Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout042-010-081PLANNINGNL7 COMM SIGN SU14MARY SHEEN FOR LADIVISIONS ------_____. APPLICANT Mike Wiegert Log#87-06-11.-01 ADDRBSS�, 3.92 A Connors Ct. , Chico, CA 95926 OWN4RSaute PRS' aVC`t' DESCRIPTIMI Tentative Parcel Map to divide 116 a.c,r(jj) 1.0 orcato 2 parcels, Parcel 1 of 54� acres and Parcel 2 of 6 ac),Ac ! ..� .. .�,:... . 140CATIONon the north side of Bell ;[toad approximately 900 foot west of Guynn Avenue, Chico, CA ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S') 42-01-81 ZONING. A-5 GENERAL PI,AN_Or ��,PROJECT CONSISTENT? GENERAL FLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT .MATE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE- LAND ;CGNATUAELAND CONSERVATION ACT CONTRACT5�: DATE APP111CATION RECEIVED 6-10-87 AGENT/SURVEYOR/CIVIL ENGINEER: G.D.A. ADDRESS: 220 Grand Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965 DATE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT PREPARED _�.,�_ ..,r ._.. r.......a...:N -. ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL =MPTION - DATE ;PILEt7. DETERMINATION AND DATE NEGATIVE; DECLARATION - DATE, ADOPTED, — MITIGATED N= DECLARATION DAT]' AOOPT40 P ..___.SNP»... ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE CEY TI 'ILM STATE CLEAAINGHOUSB NOS . .• .. •. - "r-.nwvr�wKwxsu,uu.+.+wva� '—.-p-==-•.-_`wtiu��.w a .w wen+',war:+wwr-..F*.'••..aw..wy.unaa+u+.W»RJhu.++Hru...W.a.v»wraanaasu:w-.--�:.a »bwaw ui.NKY.'�f4' ..• -'-wwwyr+.+wN+1Y4¢#lMxalsa'w.. SUB, COMMI:.M MEETING UhTL,w- :--r—.--+-atiaJa.Y�. i�W�+�sW+kr».nw.W'.rr.YNlkwwMaW.y6i ., YYY.,is'N.I.+Y':wM ..- .u'�.•—..M.irNy r AOV48ORY AGENCY 'HEARING DATE ADVISORY AGENCY ACTION A'PP] MLHO 1 PPL- AL HEARING DATE HOARD ACTION COMMENTS VF011 PLANNING DIRECTOR' S ,2L"PORT BUTTE COUNTY r a • CO:: c Qfi: ilt?�CFw F.>; Buit®l:p. Planning MAY �99� FL)F, FA CEL IjAI' OF; SU81,I Ui S 1 U,: tAP lf;ems 1-4 to be completed by applicant: ©rov%6, CcUforWa 1, App" Nau�e%� 1�,r�7': tion _ ��/i!i c�� r /JP �,,,-�'- _ . w project 'Description 3 1987 3, Assessor'Parcel Number(s) /r, PrOp08ed UaC •xbe following '` itemare to be completed by the planning Pcpartmd s Land COnSerVatitlTl Agreement Current zoning _ �2ttA fir-' (+-•��-' � ���'� General Plan Designation ...----- ---* Not Applic•abl.e Aoolicable Conditional cz. YES NO . Agricultural- esidentia;l r culturaI Compatibility 1. Ag Capacity 2, Water & Sewer Cap Y 3, Adequate T tre Vaci.l :ties q Road Capacity ft ?laintenance r "-... Access to Cpr"mett"' & Schools 11D. .. , Ctrcl ar:d & Field Crops x, rt , 1., F'rQdominarlt 5-10 Ac. Parcel Sixi!, ....� xwa.....- F t/icxnity of Urban T�4Undaries 2Y 3, AFri.c, viability not i^paired staff peteiiminatiorl: Project does J-4 hoes not thr. General Pianosubstantially aoniorn to Gorrr�nts ; ( Uati: ,tt►kurr yy Lr t a f f r trrTt'p l.r.'r'D DIVISIQ"Ii 7 A:•1 AWARE OF 'rill: At ovt STAFF AS lilt APPLI CkI'T FQ�. `i1tF T...4 � . �� t .E u 1+.,..a t1L 1Fft."U tv�1'f`2Q1� F'.1;GA."ItIG 'lllE CQI�FOR L'u�CF 1�'IT�i TttE CLt�..k�l, I'LAT�, S Sn3,Lure of Applicant Dated �►t;.�rnr.�► •��or! Piar�iih i9 l.r 1r�mr�.�,,,t�nx F.��•+;� n R imp-=' a i.Svl:.\�u�^7r1 :!d 1t sPi1'. � i`,..:� �1�+ . N�.LGE Off' L�TE�:M=N.'ZU1'J tJ Office of Planning a0".7 Res at V, ROM: ih.,t e County 1400 "enth Street, R8 'i 121 "'"" F k`` P'li ening Department 5acrar >nto, GA 35814�;� 7 County Center Drive or AUG "l 198*1 t. voville, CA 95965 X_ County Clerk C,ANDACE d GII tUbdS, Butte 00. Clerk County of Butte By. G. CMCRO Deputy Y .';U33_7ECT : Riling of Notice of Determination in complianeo with Section 21108 or 21,152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title AP 11 Name Tentative Parcel Map 42-01-8.1 Mike Wiegert State Clearinghouse Number Contact. Person Telephone Number (if submitted to Clearinghouse) Public Works John Mendonsa 538-7266 Project Location On the north side of Hell Road approx. 900 feet west of Guynn Avenue, Chico. ' Project Description Tentative Parcel. Map to divide 11.6 acres to create two parcels, one of 5z acres and one of 6 acres. This is to advise that the Butte County Advisory. Agency (Lead Agency or Responsible Agency) has approved the above-described projoct on August 24, 1987 and has mada (nate) the following determinations regarding the above-described pro'ectt 1. The project will, X will not; have a significant effect on the environment 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A Negative Declaration was 'prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 5. 'Mltigation measures X,were, were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of overriding cohiideretions was, ? was not+, adopted for this project. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responson and record of project approval is available to the general public att Butte County Planning ;Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 35965 Date Received for filing and Posting at OPR L_�t Stephen A. Streeter, Senior P1aY7nor Title X t?aV"sed htat'ch 198E Tentative Parcel Map AP#42-01-8,1 Mike Wiegett 1.Contribute $75.00 per lot to the West Side rIn�io Benefit fund. n rr3� til - S INTER -DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Butte County Advisory Agency FROM; Planning Director SUBJECT; Report on. Tentative Parcel Map ap for Mike W�.eg�il`.f. 011 A1? DATE; August 7, 1987 This is a proposal to divide 11 acres to create t each. The present zoning is AS two at= Land Use Plan Ma (Agricultural - pal, is Of aures Land Use P of the Butte Count 5 atre Parcels), Th. Plan designates Y General Plan, Chico Urban Safety g this area as Orchard and �; Area y Dlement indicates that this Field Crops. The hazard area, There Project is in are no specific or co an utrelas$ified fire mmunity plans for; the area, The Proposal does not conflict with Count Proposed element of the .Butte Count, Y zoning specific or J General not any adopted or community plana Plan not any County; Recommend approval subject to the adoption of the Ne With the following mitigation measure:. gative Declaration 1, Contribute $75.00 per lot to the West Side .fund. Fire Station 1',.nefit �a LMT. -,It cc' Mike Wiegert GDA ���f r,• ..•r. Oepatm of URVO., CalilormaStata U(INcrsi lty. Cmcn Catiiom;a Cneco, CA 95929 tC+IaeologMct"0Wa.r.. Inventory Mrxxir , .;.roll US��lo► TO: Butte County Planni-ng ##7 County Center Dr. Orovlle, Ca. 95965 c e � Dcar County .Planners, rr_vieu of the above project has revealed the following: X The area indicated as within the projectL boundaries is considered to archaeologically sensitive. Present ate: %, Easy access to natural sources Of water Flat meadowland or flat land near water South and/or east facing slopes 7c Previously recorded sites in the vicinity Other: ------'� ssaw a be ;ducted We, st�'roclgly r�R1end t _,t an archaeological a�iate Mitigation of the area by a qualified archaeologist and Pp °' measures prepared. . e '.ten previously recorded >,:n the project site or mites has/have have. a negative it+pact on �� cuXtuc'al ---- ) rations will ist be =ltacted resources. Fie �' reoa+"d that a qualified archaeolog to assess site c0aV) r)0nts a+x1 prepare a mitigative Vto()o a" Ebwever if xx frith+ K3 A survey is not rec.�rrr�PIWILXi for tJle above E k'r 1r:o uring r mat:cr�a s are encvunterc'Td tion �. any pr8 Lstc�e is or Istj cia turc y ng • n Insfc cease irm > a +. Y k of p_ sT-te and materza�b Ura m-- _..._ ,bank you for the oto rtun%t:y to reviw�w and axt.tdnt of this proposal. Please let us know what decisions are tt4'�de rexprding the pro7rct= 5inct•relyr ' I)t . �)kotu Kowta W)rtheaSt inforr�atlo+'1 treater C(70rc MOtOt Inter.-DeparMi6pla Memorandum TM Advisory Agency rRones Planning SUBJECT: MIKE WEIGERT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AP 42-01-81 DATM July 8, 1987. The subject parcel was created May 14, 1986 as Pd cel 4 of the Robert Brown Tentative Parcel Map. That previoU8 map Was approved on appeal by the Board on October 15, 1935. An envixonmental analysis was prepared on the Robert Brown Tenta- tive Parcel Map which is sufficient for consideration of this. subse-7uent division. Additional Information: The Tenta*lve Parcel Map adjoins but isnot within the Bell Muir General Plan Amendment area pending at the Board level. The Bell-NMuir. EIR therefore does not apply to this project. Since preparation of the initial study, the Fire Department has indicated that a new station will be necessary on the west side of Chico. All developers in this vicinity have been requested to contribute $75 per lot for the purchase of one= half acre and construction of a fire station. The applicantshould contribute $75 per lot in order to offset increased demands for fire protection services. Planning Department records do not indicate that an archaeological survey has ever, been prepared on the property. In order to det�rmi'ne whether or not such a survey should b prepared, a records search should be requested from the Northeast Information Center, California State University, Chico. Instructions and the Center's address will be included in the cover letter of this initial study. A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures and Conditions is tentatively recommended, subject to payment of $75 per lot to the West Side Fire Station Fund and submission of an archaeological records search. BMT/sjs cd: Tike Wiegert, 352A Connors Court, Chico, CA 55926 GDA, 220 Grand Avenue, orovill,e, CA 95965 C9 APPNi11"" f cOuN'rY (11V 181 1*1 as-o��2G-ox 1 NVI R0Nr11 NTA1, C11> (:h a1 Agency) fl5-�li� t;'OL t' 0 �e comrle-�`T�) 8:10.01 l:. o g' 11 5-07- AP It /;2-01-35, 42-34-2G, 42-34-x5 BACK'_ ___--C i) ; o { proponent Robert Browne Robert Ni.ch�?.� ���tittiti_.4U�a���.--��-�~ 1. Name i 1 i.c'aI)1 ) proponent and representatr610�TandlpGoui°L 2; Address of .1 4 v.„pa Circle ---- ,., 3: l`SANDATORY FINDINGS op SIGNIrICAN rade ^the potential to degredu.e a, noes the project have the p substantially quality of the environmenty the lab�tat of a fish or w.ldlifc species, ry o ulation to e °urinate a `plant or fish or wildlife p threaten to s.sta.'ining levels, animal community, reduce the n�lant or animalcort e range of a rare or endangered 1 per eliminate important examples of the major p rehisto�ry? of California history or potential to achieve project have the I term, b. Does the p J A short-term impact on the shortterm benefits to the detriment of long - environmental goals? ( term impacts Will environment is one ime1iwhli.le�long—tea Yelzt�vely brief period of endure into the future.) . h are indiv,du- YT:S Milo V- J X CA noes the project have impacts Whir - noes cumulatively considerable? (A ally limit separate resat�rces project may impact on two or more rce where the impact ole effects of the ttotal aofvthose stna.11 , but where til significant-) impacts on the env ronment �s sign e roject have en'Vivonlnental effects which d. Does the p w - will cause substantial'aoreindl'`ectlyr? on human beings, either tF`i'CR�JINATIaN (TO he col"pleted by, the Lead `Agency _.. NP 0n the basis of this initial evaluation' NnT have at ,1lprliri.cant effect ►o. re aced. 001 f'i'nd the proposeol p " i +niri. .-�-" on the env"tr"onn�enr, a��td a� NI:GA`►'iVti nb', CLAj��TIUN will be p d that although the proposed project n ceulrl have rt is t/tVl; fin there will nes hG a signii'i.cant cant e 1' fact on tilC etty i t onment I�IiGAyi IVfi effect in this case, cause th ldecil eoAtl��NpFrleje�cti'S Aescrxbe on ,. the attached sheet have �rr:}aared.at nr..CLARATION 11111 be i project t�1A1' have u s };ni lie not effect on 1/1V1? find the prnposed 1 J._ e environment, and an p,NVIRttNrlbNmA1. lt`1PAC°j' Ri;t�l;1RI' is �•ca til y �tW pN�PAIt"[h1p.N`1" 1` 11 ,.•� GC rlU"C'i'►► L ANN l t lDAIT.26 ` „Y ... �C David N to amus Ass. i to plan er iiev:logml by�� T ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS •:cp anatioris o,,, a l ''yes" and "maybe" answers are 'requirod on gttached sheet(s) 2 3. WATER. Will,the proposal result in substantial: YDS MAYBE NO EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant; 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 d, unique geologic or physical features? e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, e. either on or off-site? y, f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach f,g sands, or changes in siltation, d,3position 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- blides, ground failure or similar hazards? .x AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient ` air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? k c., Alteration of air movement,, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? X 3. WATER. Will,the proposal result in substantial: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters?( b. Changes g absorption rp rates, drainage patterns, ortherate andamount ofsrface surface runoff? c, Need for off-site surface drainage mprove- i tnents, including vegetation removal, channel- ization or culvert installation? d, Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? e. Chane in �.. the amount of surface water In any water body? f,g Dischar e into surface waters or In any .alteration of surface waterualat hiding quality,' y, inc t not to dissolved olimited �emperaturey ou Yg yc_ g. Alteration of the directs •4n, or rate of Flow of ground waters 7 h, Change in the quantity of ground waters either through direct additions or with.' rawa s ort through interception of an qulfei b cuts or excavations? 16 Reduction in the amount of water otherwise ` available for public water supplies? 1r Exposurepeople or property to water hazards zards such as flooding? - 'YES NIANO PLANT' LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: a, ange in the diversity of ,species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, and aquatic plants)?. shrubs, grass, crops, b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an C. area, or in a barrier to the normal repldnisho ment of exist -in" species? d„ Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop'? ,.�. S. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: numbers a. C angurin the diversity of species, or animals (birds, land animals of any species of including reptiles, fish and shell fish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into —- an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d ,Det6rioration to existing fish or wildlife ` habitat? 64 NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 4 74 LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce; sa,gni .cant light and glare? S. tANDt SE. a1Wil.l the proposal result in a subalteration of the present or planned. lard use of an area? 9 NATURAL RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in suTs t ntial a, increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any non-renewable aru�`rl --`- X, resources? -~-- lo; R18X OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: a. res f explosion or the release of hatardW ous substances ('.including, but not limited to oil;, pesticides; chemicals or radiation) in t}yC event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency plan? .k response plan or emergency evacuation 11. POPULATION: Will the proposal alter the location, i'str ution, density, or growth rate of the human population? r._. lu, USING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, housing? oOr create a demand for additional YES MAYBE, NO 'I`ItANSPORTATION/CIRCUL.ATION, Will the proposal i3. cult in: Generation Of substantial additional vehicle � u. a movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impect on existjng transportationG _?S d syssystems? --- tem? alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? .. , f:C; t:'t e. Alterations to waterborne,rail or air tra .� f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicle go bicyclists or pedestrians? -' osal have an oeffect tdef proposal 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. red nWill upon, or _esult inew governmental services; ZG a. Fire protection? --- -� b. Police protection? -- Xc C. Scl oo18? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. '�Iaintenan.ce of public facilities, including X G roads? I f. Other governmental services? 15; ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: --- Jesse of substantial amounts of fuel: o? energy? b; Substantial increase in demand upon existing of energy', or require the developments sources of energy? of new sources 16 UTILITIES. Will the propsal result in a need for substantial alterations to the n- w y zeins, or following: a. Power or natural gas?C b. Communications systems? c. Water availability: - d Sewer or septic tank? - x e.. Storm water drainage? f Solid waste and disposal? 17. Rk':i`tA1 HVALTH. Will, the proposal resulotential of any health hard or p a. �,l�ac,�on health hazard (excluding mental healtla) ? td health � ._.� b. Exposur',w, of people potential - hazards? 18. AESTHETICS-. Will t';� proposal result viewnap e to o65tructxon of any .� c e i . r �� p the public, or will tfa, ,`pro oral result in the creatl0n of an aesthetit-i'.1 -L',r offensive site Open � to public view? r NO Yl S MAYS 19. RECREATION. Wilt the proposal result in an ii upon the quality or quantity of existing recre;�` • olkal opportuni< ' es? 20i CULTURAL RESOURCES. a. Will. the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or X historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical, or aesthetic effects to a prehistori- or historic building, structure or object? 4 c. noes the proposal have the potentia] to cau5o a physical change which would affect uniquo ethnic culturalvalues? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impart area? -- V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 42-01-35, 42-34-26, 42-34w25 .See attachment 4 i 0 1 • 11 ko on the nt of nine additional and The develOPme n map, four on the NiG110115 M6-1Pl �11:) elf (four Orl the Brow t i n some over cover i I-ILI, compaction' three projFct- map) will re5tkl Will load L(� an increase (),*e on the Vrazzell soils. This disruption I and displacement Of and an increase in erosion POtOntial and in storm water runoff a 0 to the site Of the Parc:els created, ,iltation potential- Du .11 not be sig,lificant. any increase wl p.operties, are soils area Of VIIIA 10 am which is 1g: The three subject . agricultural soil. Deve�OPIIKIIlt Of the three considered to be a prim os from -AW-gol- holdings projects will remove aPprbvinlately 65 acr I puV-SUitS- idered to be vi -Able for agr cultural -ing generally cons parcels could causo neighbol AdditionallYi deVelOpment art the s due to the ,rty to be less SU I itable for agricultural use PrOpe r residential fatilities' encroachment of homes and othe within a Moderate E�arthquake Intensity 6 miles All of Butte County is wit .ty is located appro VIII. The subject proper . , em of unknown activity. Zone Mohocline, a fault system for southwest of the Tuscan I ng Ca�e standards of ho(Aez to Uniform Buildir r,onttrUCtion r '-�5 should provide adequatO protection to 5mismically active areas in case of seismic activity. V�Iibit some minor localitzed let. properties currently 0 le development of 5 0+ heavy I"ainfall' While this tendency The sub -4 1,110.0ding during period slightly irltr0a j+icant due to the the properties m- 1,jomesitOs On any should not be sign L�,owards +100dingt r,jze of the parcels- the subject approVi y 12 1/2 acres Of 4d: At the present timOi matel�eVotOd to row crops std on (or, all throe properties) is.i Idtk,i,es and nrraton pr sture. The existing field boUr as showon the irrigated Pa not follow the parcel bOLthdaf they exist are not wholly 'do itionally, the. fields as th ,facilities Add -tels. As such, the viability Of tentative maps. ual original pat � such, the located on the individ ill 'be severely r0ducedi Am those as they exist W those properties Will be host. While it cultural use of :� parcels Of spo,,.iality crap" can r historic Agri can b:.. shown that 4 and 5 acre historically such siZ`4 Pa t�joille,_imes. bin viable as 'economic units', purzu,tti goo A150 item aro not used for intensive area that no additional homOsitus im an 'IonL�tt �I, tonoisO Ji I I LI., Es I i ShMen't of n' ,,Pose future re5it 6b, Mt. Eatly agricultural V activities and may o"'toone them to is pyt�dvmin created by agricultural act It is and dust. cr associated with agriCultUVal th hazards e tbAtt�, be ottabliV*10-d On all hPal .00 foot building arcels- rocoMmetldod that a It, ay'ricultural use P boundaries adjacent APPthdix V � PA96 6 f� AP 4235, 42-34-260 42-34-25 t U, Butte County General Plan designation for tho k h uo parao l % involved i +G Orchard and Meld Crops. The three pr upur t;t. oi mr o located on the rural side of the Chico Area Greenling. While tho zoning is A-5, the policies in the Butte County General. 1 "l mn would only allow development of 5 acre parcels if predominant lot; ni zoq III the area were 5 to 10 acres„ the project is adjacent Q ot in c lnq proximity to turban boundaries;, and the present status of mgricultu Al, production would not be impaired. Of the three condi ;i,t. "51 only tali(: second is present: The three existing parcels are leca'taud a djacok to or in close proximity to the Chico Area Greenling. (Tho Brant( Orn ol.l parcel: to the east and the Robert Nichols parcel in the aonter are adjacent to the Greenling where it runs along Bell Road.) Historically, moll Road has been the boundary between mord, inteWve development to the south and purely agricultural pursultYs to tho north. Approval of these three projects would reprozont an encroachment of suburban residential uses into previouGly intensivE agricultural areas, els such, these projects do not appear to confOrM to the policies of the General Plan even though the Win p aramot oro of the zoning would appear to allow 5 acre plrcels. 13: Development of nine additional homesites on the subject properties would incrementally increase traffic and vehicle move' ._grits on Gell Road and could impact traffic safety, road maintenance) and incidental hazards to other motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedesti,ions. 14: This project will represent an incroase in demand for publi services in a rural area. i,b; lower and communic=ation systems will have to be extended to the newly created parcels. AP Q-01-10, 42- W4-26, 4--34*-25 Sl1�C�ST�t7,�ht 1 `f` T: GAT � hN�,MG,�SU�E i. Ghowa on the final mop a 100 foot building setback line adjacent to all property boundaries bordering agricultural use parcels. ORH Y l fat: Appendix V - Pdga 7 Aop11���t: F<obert K. Brown Robert C. NiChols Frank Srazell. Assessor~s Parcel 0 26° Log g5p06-�/U� ' ' iption A° i~ Type of Project: TentativeParcel 11,"P cel Nap�% one dividing �Z Brlef Description: Three Tentative rp' a± |� 6 , into four parcels, one of 12^2 acr�$' one ~ �B~4 -,ares nr 5 �� res each� one dt\,iding 28°4 trtofo�!r acres and two �t ~ �ac h �e parce' - - three at 5~� sicY~�� each; � -'� e a� 1�� 4 acres, ,. ~- ls on , ~''-- -- d uVOe dividing '218 acres into two parcels, one at vis at 15~8 acres~rth st�e Of B011 Road from Mu�r Avenue t On the north ��, Loc/ationz �mate1y 400 feet east Of - �s Avenue in the Chico ea~ °�p pXJon r dwelling un^~ to - ' D�ns���y of Development: 5 acres per 4° proposed e -- e- dwelling unit. 12 acres p r eI- 5^ Amount of Impervious Surfacing. Minlmal 6^ Access and Nearest Public Road(s): properties front on Bell _ Road f ge D1sposa1: Individual septic systems 7* Method of ewar Supply� Individual Wells 8° gourte o �at= r Lines" To pr�rerty 9~ Proximity of powet I d dtYi��i��ns andde\��1opMent: Some10, p�tasntial for fur her �n creation of 5 to 6 acre #arce s l�n6er additional potential for cr� the existing zoning. B. EnYiron - � ' 1° Terrain - 2% a�al1ey land a^BEneral Topog� c Character.- b. haracter: b" S1 apes: o �v*^on� i7O feet ASL C. / 160 to d^ L�miting ractors): Nont � loam' ��n*ral1y well a. 'pi� and Charactei�ti Vin- c7ained With good permeability. b^ L- m*.t1ng Factorsh None ApppAndig F (a) M f AP 42-0�, 42-34..,260 42-34-25 NfAtl.Wal Hazards of the Land A- EarthquaE;e 7onea Moderate E.ar-thquale lnl,t;j, ity ZaritV VI1T b. Erosion Potential „ None C. Landslide Potential None d. Fire Hazard. Unclassified e. Expansive Soil Potential- I,,lodsrate 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: None on-site b• Ground Water: Abundant valley aquifers. Alwea of hig,l'i groundwater e,;traction,, Potentia, subsidence area. C. Drainage Characteristics: Land brains gerterlly to the i West towards Mud Creeki. d. Annual Rainfall (normal) : 20 to 22 inchew e. Limiting Factors.: Lack of tan -site drainagepfa year 5. Visual/Scenic Duality High g facilities. 6. Acoustic Oualitya High 7• Air Duality High eXce t burin burning: P 9 Periods of t`gricultural. Lei o1og�. ��]._�nyi rahmenta e- Vegetation: Row bro s P y grazing landand orchards are all located in the area.. 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small binds and animals common to agricultural areas. valley Gultur9l-1nvirgnmetit: 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources jr, the area; Low sensitivity area. 11. Butte County Genera: Flan designation, orchard and Field Crops, rural side o'r the Chico Greenline. 12. Existing Zoning. A•-5 1` . Es i sti ng Land Use ah--si tea Row crops, historic geed l is t area SUI -rounding two residencesgrazing On theand Parcel 1 Of the Brazell map. 1.4. Surrounding Area. a. Land Uses; Agricultural uses. Single family residences at rural densities to the south and east. b, zoning: A -5i S -R, SS i, and R'T--iA C. Gen. Flan designatiunse Orahard and 'Field' Crops, Agri ct.tl tt.traj Fesi denti, al and Low Density Rosi denti al d• Parcel Sizes.. to ir.)t:f acre Pal~i~els to the northanorthar=re the u and South Care ���•trcel to the Wes'lt, 1 o 1() acre parcels to , an i;i acre parcel to the east with I to 10 ache parcels further east. The three subject peel -cels are all apprO imatedy 2B 1/2 acres in site. e1, Population: Suburban densi-Lies tranS3tienirig into jural at the subject property, Appendix v (b) p �r AP 42-0 -, 42"34,26, 42-34-25 15. Character of Uses. and Area. C'risting agra�t:i�,.itµ�l. ,, uses. Of milted eubUrban residentif", `end aEWCUA sir '111t 16. Nearest Urban Area: Chico cel"i•ol.tltt(1, al 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence; 18. Improvements Chico Stnd -as Uwban Ares: Na 1Y. Fire protect i orr Service. a Nearest County (State) F re'Stations 141sset Station 442 Toad b Wager Availabilitya Wells and fire 2C). Schools in Area: Chico Unified School Dist) only Iit �,