HomeMy WebLinkAbout042-100-011PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY SHEET FOR LAND DIVISIONS
APPLICANT Wayne C. Turner
ADDRESS 11216 Yankee Hill Rd., o-oville, CA 95965
OWNER Same
PROaVCT DESCRIPTION TPM to divide 20 acres to create 4 J?drdels
yrcel # l -- 5.3 acres, Parcel #25.0 acnes, Parcal IIS N . O acres
r
Farce - acres
LOCATION on the south side of Reninedy_Avenue 1200 foot oarit of
Moir Avenue, Chico
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S) _-2`10.11
ZONING A-5 GENERAL PLAN Orchard & PROJECT CONSISTENT? :.
P-i-eldrop
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT
DATE OF APPLICANT STCURM
LAND CONSEIRVATION ACT CONTRACTS?
DA`.t't' APPLICATION RECEIVED August 1.5, 1986
.w
AGENT/SURVEYOR/CIVIL ENGINEER: R.F.C. Surveyors
ADDRESSs 331 Wall Street, Chico, CA 95926
DATE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT PREVARBD .
.ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL L'XEMPTION w DATE V11LED_ _ ..
bETLFtMINATION
AND DATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION 'DATE ADOPTED_, _
MITIGATED NEG. DECLARATION - DATV ADOPTED* ,mom, _ _...r:.
ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE CERTX , _8n
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
SUIS. COMMITTEE, MEETING DATE
ADVISORY, AGENCY HEARING)71'S'E 1� ,�•.. u,v
ADVISORY AGENCY ACT
APPEALED _APPEAL HEATING MTV..-.
HOARD ACTION
COMMENTS FOR PLANNING DIIIUCTOW S
1"'lI:
COU t� I'Y, PORT l �.�+�
PLS CONFORASANC . / , a ,
GENFRAI. POR STISDI (�vu
FOR PARCEL MA
completed by applicant:
ms �--4 to be i`L�""
e W
1. 0,1
Applicant Name
tion PA
2. Project DescriP
3. Assessor's parce Numbed s)�
1Q�
14L.
4. 1,roposed Useartment
luted y
The following items are the 'Planning Dep
to be comp bre±�ment
x,n,nd Conservation Ag
Current zoning ..�---- r �Kc�P S
G tr
e C M
/—i
Designation .�..5
General Plan MAR 24 1986
iter
Applicable
bl'e Conditional Criteria: NO . Qrov�b, C¢Ufp i1
AlicaYES
Agricultural -Residential»
Agricultural Compatibility
2. Water & Sewer Capacity
._--.
3. Adequate Fire Facilities _"996G 9a
4. Road Capacity & Maintunchoola r
5. Access to Commercial &
�4 dty7Wdt�:1�Q �1t'it�d
Orchard & Field Crops
l0 Ac; Parcel Size
1 Predominant 5-
2 Vicinity of Urban ,oundaaiesd
ri.c. viability not imp
3 Ag does not
Project` does to the General. Plan.
StLoff Determination: substantially conform
f
i4k?G G5.
lj J4G, �+
v r T �a
Comments
i A,.VY', ,C'p•/Q ¢ rd /� +�=" E' '•`"t c r S , G , A.)7421�-4I� Crvra
,_,_ a ,_„_,__. � ,cavo•-,•-
pate
Stam SignatUte "
Art AA1tg OP TIM A%OVk
AFP
tit
RT�t�l1:S2'ED ,00 DxVinir, c NLS PLAN,,
A5 !11E APPLXCANT FO1t ' GIONF,OIOW" taxT1, '
Dg'1'ETi�tINA'Ilm ivWING ` �.,
Signature of Applicant
Dated
'LU 1000
reviged 6-80)`
OW
-%N-',* 1#
CON
"zM A "
i7ZIA
`1�r 2N
l3tti:tc Corttnepartment
a R4, Mµ
an rC4 Planning 1;Vrt
>f 7e.nnl:ng 7 00111101 Center I?�'
off ice Room
t;0 1400 ,1,E *h Stree5► orlovi.11.e, CA 596
Sacramett ' +
CA551�4x
or Cou,k'1 C.(erk
`� C? , hA QECk'� R,
Cnttnty Clerk L, I �i1Y 11,013
X of Butte li�xticr4 with Section
County ;"7
etecmination In comp
Filing of Notice of Resources Code.
a
SUBJcT e f the Public w_..-
,--
1.4ayne C- umbea:
P`rojec cjr
le 42•�"10-11 ')telephone N
Tentative Parcel Map Contact Person
Clearinghouse Number 534-42666
State to Glea- inghotise) cant.
(if submitted Jahn Mendonsa � x,200 feet
Of KennedY Avenin,
public Works south side w----
on the ---�
Project Location Chico. cxeate
of Muir Ave►ue, Map dividing 20 acres
tion Ten ka acre sP eacktl
Project Desc rC JS of 5±
f ot,�r p
Board of 5u ervisors ency) made
Butte Count �ncy Or Responsible AS and hos
to advise that the (head Age
This is project on 12
r escribed p' � (Date)
roved the abole�d Pro
actt
has app regarding ,he above-described p �-.
have a significant effect on ;the
_ the following deteYmination�
will, -,�x.. wily. not,
14 The project _ �- ro ect
environment, Prepared
ror this p �
An Environmental Impact Report was p
'1� pursuant to the peovisio�ts of CEQA� ro,ect pursuant to the
tiVe Declaration
was prepared .for this p
x A Mega the
provisions of ct"Qh, were not, made a condition of
measures . w t`ey
3 Mitigation, ro oct, tad
approval of the � ' ) Vitas, �.,.�...��►:� nett; Adopted
of o`ter>•itling o.onside'aCions
4. A statement project, lot this prod ntmnt,s and respans�a and record of
that Che f final EI,R W th co at"
,eneral public
This is to certify a'I'ment
prajer:l; Approval is available to the 6 El.anning Dep
Butte County
411
7 County Center brive
CA X5 '
965 ,I
n10V",lle> ,�
to Received
or l±illnb and
86
it re ..Streeter
potting
at t�Plt _ l2 i S5tephe>1 A
Senior 23 a,t~iier
W
, '' 'k'it10 ltaVlsod hart
Wdyna C. Turner
MitIption Measures, Tentative Parcel Map, AP 42-10-11
Y. Map Zone A Floodway as a no -development area.
2. Contribute $75,,00 per lot to the West Side Fire Station Benefit Fund.
TO t
V ROM
8USJECT:
DATE:
Butte County Advisory 'Agency
Planning Director
Report on Tentative Parcel Map Of Wayne TI.Irner on
AP 42-10-11
Ott -ober 28, 1986
This is a Proposal to divide 20.0 acres to create 4 popqoIg of
approximately 15 acres each, The present zoning is A-$ (Agricultural
5 acre parcels); The Land Use Plan Map of the Butte COunt,Y General Plan
designates this area as Orchard and Field Crops. There are no specific
01" Community plans for the area.
The A-5 zoning on -Bite was adopted June 14, 1966Y Prior to adoption of
the environmental qufaity act and Butte County Land Use plan. Zoning
which Predates the Land Use Element may or may not be found consistent
With the General Plan What determines consistency
Policies in all elements. is compliance with
Page 46 of the Butte County General Plan establishes conditional zoning
and development criterion for Properti
Crop* These are: es designated Orchard and Field
1, Predominant existing Parcel sizes of 5-10 acres,
2. Adjacent to or in. the vicinity Of urban boundaries.
3- Present status Of agricultural Production will not,ye significantly
Impaired.
Of over 572 acres of land surrounding the subject property and
11 designated as Orchard and Field Crops by the General plano approximately
acres are devoted to parcels of appl_oxma4_ely I
,oneral plan policies or spadir-10
created Prior to adoption of any r l acre or less and
zoning. Of the remaining 561 acres, there are 50 pacels
Parcel size of 10 acres and an average size of ll.22racreswith a median.
This Project will represent the removal of Approximotley 20 acres of
Orchard land from
production, While removal of 20 acres Of orchar\-, from
Production may not be a significant roductjbhs this project could
trigger other similar projects on neighboring properties, Tk,ht, or
more new 5 -acre Parcels could, be treated along kohnddY Avenue
representing the removal Of over 100 acres Prom produdtiollk S i n eia
5 -acre parcels are generally not Agriculturally
likely that demand would eventually be made to viable Parc'elds ib is
the area. CrOAtO smaller parcels in
tf 1*aare parcels are cre4b6d) more than 200 parcels 40UI,d
exist in the immediate vicinity of thit pfoj
Parcels lest than 5 acres eat While devolopmont of
Amendrroni;s and Ria'Zone It the Area would require both General plat
0' similar Pressures are 'currently being s6onft
the Bell lIujr Road area nearby to the east, I
Policies indicates that the predominant
Analysis of the General plan p
parcels are
is located on the a distant; And
parcel sizes are 10 acres a�d larger in an area where 6 �� re
being requested;
the sub3ew property roximately 1/8 mt
the Chico Area crstatuseafwagricultuhich 18 pal productjon will like
ly be
that: the p aired, not only on-ante, but within the General area,
severely imp it should be
has been zoned A-5 since that does .not
While the subject property uaranteed and that Sze of the
ed to the minimum lot size
kept in mind division of land is not �
that land can be develop
guarantee t only gives an inciication of sizes' that may b
zone} but ra'theri
possible.
Recomn3endatiotz General plan and
Find that the map
does not comply with the Butte County
deny It based on Government Code Section 66��'�d
tl'+ase
if favorable Action is under consideration,
mitigation measures
mitigation
apply
ment area-
1. ttap Zone A Floodway as a na develop
Contribute $7
5.00 per lot to the hest S9de Rice Station Benefit
"'und
DRFI b lr
CC,. Wayne C . 'Corner
RVC Surveyors
*,
October l,, 1986
Country of B LLe
Planning Department
7 County Center Drive
orovill.e, CA. 95965
ATTN: David R. Hironimus
RE Wayne Turner
A.P. 42-10-11
l5 Ol
Clam lbo. Pinnninq Ci foiv"
OCT 3 '0J6oroville, CaUforRIA
1;og No. 86-08-
PYC SURVEYORS, INC"
.� ... ,. Dave:
As per our conversation the other day, I'm writing
'R this letter on behalf of my client for suggested
t mitigation measures.
C
'
1. Areas of flooding, if arty., vtill be
shown on Final. Map,
SURVSYORS,INC.
2. My Client washes to proceed with his
application for four (4) parcels
331 WALL STREET all of the parcels are per Butte County
CHICO, CA 95925 General. Plan and Zoning. In a review
916.343.5841 of this project area A.P. maps indicate
many logs under 10 acre in size and even
many lots as 5 acre and less in the
general area especially Fast 1/2 miles.
3. M;� client has said if he has to pay
$75.00 per lot he will do so, but
asked what area in the Northwest has
to pay the same Do you. have a map
and if so, could we have a copy's
T ank YOU.
cerely
i78SELL A. CRONj NGER
RAC/b ds;
0 AVPBNDTX C'
COUNTS' OC' BUTIT
1.iNVIRONK—WAL, (I-MCKLI.ST F(, RNI
(to be complete y Lea Agency)
Log 1186-0-8-1.5-01
1 BACKGAOUND Aid 11 42-10-1,1
1. Name of proponent WAYNE_ C +, URNEB,.. ...._,.. _M
2. Address of proponent and representative (if appi J,crtl)`I o)
3. Project description Tentative Parcel Map
MANDATORY F1'NDINGS OF STGNIFICA'NU. YIIS MAY'Ilil
a. Does the project have the potential to degl."W* the
duality of tho: envirotament, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildfire species, crluse n
fish or wildlife population to drop below se] r -
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the nombor or restrict the
range of a rase or endangered plant or animal ;or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
or California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term benefits to the detriment or long-term,
environmental goals? (A shout -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.)
N-1
10
c. Does the project have impacts which etre individu-
ally
divzdu-ally limited, but ttmattlatively c:onsiderau'le? - (A
project may impact on two or more separate resources
where the impact on each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect or the total of those
impacts ort the environment Is sig0ricant.) x
d, noes the project have environmental ofrects which
Will cause substantial adverse errects on human
belings, either direetl,, or indirectly? _ .�..� moi(
Ill DETT OrliNATi(1N (To he completed by the Lund Agency)
On the bets .s gar this ittiti.c;l VVil,ltcattirtt a
l/IVI: find flit/ 111.0posvd proloc•t ("001.11 NOT have a �'igl)lricant criect
on the envi ronillont , and ai hl-'GATI'VIi 0110 LARATION will bo propnrc,6.
I/VQ 'find that :altholigt thr praajatasvd project ccaulcl have a sllnif'l-
Cont e ('f oc t on tho env i 1101111101i, t b v ve IV 11,1 not I it s 11,ni I' Cant
oCreta in this easy becnta:;sty Hie W'i''ItrATION piliASIIPW(,' des'evibed on
tite attached sllovt hove bvvil added to tfiv A N11GA'I`IVII
IiECLARRIUN will he prtltai'cl.
i/lVli rirtd tits` hreal)osod ltrcIjOc•t SIA) htrve a sig'n111ttiilt ofroet all
the envi ronntent, tIntl ata I NVI lt(1Nt`lEXI'Al, TNIVAC,'t" REPORT is veclttived,
I)A't'I ; September 22 9fi6 cote, -TY 01' 81I'1"1'li, PLANNIN01 11liPAI2'i'lcit,NT
~O.IMUS sso =ate -Planner
2,
ENVIRONMENTAL IM ACTS
p anations of 511 "yes'' and "maybe" answers are required
on attached sheet(s))
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant: YIlS
`Unstable
MAYBE N0.
a.
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 thy, channel: of
a river or stream orthebed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?.
g.
Toss of prime agriculturally productive soils
outsidedesignated urban areas?
h.
Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards'such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, ground failure or similar hazards?.
24 AIR.
Will the proposal result in substantial:
Y-7
Air emissions or deterioration of ambient
air quality?
b.
The creation of ob ccti.onable odors, smoke
or fumes?
c.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
i.emperaturo, or any change in climate,
Ibcal.ly ur regionaxly?
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 in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface runoff`?
c,
Need for off-site surface drainage improve
ments, including vegetation removal, channel»
ization or cultiert installation?
k'
d.,
Alterations the course or flow of flood
waters?
e,
Change in tho amount of surface water in any
water body?
f.
Discharge into surface waters, o•r in any
alteration ofsurfacewater quality, ineludin
but not limited to temperature, dissolved
oxyggji or turbidity?
c
g.
Alteration on of the dir.—tion or rat- of flow
of ground waters?
X
h,
Change in the quantity tax, of Dround w�t�:exs,
'Or
yqualitV
either through direct additionswith-
dra`Yals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or Oxcavations?
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?
2,
YES
MAYBE No
4.
PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial.
a. I G Range in the diversity of species or numl)or
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species?
�.
d, Reduction n acreag a of ar.Y agricultural xi.cultural c rop?
'
,...
S.
ANIMAL UE ` will the proposal. result in substantial;
a. Chnge diversity
in the of species, or numbers
Of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shell fish,
benthi.c 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?
1{
d. Deterioration to existing ,fish or wildlife
habitat?
6.
NOISE: Will the proposal result in substantial;
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
7.
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce
s g ifcant ght and glare?'
S.
LANDUSE. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or planned
land use of an area?
9.
NATURAL RESOURCES.* Will the proposal result in
substantial*
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resourc�;s"
b. Depletion of any ioii-rejiAir u�i, xjrwty ct?
resources?
10.
RISK OF U 8ET. Will the proposal involve;
a. A risk of explosion or the release of hazard-
ous substances (including, but not limited to)
µ
Oil, Pesticideschemicals or radiation) in the
p
eveni
event an accident or upset conditions?
b. Possibleinterference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
11
POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the locati.o,
istribution, density, or growth rate of the human
Population?
X
12.
HOUGINC. Will the, proposal a'f'fect existing 'housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
Aim
15, TRANSPnPTATTr)XT/PT'n^TTT A -- YES.
Will the prc,,--,,aj
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehiei,e
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
0
demand for new parking?
C. Substantial impact on existing transportation
system,-,?
d. Significant alterations to present natterns
Of circulation or movement of ..
goods? peol I and/or
e. Alterations to waterborne, tail or air traffjC?
Increase in traffic hazard.
bicycl* s to motor vehicles
or pedestrians? 0
bicyclists
14. PUBLIC SERVICE5. Will the Proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services *
a. Fire protection?4
Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks of other recrpatiorial facilities?
Maintenance Of Public facilities, s,including
f. Other governmental services?
15
ENVGY, Will the Proposal result in:
T— rS0 of substantial
amounts of flael,or energy?
b# Substantial increase in demand upon
sources of ever existing
Of new g Or Fenergy? require the development
sources Oy
.
16.
UTTLITIE8 W,
1,11 t:he__
Proposal result in a need for
ri,ew systems, or substantial
alterations to the
f011aiving:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Co'lMunications systems?
C. Water availability:
d. Sewer or septic tank?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17,
HUMAN HEALTH. JVJ11 the Proposal result in.,
Creation Creation of my health hazard
SC
or potential
health hazard (excluding -:ental ilea
b, Exposure M I t1i) ?
O
''c PeOP10 to Potential health
hazards?
18.,
AE8TRETICS. Will the proposal result in the
trticii of
any scenic I-i,5ta or V,
the public or lirill theI ew open to
Proposal result in the
creation o� an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
YES
MAYBE NO
19, RECAEA'TION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of existing recreationtt,;J,
opportunities?
20. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
a. Will the proposal rest;lt in the alteration
of or the destry,:ction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site?
b. Will the proposal. result .in adverse physical
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure or object?
�!
CoDoes the proposal have the u..
p p potential to cause
a physical, change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
AF�
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
V. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMEN`::AL EVALUATION AP 42-10-11
See attached.
OF EN I 0114 i t`iT E- V UAT Z 0
AR 'l2" 1 0"1 'i
SSI addl ti onal homed', ren i.hn avid
int of three lacemen r COMPaction
Bb'd,f•re'ulelopmsome disrupi.ions disp }ncre9se In erosion
1-b,e+f' will t in could lead to an
property Due to the alae of the
so ►ch Slough, overcoverine of the Channel
} test i an of nearby t expected to tfe s i 9n i f }cant
and s created this effect ► na 70
parcels being removal of al"Ir"oy l motel Y
► went the e While e removs 1 of '�0 acres of
i9e4a� This pr^oJect will rep^ this
of orchard land from production•
acres not be a sign ificant reductions In the
roduction may ro,jects on nelohbot"in9
orchard -`rom p other similar p could be crenated
trigger 5.-acre Parcels from product l on
protect coulddTWentY or more new. f ovor l00 acres arcels
propertles. the removal o 0lly viable P
rePresenting enerally not agriculture
area: arcels _are 9 eventually be made to create smaller
Since h-dcre p Would While .that. demand parcels are created, mare,ectn
it is likely r2rea. If 1-acre p vic}n}tY of this prof require
parcels in the the Immediate in the area would req
parcels could exist in ass than 5 acres pressures are
parcels l ezonass similar p to the eastb
development of p endments and nearby
both General Plan Am the Ball Muir Road area
currently 0o Y al ng seen In arthgooko Intensity
a Moderate les
is
with-inlocated approximately 6 rractivity.
ih: �q}l Of Butte County }s stem of unknown
'Che subject property a fault sY
.one VIII Building Cade standard$ for
.one VIII of the Tuscan r}onacunrl form oats protects on to
of bull to ravld° ade9
construction active areas should pvitY
-401smically case of seismic subJect to
occupants in of the property are
the southerly portion
Portions of lough, Provisions ` mush, be made that bt.tl 1 d nc3
fl from Channel
flooding t�9
sites are 1 ocated above f 1 oad .Waters. . } nipac�. on W 1 l dl i f e habitat
have same properties this is not
of level opmeht rnaY of the Prop
6da Effects Slough• Due to the size
Wtthin Channel significant impact. b"acre
C374pE3 _ted to be a 6 C AeT } ul total Field
currently
zoned A-
pct property1 s area i tG i cafes Orchard and
cru=
g�
The subJ�he General Plan far the
minimums ing� to 10-acro
olio}es of that designation indicate that roprlaLe..
crops, and the p Because of surround arcels would be opp
parcels are appropriate. acre P
similar development of 10_ could cause o demand for
parcel s the prmove
oposed b.-a�:re p would eventual l yBeee item 1 M
arce,�
Creation of snit in the area, which 1966:
cultura1 use
additional development of the orei� from agrzon 1 n9 was adopted In
sionificant P Act and prior to the
be noted that the exlstlnB A-Q a1itY Plan
It sl,auld v rcnmental and the Chico Area General
prior to the Califiarnla Bn 1 1g79e ro erl'Y
General til an adopted l n a not be p
current the existing
x i st i ng A•-B zone m Y
In 1 rat As surhf lot sizes in the areas
Indicative of appropriatedemands for Similar
could tr199�r endment
11"121 Devel opmerit
of this Project- eventual 1 Y a General pl on Ar Item 1 C
the immediate'Smller parcels in the future Bee
Parcels in allow even
and Rezones to
1Sa,e,f% This project will represent an incremental increase in
broffic and traffic hazards in the area. As neighboring parcels
croate similar developments, there will be a correspondinO increaso in
tr i f° i• i c and traffic hazards. See Item 19.
1 Wi s This project wi 1 1 represent an incremental i nc: ,4r+r,t in demand for
oUb 1 i d services In a rural area . As s i m i lar deve l oP . t-',, takes P1008
in the area, this demand could become overwhelming. 64e Item 10.
II. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
b,ce See :Items 19, 4d, 8,-11 and 12.
Sungested M i t i Haat i on Measures
1. Show all areas subject to flooding:
2. Redesign the project to yield two parcels of approximately 10
acres each.
S. pay $15 per lot to the West Chico Fire Station fund.
Assessor's . Parcel #k
w Wayne C. Turner 42-10-11
Apr cant Log 86- 08" 10- O i
DAU-S- ,HEST
Ap iert Descr i at i o11
ect= Tentative Parcel Map. into
acres late four
1- Type of Proj D i v i d n9 aPPr
Brief Description- ox l talo l y
ate l y
acres each. apProxim
parcels of On the south slab of Kennedy Avenue,
Location * of Muir r Avenue , i n tete Chico area.. unit
3- 5 acres Por dwelling
1.200 feet east of Development Minimal.
4. P,^opo5ed Density Kennedy
Amount of impervious Surfacing= ProPerty fronts on K
�, AccesS and Nearest Public Road(s)` tic systems.
Avenue. a Disposal: Yndividual Septic
? Method of SeW8 in,di v i dual t,vel 1 s
Supply' To existing PrOPerty„ N
8, Source of Water
tpower Lynes' Kiev®lopment one
q. Proximity land divisions and
i0. Potential for further
under existing tart i ng
i ronmenta so t- Lng
B. En�-
p s i cal-
v i r'o " On
E
1
er valley ey 1 and.
Terrain ci raphie charact
1=1 at
a, General 'fop 9
Slopes= 0_29. 1E��1 feet above Sea Level
b ApprcA l matel Y
G. ElevRtlon: None.
d. Lim tloo Factors`
2 Vina Fine wanly Loam
Solls Ctiaracteristics:
a. Types and abilities.
ex .dl t ent agr i cul tu'l
Factors: a
b, `Ii•
NatLimiting ural Hazards of the) Land cake Intensity Zone
- Earthquake Zonm- Moderate Earthq
b. Erosion Potenti.J shone.,
c. Landslide Potential:
sl led.
d . F i rb Hazard" . L.ow
a. Expansive5oit potentials erty on the
;� " Hyde+t� i o9y Channel
SurfacSlough borders th��
a" e water. Cha"
south. Abundant vel ley aqui fers•
b. Ground water= Characteristics" i'roPa ty drnitis th�toaChannel
c- Drainage iCharaoter to the
the Wea,t to roadside d i tche5 ariG `'
Slough. I0
2� chsnriel
dM Annual Rainfall tr►or!morrdir',� potential aloi`10
e 1.iMitln9 Factora-
Slough«
5• Visual/Scenic Quallty= Good.
6 Acoustic Quality: Good.
burning.
`7• Ater Quality:
Good, except during periods o1 410r'
qtr i Cu 1 l>t 1,rm 1
E o 'i c Env'i ron ente
8- Vegetation: Almond or"chards.
9, O i l dl i fe Habitat: Small b i rdS and anima 1 s
orchard lands. C t,Yt,era.
an to volley
JSL.iz}_Ltura l vo I r+ot
_ � nmcg V y
10. Archaeol;ag i cal and
sensitivity Historical Resources in tt,�s areae
.area..
Butte Gaunt LwW
Crops. y General Plan des gnatlon: Orchar4d and Field
1 Existing Zoning: q-5;
1 Existing Land Use on-site.
14. Surrounding Area: Farm buildings and orchard.
a• Lund Uses;. A^^i cultural
scattered si uses, primarily Orchards, and
b. Zonin ngle-family dwellings at rural densities»
9- A-5.
c. Plan designations: Orchard and Field Gen,,
d. Parcel Sizes: Generali 10 Crops.
c l ustat, of less than 1 acre t° 25 -acre Parcels With
a
Avenue. Parcels nearby along Mule,
e. Population: Rural densities
16. Nearest Urban Area Rural►roharci
15. Character of Site and Area
1?» '
Chico» lands.
Relevant rent Spheres of Influence Chico.
18. Improvements Standards Urban
1`9. Fire Protection Sery i cre d Area: No
a. Nearest County (state) P4
Station 442. Cohasset (load
b» Nater Ava i`I'ab i 1 i t
20. Schools in ye Fire tankers only.
Area: Chino Unified School bistrict,