte County government to meet growing demands for roads, schools, law and order. Thus, beginning'wButte ith 1C6U tyC aonf�iguraUi,an�on -began to5be Areas within e origina separate counties (Fariss 'and Smith 1882;1'56 incorporated as - 157) 15 During the late 1840s and early 1850s, Bidwell 04-t4bli:shed t'he Chico area as an agricultural, transportation, ;and o'flinmercial center. As early as 1847, Bidwell maintained eXpopimental orchards and fields, and a flour mill and fruit-drying p),fint were soon built. Stage lines passed through Chico, oonnectir,g Marysville and the Shasta area. Bidwell opened ti t;►otei to accommodate travelers. By 1851, the first peat ortioe was established under Postmaster A. H. Barber. A court hntI already been founded, and Chico became a voting precinct in j1852 By 1859, a school was established in the town (MoGie 198,', Volume I, Pg. 35 Talbitzer 1987;40-41, 60). By 1860, the future City of Chico was thriving. Bidwell, had purchased John Potter's ranch, a part of the Farwell Grant, and had a surveyor produce a plat of the town. Bidwell. laid out plans for the town's future streets, and gave free homesite's to persons wishing to settle along those streets, about 500 people inhabited the town as of 1860. The to£-n's growth was aided by commerce with the mining camps and towns to the east (MaGie 1982i Volume x, pg. 35 Talbitzer 1987:63t 66) . Agriculture and livestock raising along with mining in outlying communities continued to sustain Chico through the fins.. decades of the last century. The California and Oregon Railroad, which arrived in 1870, provided another economic boost to Chico, 'end facilitated the growth of the logging and lumbering ind lbry in the nearby mountains. By 1872, the year in whior the Torn of Chino wau incorporated, Chico boasted several lumoir yards arid sawmills, and hundreds of people in the vicinity were em`ployad in the industry. Flumes were eventually constructed to transport logs from the mountains directly to the mills of C.hioo (Talbitzer 19874.67-70)- RESULTS OF THE INVBSTIGATIOW Records search As noted in the Yntroduetion, a records search was conducted by the California Archaeological Inventory, Northeast ltt6rmatioU Center, California State University, Chi.00. The records search revealed that no preVious cultural resour a surveys had been undertaken within the project area,. Two prehistoric archaeological sites of co'naequenc'e were recorded within a one mile radius of the proSite CA- But.-13 it descr bod as a Village aril gravesite. dAOut-541 is a �e'o° area. V,,' lage site that occupies a mound. ■ 16 Field Survey Methods The information tion Center recommended project area due to the a survey of a Portion of Of the to and Perceived archaeological sensitivity author decided the Potential for future ided to conduct a complete or f development. area, since it wauld y of The cover the entire take little; additional ''he entire project archaeolo Aaree_ A complete time and effort to Of Gists systematicall survey involves ualif the entire pro Y walking serosa the 1od Prehistoric 'jhc't area look$ng for a ground surfaac 0Ul tural evidence artifacts) The curve activity (i a of historic 01: aV1 sites, structures or less evenly-spaced Y was performed b sPoed between traverses across theWalking parallel, mot q tween Frac given to tbs a and 5G meters apart; land. Traverses wero margins of Mud Creek. More intensive coverage, Ground surface visibilit disoing of f:he y was excellent arch an ground. Although disoin , 'due to the recant aeological deposit g Would cause impacts to would obliterate asite m view: thPt such activity ' it is unlikelY Survey Results fro The sYstematic no The , complete survey of the artifact resources with the eXQo Project area (see Map 1 for location) Ptlon of a gin revealed . g1e isolated The artifact can flake, measuring 3.9 em be described fine-.grained as a basalt interior waste 3 9 em x 0. �{ o thick. Volcanic 'ormatio n basalt that is It is made from is un U.e to the east of thengrmaZly �tssoeiated with 9 stionab.ly of Cultural Project afiea. several ,�iagnostie origin, The flake strikingattributes g since it' not only Posse.... Platform, bulb of of stone chipping waste the basalt of hipping ff.e, which it is , Pressure striations and was they"efore del is is not native re the ), but Y transported by people; area Basalt was utwlized b Pro eat a until the advent of the Histori Y local Indians for several. mil:'�ennia rePreseT�tiQularly time-sensitivea period• Therefore not p Presents chippin . Moreover , the flake is funotio, g Waste, it is not. diaghaatiosinae .the rlake diagnostic IA the absenae of tem ars wit respect to siggnificance.attributea, the flake has orally or fianationally fla�;e Its Significance is limitedv r little, if Provides evidence that, at the feat , several thousand lest orae thatathe Project area, Years, one or more l ev'St men during the .last Given this 'his fast Was a foregone conal.usion d throu h ' the limited g the. area Potbotial to shed light on r regardless, Mention ; it was felt that While the prehistory of m it would serve no useful this artif'aot We normally choose P w..a Worthy of artifacts to record only rthoset isolated lY record it that reveal the a age and/or function o3' the implementria 17 9 No other site, cultural feature, structure, or art;l,:rA_Qa j wars observed within the project boundaries. RECOMMENDATIONS The survey did not generate;. o evidence for the V11boohoo of significant cultural resource. within the projea or,ou Accordingly, it is concluded that the undertaking will havo "no effect" on cultural resources. Archaeological clearanao ,for tho subdivision is there'ore recommended. As a standard precaution.., it is further recommended that is the unlikely event that the proposed undertaking subsequantly reveals the presence of cultural resources (i.e. artifact a.. concentrations, structural relnr•nts, human skeletal remains) that Were not observed during the surface survey, work on that loour should cease immediately until a qualified archaeologist can be consulted to evaluate the remains and offer aspropriabe recommendations For mitigative treatment. REFERENCES CITED Alt, David D and Donald W. Hyndman 1975 Roadside geology of northern California. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula. Baumhoff, Martin A. and D. L. olmsted 1963 Palaihnihan: radiocarbon support for glottochronology. American Anthropologist 65.278-2,011. Beardsley, Richard 3K. 1948 Culture sequences in central California a.r4haoo109Y- American Anti;qui.ty 14:1-28. Beardsley, Richard K. 1954 Temporal and areal relationships in central california archaeology. university of California Archaeolosical Survey Reports 24, Parts 1 and 2. Berkeley,. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 B c sli P. McW. 1974 Toward a prehistory of the San Francisco Bay area. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, Riverside. Burcham, L. T. 1g$1 California range land. Center (First Research at Davis Publication 7. published in 1957 by California Division of Forestry). Castillo, Edward D. 1978 The impact of Euro -American exploration and settlement. in Handbook of North American Indians; Volume 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, PP. 99- 127. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Chartkoftj Joseph L., b. Miller, and K. L Johnson 1910 some ground stone industries of the central Sacramento valley and possible explanations for variation among them. ?aper presented at the Southwestern Anthropological Association and the Society for California Archaeology Annual Meetings, Aoilomarb C'oberly, Mary B.r��. - 1913 The archaeology of the Ryan Mound, site Ala-S2�a central California coastal village sits. museum, of AnthropoloBYi University, of Northern Colot%do, Ooeasi,onl Publications in Anthropology, Archaoology seHds 4. Greeley. Cook., Sherburne F. 1946 A reconsideration of shelf.mounds 'With respect to population and "nUbt-.tion• Amerioan Artiguity 12:51-53• 19 Cook, Sherburne F. 1955 The epidemic of 1830-1833 in California and Ore University of Caiiforn;�,a Publications in Amer gort Archaeology and Ethnology 43(3):303-3,26. Berkeloy. ictatM Dreyer, William and Krista Deal 19'12 A reevaluation of ground stone assemblages in tj,, northern Sacramento Valley, Northern California Archaeology Spaper presented at Mita State University, Chico. ymposium, Califortlia Edwards, Robert L. 1970 The prehistory of the Pu,ilmak Wintun Tehama Count , Thornes Creek, Yy, California, including a Suggested chronological model of the northern Sacramento Valley region prehistory. Society for California Archaeology, Robert E. Schenck Memorial Archives of California Archaeology 18. Sa'n.Francisco, Elbton, Robert, C. D. Zeier,, S Stornetta, L. Crittenden, and B, Brown 1984 An analysis of certain lithic specimens from CA_Nev- 407: Nevada County, California. In Stage Ir final report for CA-Nev-401 archaeological data reoovery program, edited by c W: Clewlow, Volume II A on file, California Department! opendix II. Report Marysville. Transportation, Farbe19Alf red 8 Archaeological ekoexaticns at Chalk Bluff Ridge, Nevada County, California, with a new interpretation of the Martis and Mesilla cote lexes �, Research Archaeology Program, Publications of the California State Universigy, Chic�hrapologioal Papers 3. Farber, Alfred 1982b The Martis >and Mesilla complexes., an alternative lavation. Paper presented at the Northern CaliorniaArchaeology Symposium, CaforaChico. Stats University, Farber, Alfred 19$5 Alternative approaches to the Shasttk Complex and adjacent expressions; asb6wblages, eultuptill eoo].og, and tdxonamies, Journal of California and, Antbi"o olo tlrna sin gY 71).75-$8. Far'" , and Clarence L. Smith 1882 History of Plumas, Lassen, and $inrra Countiet30California, Reprinted in 1971 by Howell -North Books,, Berkeley. 90 0 G [1 Fredric' -son, David A. 1973 Early eulturas of the North Coast Ranger, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis. Fredricksca, David A. 1974 Cultrreal diversity in early cenferal Cayiforniac a view from the North Coast Ranges. Journal OV California Anthropology 1(1):41-53. Gerow, Bert A with Roland W. Force Y B 1968 An analysis of the UniversitY Village Complex with: a reappraisal of central California archaeology. Stanford Press. Gifford, E. W. 191 ti Composition of California she<llmounds. University of California Publications in American Archnoology and Ethnology 12:1-29. Berkeley. Gifford, E. W. and W. E. Schenck 1926 Archaeology of the southern San University Joaquin Valley. of California Publications Archaeology and Ethnolo 3n American gY 2 3(1).1-12.5. Berkeley. Griffin, James R. 1988 Oak woodland. In Terrestrial vegetation of California, edited by M. G. Barbour and J. Major, pp. 383-416. California Native Plant Society, Specie] PUblication 9,. Sacramento. (Ex oripanded edition, York). originally published in 1977 by John Wiley and Sans, New Heady, Harold F. 1988 "11ey grassland. In Terrestrial vegetation of California, edited by M. G. Barbour and J,, Major, ply. 491-514. California Native Plant So Publication 9 Sacramento. ndety, Special originally published in 1977 by John (Wil y and Sonsed , New York). Heizer, Robert F. and Albert B. Elsasser 19.-80 The natural world' of the -California Indians, University of California Press, Berkeley. Fleizer, Robert V. and V, Fenenga 1939 Archaeological horizons in contral, California. American Anthropologist 41:378-399. 21 n.. 1 Holland, Robert F. and Subodh K. Jain 1988 Vernal pools. In Terrestrial vegetation of California, edited by M. G. Barbour and J. Major, pp. 515-53-3. California Native Plant Society, Special Publication 9. Sacramento. (Expanded edition, originally published in 1977 by John Wiley and Sons, Now York). Holmes, W. H. 1901 Review of the evidence relating to Auri;ft`,rous Gravel Man in California. In Annual report of the Smithsonian i Institution, 1899:419-472. Holt, Vesta 1962 Keys for identification of wild flowers,, ferns, trees;, shrubs, and woody vines of ,northern California. National Prea3 Books, Palo Alto. Humphreys, Stephen E. 1969 The archaeology of New BUIl,ards Bar. Report on file, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento. Jones, Philip M. 1923 Mound excavations near Stockton. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 20:113-122. Berkeley. Kowta, Makoto 1975 Research design: northeast-ern California. Unpublished ms. on file, Department of Anthropology, California State Un,I.versity, Chico. Kroeber, Alfred L. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Et'h'nology Bulletin 78. Smithsonian institution, Washih&ton, U.C. Kraeber, Alfred L. 1932 The Patwin and their neighbors. University of Cali-fornia PublioA,\t ons in American Archaeology and Ethnology 29(4)::253-423. Berkley. KfJohler, A. W. 1 9 7 7 Natural vegetation of California (map) . "�? Terrestrial 'Vegetation of California, edited by Michael G. "Barbour and Jack Major. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 22 11 Lillard, Jeremiah B., Robert F. Heizer, and Frank3jb Fenengh 1939 An introduction to the archaeology California. Sacramento Junior College °f Centeal Anthropology Bulletin 2. 1, Ublioations irl. Lillard, Jeremiah B. and W. K. Purves 19?,6 The archaoalogy o* the Deer Creek G Sacramento County,, California. junior Collog, Publications in Anthropology Sacramento asumnes area P BY Bulletin 1, Markleyo Richard E. 1978 Archaeological excavations in the orovill. I,oaali Butte County, Cali,f.ornia, 1975. Unpublisilod M.A. ts, Department of Anthropolc�,7,y California 3: A thesis, Chico. S•fato University, McGie, Joseph F. 1982 History of Butte Counfc of Education YVolume: I. Butte County Board Published in 1' Orovill,e. (Revised 9560, adition j first Meighan, Clement W 1955 Archaeology of the !North Coast Ranges, ' California.Un vers"yof California Archaeological Survey Ht:iports Merriam, C Hart 1966-1967 Ethnographic notes on California Indian tribes. In University of California Archaeological ,Survey Re orts 68., Part 3, edited by Rnbert F. He�.zer. Berkeley. P Horatto, Michael J. with D. A. Fredrickson C. Ravens and C. N,. Warren 1984 California aechaoolo York. gy• Academic Press, Ino., New Munz, Philip Ai, and David D. Reek 1959 A California flora. University of California Press, Berkeley. Nelson-; N. C. 157 IV San Franeisoo Bay shellmounds. Indians: a source boob ed It1 The. Callforn �,a M. A. Whipple edited bar Robert F. ieizer and Unty rsit ' pp. 14 1-157, Second Bev;lned Gditl at Y of California Pre;3s, Berkele Published in 1909 as hShollmounds of the � (originally Bay regioh.►i Un,lversity of CaliforniaPublicationsPrAncisin American Af ohaeolog,y ;and EthriologYr 7-'309-856. Berkeley.), 23 r D D u Nelson, N. C. 1910 The Ellis Landing shellmound V"iVersity Of California Publications in American Arahabology and Ethnology 7:357-426. Berkeley. Olsen, William H. and F. A. Riddell 1963 The archaeology of the Western Paoltic Rai?,rodd relocation, Orovi.11e Project, Butte County, CaV,fornia. Californ.'.a Department of Parks and Recroation, DivisioO cif Beach%.s and Parks Archaeological Reports 7. Sacramento. Olson, R. L. 1930 Chumash prehistory. University off' Californi,tl Publications in Ameri,.can Archaeology and r8thnology 28:1- 21. Berkeley. Peak and Associates, Inc. 1983 Archaeological investigations at CA -VII- 115;Boathoubo Point on Bticks Lake, Plumas County, California. Report on file, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco. Ragir, Sonia. 1972 The Early Horizon in central California prehistory. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 15. Berkeley. Riddell, Francis A. 1978 Maidu and Konkow. in Handbook of North American :hdians_, Volume 8t California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, Pp. 370-386• Smith-sonian Institution, ?lashington, D.C. Aitter, Eric W. 197`0 Northdrtl Sierra foothill archaeology; culture history and culture process. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication 2:173-184. University of California, Davis. Rodgers, David B. 1929 Prehistoric man on the Santa Barbara coast, California. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural His -tory Special Publication 1. 8chencki W. E. 1926 The Emeryville shellmound: final report. University of California Publications in American Arohaeology and Ethnology `81.147"282, Berkeley. 94 D 0 t r7 n 0 Schbnck, W. E. and E. J Dawson 1929 Archaeology of the northern San J(oaqu,tn Valley,. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology ',25(4)-.289-413. Berkoj, ey Shipley, William F. 1963 Maidu texts and d.'„etionary. University of Cal ifornl(� Publications in Linguistics 33 Berkeley. i1mith, C. E. and W. D. Weymouth 1952 Archaeologyofof the Shasta Dam area# Califor+niai University of California Archseologica? 8ur'Voy RepotWf 18., Berkeley. Storer, Tracy and. Robert Usinger 1963 Sierra Nevada natural history. Univ(,city or California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles: Sudworth, George 5. 1967 Forest trees of the Paci;fie Slope. Dovat' Publications, Inc,, New York. (First published in 1906 by U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service), Talbitzer, Bill 1987 Butte County: an illustrated history. Windoor Publications, Inc., Northridge. Tregamza, Adan E 1954 Salvage archaeology in the Numbus and Red bat) k Reservoir areas, central California. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 26:1-39. Berkeley, Uhle, Max 1907 The Emeryville shellmound. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 7:1- 106. Berkeley. Wallace, William J. and Donald W. Lathrap 1975 West Berkeley (CA -Ala -307): a culturally stratified shellmound on the east shore of San Francisco Bay. Contribut`on:s of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 29. Berkeley. Wedel, Waldo R. 1941 Archaeological investigations at Buena Vista Lake, Kern County, California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 130. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Wells, Harry L, and W: L, Chambers 197.3 History of Butte County, California. Hovioll-North 'Books, Berkeley. (First published in 1882). 25 Wilson, Norman L. and Arlean H. Towne 1978 Nisen,an, In Handbook' of Volume 8, Calif—ornia, edited b Norah 41401lean Indians, 857-897• Smithsonian Institution Robert �+ Heizer,pp, � Washing ton, D C, e 26 MAP1: PROJECT VICINITY AND LOCATION FORD, CAUTMNIA 7.5" 0905 (1951, 1459) QOAbRAHO E �� � a ^' � m Tf t e y . e ' � ,f .�' � �. �� Y M c : � _� ^• g � � �- ' - ° o i �[ ' �' r �,� �, 1k`PC,SCAN'I',,_ James Paiva Log#87-06-J22-0 ADDRESS Rt. 1 Box 469P Chico, CA 95926 Same OWNER PROSECT DESCRIPTION — Tentative Waiver Application to divide x,97 acres Uo create 4 parcels, Parcel 1 Paroel 2, Parcel 30 Parcel 4 85+acres 50+acres 27+acres 34+ages_--_� LOCATION Bordered on the north by tell Road, on the aouth bx�J))P.IiR on the west by Meridian Road, and on the eastM Eaton Rd. , extents on__ '�'N`or wes x,co area. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUM$ER (S) -_ 42-0157 ---- ZONING AS & A10 GENERAL PLAN Orchard &.� PROJECT C'>ONSISTENT?__,,— Field Crops G NERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT DATE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE I,AND CONSERVATION ACT CONTRACTSL? DATA; APPLICATION RECtIVM� June 19, 1987 Sierra West Surveying AGENT'/,,UR)`EiOR/'CIVZT, ENGINEER: Y g �--,.--.--, ADDRESS: 5437 Black Olive Drive, Paradise; CA 95969 DATE PLANNING 'DIRECTOR'S REPORT PREPARED— �.Y .... ., ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - DATE DtTEAMINATXON AND DATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION -- DATE ADOPT= MITIGA`zTEO NBG. DECLAMTION - DATE AbOPM , r �- ENV. TMPAC'.1,' REPOAT - DATE 51,11ATE C lAiMRINGHOUSE NO r-..,.._..:.._..:..........-w....-«..,,�:+�..,......,,..u.A,w,,..w „� w...._....+...-�, ...-...:...._.�_4.,.�.,:.,.,,.,�w-u.�:�s��-�,...k...r..r,+�.;,...�.:.u....Y:+s,...w..,�.�w„ ....:�...�..a.rWu:..;. St)8. COJtZJITTEE N1E TINT pA''E' :,�.. , . _,4: _. t.». ,w .,., .. .� �. e ».. ......�::.: -.� -.• ADVISORY ACrNC Y HEARING DATV L'/ ,__ -Eu fte Co "art �,-_ "'" LAND OF NATURAL Yk/EALTH AND IIIAIIJy September 18, 1,9$9 Sierra West Surveying �- RC: AP 42-01-57 5437 Black. Olive Drive Waiver Application Paradse,'cA 95969 pear Gentlemen: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Advisory Agency held on September 18, 1989, the agency noted that Waiver Applications do not qualify .for extensions of time, so the request should be considered withdrawn. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. Very truly yours, William Cheff Director of Public Works a hn Mendonsh Assistant Director JM/ds cc Planning Health James Paivat Rt. 1 Box 469 P$ Chico, CA WHO to. MA"n,n) cmrm' ��v111�, �ali�cFhin Y ` NC7 ,1..>_C� C��' Li:E'3��l2Mxi`•7A i :1,�1�7 earch C �•�t7 Buhr? County office of Planning anti �l _ s' �; Planning Dcq)art:r00I' 11400 'Tent, Street, Rooni'�y121 7 County `;eater llt`ivu Sacrarnento,. CA 95$14 AUG 2'7 198Y Orovi l lc+� (,,A 95965 0r X C;oun+.y Clerk.. t�:�r•It`�,C1+.1.Ci�iEl'��":;,C1ult�:�ct.�lerk County of Butte By :;t,1'FQIpx:l: Kling of 'Notice Of Determination in rompliancO w11I1 Section ), 1,0 or 21152 of the public Resources Code. Pr.n,joct Title AP1! 42-01=57 Dante Tentative Waiver Application James lgaiVa St:,,At4 Clearinghouse Number Contact r'ersoiti 'maephone Number (if t,ubmitted to Clearinghouse) Public Works John Mendonsa 5387266 Pro Bordered on the N. by Bell Road, 84 by Southern Pacific Railroad rck i,ocet e i ��n lroad tracks, 'W: by Meridian Road and E. by Eaton Road extension, in the northwest Chico area. -- Tentative Parcel Map to divide 197 cares Project Dbscription P1aiVer of into four parcels, one of 85 aures, one of 50 acres, one of 27 acres and one of 34 acres llt1 i to advise that the Butte County Advisory Agency (Lead. Agency or 'Responsiblo Agency) ltt+ til)provcd the above-described project on August 24, 1987 and tins made (Date) the following determinations regarding the above-described projeol.. 1. The project Will, X will not, have a significtint Offect on the environment, Z. An l trvl ronmental 'Lmpact Repart was prepared for this project pursuant. to the p�rovisionsof CEQA, X A Negative neclaration was prepared for t.hi:r projcyc:t pursuant to the provisions of C80- '3, measuiccs X . k 0110 a wr,re nol-.. ►nrrc i� t r +rtuii t e�Yt t t' tl�r. tpprc�v,ai of the tsrOjUCL 4 A :,t.ttr-mlunt Of ovurridintt,' t.Oil:ill't�l'r11' CSI1t9 wet;g� a ;d� tt tl'l9l s #r nj�t€C} for tlti., projuct. 'Ch i ; fi+ r1'l if �x tltrxt the. final Tial with oollull:nt,; alul III;,,rl�tt.,�,�r rttt�l trovot.r1 or prc5je(.*t� eippt•ti�urrl is availabl.e tk't the general Public , Butte County Planning Dc:ua0.10010 7 County Ce titot; Drive. orovilief CA 95065 I�ah.e kawetvvd far filing and • �'µ 1'o:at.ittg tit Cll't� - bigtq >ttrc; Stephen A. Streetez, Senior Planner 'i';it:it:+ lif�vixii� FtaYi:it i48G A Tentative Waiver Application p,P#42-01-57 Fames Paiva 1_. Pay $15.00 per lot into the 'West Chico Fico Station Fund. A,. 1 '— - - I+ t1! €ia T F 1 � DEPARTMENT oft ( 00410 WOFi WILLIAM lsil ra i� ► r res n Puff© C" Plmnnln9, 7 COUNTY CENTER bRIVE , IYUCtot CERTIFIED MAIL (114)vlt.Lr, CALIPORNiA 95965 AUGA� y p�nhb T.+iephonw l�11J U17 /,, I CJ, '. c+ Orn RONALD b, McELRoY w"04 traliforai4 oopuyy Diraclor August 24, 1987 James Paiva Rt, 1, Box 469P Chico, CA 95926 TentaRE: AP 4201-57 Dear Mr. Paiva tive 1dniver Application At the regular August 24 meeting of the Butte 1987, the Agency adopted County Advisor y Agency environmental mitigations and P " a negative declaration held on the above --referenced approved th the attach Property sub` e tentative parcel ed sheet. deCt to the conditions map an listed on 1'f no aAPeals are timet the Advisory Agency's Yfiled--Within ten Supervisors approval ---w3 th the C �10� days of the date o this action Will be -final. lerk of the Board of When the conditions of a for you to file r+ approval are coin lied Withi Of public Works your final maps' with the ButteCoun� Will be ` the date far recordation within twentn.order of a Y -four (24 Department approval by the Advisory Agency. ) months of If you have any questions regarding g this matter, please contact this. logy truly yours; William Chef Director of Pul),tic Warks. J n Mendonsa JM/ds Assi.starit Direc'top attachment CC' �'xaniiing Behartmen t >;nv.ironmen'tal Health bepartmeht. Sierra «est Surrey, James Paiva, Waiver Application, AP 42-01,--57, 4 parcels bordorcd on the north by Bell. Rd. and on the south by Southern Pacific 14'1.11road tracks, on the west by Meridian Rd, and on the east by Eaton Rd. extension in the northwest Chico area. Engineer: Sierra Wont Surveying Public Works conditions: 1 Provide two--way traversable access RS-8-1,D-1 to each prlr(�ol from a county maintained road or state highway. 2 Access to be reserved in deeds as per county ordinance nod offered for dedication on the final map. 3 Show 50 ft, building setback line measured from rontori1ile of access easement. 4 Provide road maintenance agreement. 5 Deed to the County of Butte 50 ft. right-of-way from the centerline of Meridian road and Pell. Road plus 600 fte radius curve on Belk. Rd. 6 Indicate a 50 ft. building setback from the centerline of Meridian Road and Bell Road, 7 Show all easements of record on the final map. 8 Provide street name signs per requirements of the Departmont of Public Works prior to recordation of the final map. 9 Pay off any assessments. 1.0 Pay any delinquent taxes or c .'ent taxes as required-. 11 Deed 40 ftp of right-of-way to County of Butte tot future Eaton Rd. extension. 12 'rlace note on final map re payment of Chico Unified School bi.strict impact fees. Yfealth Department conditions: 13 Provide o 100' leachfield .Gree setback around existing wo.11s either within the property or within 100` of the property boul"(10r .cs 14 Show a 1001 leachfield setback f.rom'the h ghwaLer line of the crock on parcels 3 & 4. Planning -Department conditions; 15 Show a no-build•Lng setback on Parcels 2, 5 and 4 prohibiting resi-dential dwellings within 400 feet of the Southern pacific Railr.nnd tracks. The following is the mitigation measure; Pay $75,00 per lot into the rifest Chico Vire Station fund. INTER--DEPARTMIINT MEMORANDUM TO: Butte County Advisory Agency FROM: Planning Director 8084JRCT: Report on Tentative Parcel Maps for ,James Pn l v,�) on AP 441-01-57 1) AT August 11_, 1957 pa 1`h S � Is 4 proNrysa 1 to divide 197' acres to create 4rce 1 s s Perca 1 1 at 85+ acres, Paroe1 2 at 50+ acres, Parcel 3 at 27+ acres and Pardel 4- at 3.1+ acres. The present zoning i8 A-5 and A-10 C Agr S cul tural - 5 �,jrrd 10 acre parc(nlls) The Land Use Plan Map sof the Butte County General Plan designates this area as Orchard and Field Crops There are no spr3eific Or communitY plans for the area. The proposal does not conflict with County zoning nor any adopi„id or proposed element of the Butte County General Plan nor anv CoiAnty, spe µ l f i c or community Plan. C oo-ommend approval with adoption of a Negative Declaration of I nv i ronmental l m act with m i iW i ost i pan measures and t; bject Irk thy+ 1 01 1 ow ng mitigation measure (. M) and condition: 1 Pay $75.00 per lot into tl-je West Chico Fire Station fi.41c1, t M ) 2 Ghon a no -bu i 1 d i ng setback on Parcels 2 ;3 lbitlno residential dwellings within 400 feet of�the nSouthern d 4 hPaclfic Ra i 1 road traok s, BAS!DH:lr cc games Pa i va lerrn West Surveying APPRNDIX F COUNTY OP BUTTE RNV I NMRNTAL CHECKLIST FORM (to no complete=5,T-0717 —Agency) Log 08706-22-03 BACKGROUND AV 4 42-01-57 1. Name of proponent JAMES PAIVA Z. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable) Rt. 1, Box...�L69P Chico, CA 95926 Paradise, 3. Project description TentativeY_ex_APP1i=akinn____ 1'1. MANDATORY PINDINg; OF SIGOPICANCH t- L 1) IN qi�, F YES MAYBE NO a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause -a fish or wlialire population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal rommunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangared plant or animal ar eliminate important examp1cs or the major periods of California history or prehistory? W Does the projoct have 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 occurs in a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts will endure into the ftltl.11`0.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individu- ally limited, but cumulatively considernbleT CA project may impact an two or more separate resources where the impact an each resource is relatively small, but where the effect or the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental orrocts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either direvtly or lndlrectly� _x ITT, DITERMIN T ON fTo he complv0d by the Lead Agency) On the busts of this Initial vualuntion: I/WF find the proposed pio>0 COULD NW have a 4igninvont eflect on the environment, and a NHGA11VP RCLARATInm will he prepared, un rind that although the penposvd project could have at signirk cant orrect on the environment. there will not he a mighiricant effect In this case because the MITIGATION WASURRA duscribed ull the attached sheet have been added to the project. A NHOATIVI'. 0I:cLARA*I'lON isill be propoi-od, un rind the proposed project MAI hove a significant urrect all the environment, and an hNVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WORT Is required. DAI'h: JUIY 171 1987 muNix nP BUTT% PLANNING 11HPARTMI30 David h.- leoftimus', Assooiats Own Reviewed by: I IW. ENVIRONMENTAL IM%ACTS ITRp' anations ot all—"yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheet(s)) I. EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant; YES a, Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, - either on or off-site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach 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? 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? Z. ATR. Will the proposal result in substantial. a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectiunable odors, smoke or fumes? c, Alteration of air movement; moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally'? 5i 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? bi Changes in absorption rates draina e > g patterns, or the rate and amount. of surface runoff? c. Need for off-site surface drainage improve, ments, including vegetation removal channel- ization or culvert installation? d, Alterations to the course or flow of flood Waters? e� Change in the amount of sur-6ace water in anv water body? f Discharge into surface waters, or in any - alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved Oxygen or turbidity? g. Alteration of the directi r� or rate o� tiow Of ground waters? h, Change in the quantityor quality cif ;ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? i, Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? J. Exposure Of people or property to water " related hazards such as flooding? MAYS 3 NO ,k- YES MAYBE Ntt 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the pro asal res • C ange in the diversity speciees,norunurpj�; ials of of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any' unique, T0,ra Or endangered species cf plants? C. Introduction of new species oflants i to tri ��""" area, or in a barrier to the '"" -'' normal ren] meet of existing species? p onish- d. Reduction an acreage of any agricultural cro►7 5• ANIMAL, LICE. Will theresult ngein the diversityooflspies, or num erg a1 -X of any species of animals (birds, land aninirt`1 including reptiles, fish and shell fish, benthic organisms or insects)? b, Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rave or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction o.E new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier 'to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Increasethep _., aoI ease the pro osal result in substantial, In existing noise .�. levels? b, Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal prcduce sIgniticant light and glare? 8: 'LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantialalteration of the present OT Panned land use of an area? 9 NATURAL RESOURCES Will the proposal result in su stan-E—MI a: Increase in the rate of use of any 'natural re5ourcez" b Depletion of any non-renewable natural .�-~ resources? '• 10 RISK OF UPSET, Will the proposal involve. a. A explosion or the release of haZ.ard* bus substances (including, but not limited toy Oil, Pesticides, chemicals or radiation') in event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with aft emergency response plan or emergency evacuata.ott SC 11. - POpULATTON, Will the proposal alter the location, �str utj n, density, or growth rate of the humntt population? 12 HOUSING. Will the proposal affect exist: ng housing, or create a demand for additional housing? { ! YES OO D4AY E,L NO �a "' VRANSPORTATI pN/CIRCULATION, Will the proposal , 13. re8ult in; Generation of substantial additional vehicle a. movement? b. Effects on existiag parking facilities, or X demand for new parking? Substantial impact on. exJ Sti'n, 9 transportati nTl X c. systems? d. Significant alterations to present patterns ,.. of circulation or movement or people and/or X goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traff''Ic? - e. f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicloss C-. bicyclists or pedestra,ns? --•---- 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. will the proposal have an eftoct need for new or altered upon, or result in a governmental services. a. Fire protection? b. Polir protection?. C, Schools,? d. Paras or other recreational faciliti:s? e'. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services 15. ENERGY. will the proposal result int substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X- a, Use of b. Substantia: increase in demand upon existing require the development sources of energy, or of energy? x of new sources __,_�Vi 11 the proposal result in a need for 16, UTILITIES. substantial alterations to the new systems, or lollowi.ng was ? a_. Power or na'tu-ral 0_ - b. Communications systems? -- ,k, c. Water ava.ilabi.l ity � � h d, Sewer or septic tank? -- e, Storm water drainage? f . Solid waste and disposal? ;X 17. MU" -NAV '4P-%� rt4. Will the proposal result in. -.-��-- aza,rcl or potential: of any healt}i 11 heal.- 1 Irizard (excluding mental. health)? health . Epostzre f people It) potential � hazards? _ - osa:l result in the lg, AEST�iE ICS, 1VM n,; X11, p�rista ar view o ori ter p o s$txu n of any sa E n .a the public, or furl) thy: ;.0,,'vo5a1 result in the k 'fensti vc sire open �. creation of an a.esthet� ca;.l ), to public view? YES MAS 111 NO, 1g, RECREATION. lVill the proposal result in an impact the C(uality c- quantity og existing recreational upon opportunities? 10. CULTURAL. RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in the alteration a. of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physwcal or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? c. noes the proposal have the potential to cause a change which would affect unique physical ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious cr sacred uses within the potential impact �$ area? V. pXSCU5SION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 42-01-57 See attached. L-UAT'ON AP 42-v-57 N�or-�Et4V!RO-NL'lr-N—TAL-E-V-A-- I'lle developmerit of four homes ites on the sub,)(�,-f-i, propert�Y will 1(), 0 3b: Ment, overcovering arld fJjmPJ(-'"c)n of lead to Some dISrLiPtion, displace j,., 1,10 so 1 Is. Because of the size Of the parcels) this �Ijould not be Significant. %1ct I on Ig. . While the loss Of a gricultut-al cland ill represent epresent to homee *;hti SPI -1-ting UP t w Hill not be signif Ican t, this pr 0jely 195 acres Into frjk0' !!7,MZ0 1-0 of a large holding Of aPPrOx1matet.hese 1 er parcel Se It 18 likely that the economic vlabIlItY Of at best. Should these parcel<, b0coMe to parcels may be tenuous their smaller sizes it iv, reag,.)1`10L 1 e economically unvI8bl-,7, due to q exp�ic t add I t I Ona 1 app I I cat I Ons for d I v I s I on to create -,/en . jT10 I I or parcels in the airO81- - itIlln a Moderate Earthquake lnte�nsitY It- 4 A 11 of eutte County Is H 18 located approximately eloht, mllOs Zone Vjij. The subJeci', property a fault system of unknown actIVVty - he Tuscan Ivion-icline, soul haves Of t dorm quildIno, code standards for" L',,:)nStructlon of buildings to unif protec,tloil to s should provide adequate active area In case Of seismic activity' flooding is that area The only portion Of tl-lr_, prop arty subject to designed tO tj�je MWd Greek chann8li This area IS within the I levees On � a maj�r drainage system for the ,area. t-lood, as it 'Is part of See item 10 - of parcels 21 a and 4 that abut the Southerft Paiclflc bb Portions bject to severe no I Se due to I -al Railroad tracks are su It IS Suggested that, a ri�,-bulldling setbatk area be activities . estab I 'I shed that WOUld prohibit h0mr�s From being built within Or-eOs subject to noisei I Ba,,r-)+ i Though not 919niFIcants this Project w ropresent an incromantal Increase In tr,af f I c and assOt 1 ated hazards on area jp It an Incremental increase In demand #0- 14.1 This pro ct I I represent a6 The PrOJect site IS 1,,,tod witttin public servicloo in a rural are the area thot Is Slatod as the, area o+ benefit for 4ho Pr0100,50-d West Unless odeqUatO funding Is ("Or th 1 �; Chico Fire 3-t8tlbn- In there belilm an jtirili..lonal impact st.ation, tnj,�� projett may rest to Fire Protech lran racliltles in Line Ghico area, sugggg:e—ed t"litl I ba51 fres 1 Pay $176 lot Into the West ChIto Fire Station fullf-L Show 8 no -but IdlMqi setback Or' 3 andSOuthr-11`4 pt,to11l-ilbli`!'acIftlng 1c t"es I dent I a I dwel I , Inos within loo feet of the Railroad tracks. Applicant! James Palva AP # 42-01-57 Log # 87-06-22-U4 A. B—CO-1-e �tescC!P-t:'art of Tentative Parcel IType of project Wal ver 2. Brief Description. Dividing 1,97 acres Into i-0111parcels, One of 85 acres, one of 50 acres, one of 27 acres and one OF 34 acr"S. tmr,i bhe by S. Locatlonx Bordered on the north by Sell Road, the Southern pac I f I C Ra 1 1 road tracks, on the Wgos 1� by Mor I cl I an Road and on the east by Eaton Road extension* In the nort.hvlOst Chico areav 4. propose&DensItY of Development: Averooes approximately rJU acres per dAelling unit. 6. Amount Of impervious Surfacing: Minimal. 6. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Property fronts on Bell Road. 1: Individual Septic systems - 7. Method Of $-'�OV189e Dispace j1dividual wells. e. Source of Water 8uPPlY: . property 9. Proximity of Porker Lines " To pro nd dIv4slons and dovelopinentt Genoral 1(), Potential for further 13 Plan policies would Permit development of parcels down to 20 acres In size, 13. —Set_"-'" ja Terrain a. General Topographle Character: Flat valley land, b. Slopes; 0-27.. c, Ejovatjonx. 1!5o feet above Sea Level d. L,m1tIM0 Factors: None. 2. Soils 8,, Types and Character 1 st I cs,., Farwe I I C I my Adobe - b4 Llmit`109 Facbors: None, S. Natural Hazards of bho Land a. Lar-4bhquake Zone= Moderate Earthquake lntollsitY Zone V111' b, Erosion PotOntl"': Nlorle' c,4 Landslide potentiall None. d, Vire Hazard" Unclassified' o. Expansive 8011 pOtGn_L*10l: 4. Hydrology b. Surface W8terw Mud Creek Crosses ti,,je pr°t)party between proposed Parcels a and 4, A drainage can al PatgGs thl-Ou9l" the Property between Parcel Band Parcel :r I and 2. b. Groundwater= Abundant valley aquIPers; 01 -aa of heavy orowndwntor withdrawals C. Drainage Characteristics': d. Annual Rainfall (normal)"- 20-22" e. Limiting Factors= None. 5. Visual/Scenic quality: Good. 66 Acoustic (.lual i ty Good, except near the Southern i<i 1 . a Eta i t road tracks and p( tent i a l l Y along e boundary at the property once Craton Road extens l rare Is completed. 7 Air quality: Good, except during periods of star:jr,ar�►, valley air. �o4icalnvi_rranrent- 3. Vegeta"ion= Almond orchard. 9. Wildlife Habitat; Small birds and animals common 1.r4) valley orchard lands. Cultural.Environment - area*. LOW1 U . Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area sensitivity area. 1 1 Bui to County General plan des i gnati ori Orchard and Field Crops 12. Existing Zoning- A-5 and A- 1 '1 0 (A- 0 westerly of Mud Cr:�ek 1S. Existing Land Use, on-site: Almond orchard 14. Surrounding Area= a, Land Uses Agri cul t oral areas to the north and west, suburban residential tothe southeast, industrial and commercial to the South and southwest. b.. Zoning. A-5 A-10, A-40 IYi--'1 L-1 , C-2 and R-"1 c.. Gen. Plan des i gnat i ons Ot`chard ::j:*d Field Crops, Industri gal , Cornmerci al , and Agr 1 cu i Lural -Res i dent.' . { d. p8rcel Sizes Range from 1- tea 1 q0+ -acre parcels e. population 'transit l on i ng from rural residential to Sparsely populated arlricultor8l areas. 15 Character of Site and Area= Urban fringe area. 16,. Nearest Urban Area: Lhlco 17. Rel evamt Spheres Of Infl uer►ce; CSA 424 ( bra Hare 7 I$. xmproverrter►ts 'Standards Urban Araa e No, - 19, o19, F' i re protection Service: a. Nwr• est County ( State) Fire St;ati on = Nord Station 1141 b. Wa..er Avai habil i tY- Fire only. 20. School. 1n Area= 't;h1ce Unified School Cj strlct. Wig:.