Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
042-340-048
PAWING COMMISSION SUMMARY Sf APPLICANT Cara Rotschalk .. 84-09-21-02 ADDRESS 2700 Fa d e Chco A 95926 OWNS R same PROJECT DESCRIPTION I va ti y �,„ r , , _ , � ,- r_ zone and- -Varian qe to 10 . t r o n t a g eN POPERTY ONEDS-R-!___. LOCATED, On-the nthe o 'q"ft tt)t of Shasta Avenue ASSI?SSORS PARCEL NUMBER(S) IDENTIFIED ASAP 42-34-48 GEN PLAN---- PROJECT CONSISTENT? 7CIT rl " ,� x c o DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED embex 21 , 1984 .—No—rt 377 hStar En.ineexin --r. ConYlors Ct Sua.te B DATE REZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CHEGFaED-- CA 95926 " ,E , IAGE, DATE LEGAI, DESCRIPTION PREPARED OR CHECKED; DATE PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN2►j r,' t1B.LISHED DATE DISPLAY AD PREPARED -- --.-; _ PUBLISHED PLACE NEWSPAPER NOTICE (S) PUBLISHED 0./"-) P G, B. DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED � � n a Il DATE MAIL -OUT NOTICES 05TTEN .�._.,,.,.._ MAI LPD _ NUMBER ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION " `'�'"' CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION; - DATE FILED AND DATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTEtri ENV. IMPACT REPORT - DATE CERTIFIED OTHER COMMISSION HPARING DATES COMMISSION ACTION I.""..."" . BOARD ACTION ORDINANCE (S) ADOPTED COM ENTS.�,.�,,,___.;, it 85-103, NorthSt:ar Engineering - on behalf of Carl Rottschalk appeals the (2531) Planning Commission's denial of variance (proposed negative declaration regarding environmental impact) to lot area to allow a 0.92 acre ,parcel In a one -acne zone and variance to lot width to allow 58 -foot frontage on property zoned SR -1 (suburban residential -- one,acre parcels) for property located on the east side of gay Avenue, 2400 feet north of Shr►sta Avenue, identified as AP 42-34-48, Chico. Motions FIND THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF CERA HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND CONSIDERED IN MAKING THIS DECISION; AND ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; AND FIND THAT THE PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON TETE ENVIRONMENT, BUT WILL NOT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES ATTACHED; A14D FIND THAT THERE ARE SPECIAL, CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY INCLUDING SIZE, SHAPE, TOTOGRAPHY, LOCATION OR SURROUNDINGS,, AND THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THIS CHAPTER DEPRIVES SUCH PROPERTY OF PRIVILEGES ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTY IN THE "VICINITY AND UNDER IDENTICAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, ` NOTING THAT THE PLOT MAP SHOWING THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT SITE AND THE FACT THAT IT IS NOT ALLOWED GEOGRAPHICALLY THE SAME PRIVILEGES AS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES; AND FURTHER GRANT A`VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF A -.91 ACRE PARCEL AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN FOR AP 42-34-48 (CARL ROTTSCHALK) SUBJECT *w TO MITIGATIONS MEASURES AND CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE MEMO OQ FROM PLANNING DATED FEBRUARY 5, 1985, ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6, " INCLUDING A SECOND VARIANCE TO TAE LOT :WIDTH, M S Vote:: 1't1 2 N 3 Y 4 Y 5 N (Motion failed) (PROJECT DEEMED DENIED.) �u "BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF 8VVgkVISOR8 MINUTES - February 12, 1985 J4, on behalf of Cacl Rottsohalk, appeals the NarthBta.r Eng,neerng ro rjsed negative Planning i�oktunission' s denial of variandaatp lot area to allot declaration:regording environmental impact) lot width to parcel in a one -acre Zane and vatianoe to a 0,92 acre p lace of a 150 -foot frontage on property allow 98 -foot frontage in p one acre parools) far property zoned SR -1 (suburban residential 3400 feet- north of Shasta located. an the east. side of Bay Avenue, Avenue„ identified as AP 42-,34-46, Chico, PUBL1C HEAR NG DATE SET FOR pEBRUARY 12r 1955v AAT 10:00 A.N, Carl Rotttchalk proposed Negative D�claration and Variance to lot area to allow a 0.92 acre parcel inn a I acre zoned and Variance to lot width to allow 98 ft. frontage in place of 130 feet frontage on property zoned SR -1 located on ,the east side of Say Avenue, identified as AP 42-334-48, Chi CCI. The Commission waived the reading of the Steffi Findings. Staff stated that there was coerespandence from Mr. Mrs. Kendall supporting the proposal. Myles Pustejovsky representing the applicant, stated that the applicants intent was to develop the lot into 3 parcels,. He stated that he needed a variance because a+ the shape of the project. Staff stated that the first paragarph of the staff- findings discusses the parcel -z-, involved and how they evolved. Myles stated that the net acreage of the three parcels would be .91, .84, and .90. Chairman Avis noted that the letter from NorthStar Engineering was read at the meeting. Staff explained the use of 1/2 rights-of-way an I acre or larger parcels to get the gross acreage, Carl RdttschAlk stated that the proposed lot split is to provide his children with a homesite each. The hearing was closed. Commissioner Lambert was not able to support this project. She +,--It it was alldwIng sub standat'd lats, to be created. She also stated that this was a.highnitrate area. I She stated that this was in the Agric"Itural-Residential designation and she I was not prepared to add substandard lots by -the variance. She did not feel that this met the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Commissioner Vercruse concurred with, Commissioner Lambert. Commissioner Lambert discussed the fee toward, a fire station. She stated that she knew two property owners interested io discussing a site for the fire station. it was moved by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Vercruse, and unanimously carried for denial as follo I Ws: A,. Note L that the requirements of CERA have .been completed and: doosideeed in making this decision,- and 40 C0% 'TY IN AVT'Tg� COUN 0 ...... tliy Ai t'4.,ICAN"1'; Carl Rottschalt€ OWNER: Same FtEal�E:a u Variance to lot area to allow a 0-91-aa- parcel .91-aaparcel, in ,a 1 --"acro zone and variance to ,at width to allow 98 ft. frR!iantage in place of 130 ft. frontage. 42-34-48AE-' Ntl Y . .y !._F]Ce'1'ilt]l "► an the east side of Baty Avenue 3400 ft. north of pasta Avenue!, Chico„ EXISTING ZQNINGZ SR -i Zoned SR -1 December 159 1970, Ord- TONING HISTORY: 11368.. SUR1' OUNDINU ZONING SR -1, S-Rv A-5 stiRr OUND INQ LAND US54 Single-family dwellings at rural densities and agricultural uses. GeNE!RAL PLAN DESICNATI,QNZ Agricultural -Residential Apf�L.ICA13LE i EGt1LA'f'1�{M5:. Butte County Code Section 24 "-49, 24�-1612 and, Government Cone Section 65906► Environm�!ntal Health-., "No object:iort, to variance; however, the property Chico. The proposed parcels will be borders the nitrate concern , required i o to with the area of sewage disposal area requirements and u_�ahle s This department; cannot nitrate control ihtera:m or da ted standards. a R ndif the vairiance is gran ted►'' be approved gt�ar`antee that the parcels will Fire re Xie ar-tment: '"A water supply far fire protection `will, I Bi ;e County p' fund for purchase of new fire' County r be required. F�aY2'5 D�7 into _, ti on an west side Of Chica►" BUTTE COUNTY PLANNI COMMISSION STAFF rINDINS -Jan y to, 19E3S POt$O 2 The Butte County Department of Public Warks had no objections or comments other than the conditions listed below, ANFILYSTS•.' This project is a request to create a parcel approximately (7.9l acrta in a zone requiring 1 --acre minimum parcels. The parcel. will result from a three --parcel division Of a 2.912 -acre parcel creating two 1.0 -acme parcels from the remainder. The acreages quoted here do not agree with the acreages as shown on the applicant's site plan because of roundof errors on the sitO plan figu,es. Parcel 1 as shown on the site plan is approx i r;eatel y 2-410'2 square f eeyt smaller than cline acre, and Parcel is approximately 48 square fee;_ less than an acrLao if the lot, lines are Adjusted to compensate for the ,o roundoff errors, then Parcel 2 will result in a gross acreage of Oo9129 acre, plus or minus. The substandard parcel will also be Of substandard width in the SF's --I Zone (1,30-+00t minimum required) . Two other variances to create substandard parcels have been granted in the near vicinity. one parcel of 0.94 acre and one parcel of O,,.95 acre were created approximately 3 00 feet to earth, on the south s4de of the ros�d extension. These resulted from the County's requirement ,Cor dedication of right -o4 -way for the road extension, which reduced the original g parcel size below: 2 acres. Two: Other parcels were created approximatel)t one-quarter mile to the southeast, on the nrartheas7it side of Bay Avenue. 'rhe parcels at -a 0.95 arse and 0.97 acre. This variance was originally denied on appeal by the Board of Supervisors and later- approved after a redesign of the project avid new interpretation of the subdivision ordinance regarding gross acreage versus net acreage. A third variance was recently approved an the north side of Shasta Avenue just east of Hay Avenue, where the applicant had 2+ acres but the position of the house made two I -acre; parcels an awkward lot design. All other sub -1 -acre parcels in the SR --1 Zone in this area were created prior to the SR -1 toning and are pre-oxisting nonconforming lot sizes. The lots created by parcel map recorded in Book 49 on Page 90 which lie just north of the subject property consist; of parcels of I+ acres gross with net acreages as stated in the engineer's letter (attached)In both of the granted variances mentioned above, the original lots were long, narrow lots where the back portions were not usable due to the shape of the Property. Tn this case, _a two -lot division would create two rectangular Parcels of over 1 acre. The three -lot division creates two rectangular lots and an L�shaped lot which will also be a+ substandard minimum width. The imposition a+ the minimum lot size requirement of the zone does not deprive the applicant of the ability to divide his land, rather at limits his ability to create the number of Parcels he may desire, The environmental documents for this project have been completed and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. Environmental concerns identified in the checklist included traffic generation and the fact that the propert is p y located in an area of high archaeological, seenssztiitivity. The applicant has proposed appropriate mitigation Mures, 1 U TTE COUNTY PLANNIW&COMMISSION STAFF FINDING -- Jan4WY 10, 1905 W Page .5 RECCIP_iMENDA"1 I ONS_ A. Nate that the requirements of CEGA have been completed and considered in making this decision, and 0. Find that there are not special circumstances applicable to the property including size, shape, topography, location or surr000dings which the strict application of Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property i.n the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications; and C. Deny the variance to allow the creation ciif a .91 -acre parcel as shown on the site plan for AP 42-34-48 (Carl Rottschalk). If the Planning Commission can find that there is a hardship due to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, and that the property has beth deprived of privileges enjoyed by (other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning, classifications then it would! be proper to: A. Find that the requirements of 'CEQA have been completed and considered in making this decision•, and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and B. Find that the project could haves a significant effect an the environment, but will not in this case because of the adopted mitigation measures attached» and C. Find that there are special circumstances applicable to the property including sine, shape, topography,.location or surroundings, and that the strict application of this Chapter deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications; and D. Grant a variance to allow the creat -ion of a .91 --acre parcel ats shown on the site plan for AP 42-34-•40 CRottschalkl subject to the following mitigation measures and condi ti ons: Mitigation Measures: and Cusick Avenues. ast 1. Pay a prorated share of a traffic signal at the intersection of E 2. Perform an archaeological survey and follow recommendations therein. Conda.tionsr Meet the requirements of the Butte County Fire Department. 4. The proposed parcel's are to comply with. the usable sewage disposal, area requirements and nitrate control interim or adopted standards. BUTTE C OuNT`( FrLANN l COMMISSION r STAFF FINDING -fan y 10, 1985 P'400 S. Create parcels in conformance with Chapte17 24 of the Butte COuntY Code. b. Apel i cant must comply with all appl i cabl e� stateand local st atutes_ g ordinances and regulations. pN.lr Attachments to Commission and Cities: Location Exhibit Site Plan Envi ronMohtal Documents Lotter from NorthStar Engineering dated November 11 1904 i APPENDIX 1; COUNT C).�.. r t1U'1<`l l: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (to t- Complete by head 1 —Cl n I. BACKGROUND i.cyl, �� 84-09-21,02 Al tr 42,-34-48 1, Name of proponent _ Carl Rottschalk 7., Address of proponent and representai.iv'e� (if applicailalc} 2700 Esplanade NorthStar Chaco CA95926 _ n':n..,� u 377 Coonnors Court Suite 13 «i. tar•nj.cact description i.can V'ar.an�'Ciia.�`o� � MANDATORY FINDINGS op SIONIFICANCT-, YTS MAYBRI NO a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality o:f the envirvn.ment, substantially reduce the habitat Of a fish or wildlife species, cause a. fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, , threaten to elimi.natr a plants or animal community, reduce tine Ivamb r or restrict the range of a rare or endangered ,plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Toes tlre prc,jec;t have tilt potertial to achieve short-tex'm benefit;; to the detriment of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact en the environment is one which occurs in a relati,iely brief period of timewhiG, will endure into Lite futrirele long-term impact , ) 4 U00s the project: have impacts whichare individu- allY limited, but crrmulativclyr considerable? iA project may impact on two or Mori separate resources where the impact on each resoaarcc, is relatively small , but where the effect of °the total of those .impacts On till environment as significant.) d. foes 'the project have: environmentalY ('ec:t, whi will Cause substantial adverse e fe,-,'% on humanch beings, either dire�;t�ly or indireGt•i�•'r 11I. i)T 1ijRDiTNATT(1N (`1'0 be c`Ompir•ted, by the lead Agencv) Oil the basrw (if this initial evaluation: IIIVI, find the pa•caposecl project CatJUi.l) NOT have,a si on 'the cnvironmclnt, and a NIPGATTVl DT?CLARATION wil. bewrprepared, DIVE find that although 010 laropose1 project could have n. si niri cant effect on the environment,_ there will. trot be a sil;na�C�.i�»�nfi affect in this case becausez tine HTTTGA110N MEA:S'URl" a described on the attached shaet lravca been, crcid'od to tl;e project. V1 NFc;A7TVt? D .f:l_ARATION t4i l Tb ,bepropal-e(l. IAIVR find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect ern tine environment, rand an ENVTRoNNI.INTAL TNIPACT RTIPCR`f is required. DAI'h: October 26, 1.984 lNTY�Ojz BUT ITV, l'LAININiNC, DFI)AR"i'IcIEW flyrp ` a I2. tea r rr.r T�avx' nmus Associate Planner Reviewed by: ENVIRONMENTAL ', ACTS _+ IV. TE-x—p-1—anations of all -"'Yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheet(s)) YES MAYBE No 14 BARTH. 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 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 whic.- may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or late? 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? k°17 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: 77 Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air duality?! b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? , 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial a. Changes in currents, or 'the course or 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? 1C.1 c. Need for off-si-te surface drainage improve- ments, including vegetation removal, channel- ization or culvert installation? K•� d,. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? e. Change in the amount of surface [water in any water body? f; Discharge into sur face waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved, ozygen or turbidity? g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ,ground waters? h. Change in the quantity of ground waters-, either through direct additions of 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 grater `--- related hazards such as flooding? .2- YES, MAYBE NO 4. PLANT LIFE, Will theresu ro osal �t in P P substantial! a, Change in the diversity of specles, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of an), 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?Ne d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? -� �.�. S. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substanti til. ; a. Change in tYc diversity of species, Or numbers Of any species of animals (birds, land aninial,s 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 i;it an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? a. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? w;r G. NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial: a:. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ?, LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce signifiFant light and glare? 3. LAND USE. iVill the proposal result in a substantial alteralt;i,on of the present or planned land use of an areae .--- <^ 9. NATURAL_RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in su siantial: a, Increase in the rate of use of any natu•ra1 resources? b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural u resources? , 10, RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve, a.. A risk of explosion or the release of hazard- ous substances(includingbut not limited - mited ta, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b, possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location, zg �ribut an, densit y; or growth rate of the human population? J L. 1HOUSING, Will the pq�aposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additaoval housing? d q� 13. TR NSppRTATIONICrRCULAT ON. YES r1AY�37� N -.... Will the proposal result xn s a. Generation of substantial additional vehicic movement? b. Effects on parking facilities, Q ties, o - demand for -- -- new parking? c. Substantial impact on eXisting transportation systems? l --- _ d. Significant alterations to present patterns Of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Tncxea,7e in traffic hazards to motor vchiclo;; , bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an ef,�oct F'Pon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental Services: a, Fire protection? b. Police protection;? C. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities including roads? , f. Other governntentai, services? 15. ENERGY, Will the proposal result in: a, Use of substantial a mounts . b, of fuel or energy?' Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16, UTILITIES. Will the propsal result in a need for new systems, or 'substantial alterations following: to the a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Waters d Sewer or septic tank? e. Storm water drainage, ---r —r f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result ins a • Cr6—at—ion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health) b, Exposure of people t —�- hazards??o Potential health ' - �.8, AESTHETICS.Will the proposal, result in the o s� t��,o`n OIL- 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? :, 4 . YES MAYBE NO 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational, opportunities' 2U. CULTURAL RESOURCES. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destru,tiQr, 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?' c. Does 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 V DISCUSSION OF '`NVTRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 42-34-48 See attachment PX9999SrQN_0F_ENVIR9NM9�NTAL --- -- ----- -- ----- EVALUATION M AP 42-34-48 1b: Compaction and overcovering of the soil will Occur with the development of homesites an the two new ion should Parcel's to be creatd. overcovering and compact This ould not be significant givenethe site of the Parcels but could be extensive depending on tho amount o -F development undertaken on the parcels. 100 While erosion Potential in the area is Blighty e)ltensive overcovering a -le the soil (see item 1b) could lead to erosion concerns. 1h-0 All Of Butte County is within a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. The subject property is located approximately 6 miles southwest of the Tuscan MoMocline, a fault system of unknown activity. Several historic epicenters are located +ram I to 6 miles to the north of intensities of as high as 5.0 an the Richter scale. Construction of buildings to Universal Building code standards for seismically active areas should' provide adequate protection to residents in case Of seismic activity. 3b: Absorption r-ates may change depending on the amount of overcovering but the proximity Of the SUDAD ditch to the east would render any change in absorption rates insignificant. 3c: Any storm drainage systems required will access the SUDAD ditch to the east. This symtem is adequate to handle any projected runoffs from this project. 34; See item 3c4 3h: Water supplies proposed to be by well. This is an area of high groundwater withdrawal, and this project will incrementally decrease the amount of water available in the local aquifers. or 4dchard: The existing Parcel is approx'imately 3 acres of English walnut and a single family dwelling. Creation of two additional parcels amountwill decrease the amount of orchard land available. While the approximately two acres of orchard is probably not economically viable, this project, if approved would effectively,remove any Potential for economic activities -From the orchard. allO8: The planned iise for the area 'is agricultural -residential which .wt minimum lot sizes, of I acre. The existing SR -1 Zone conforms to the General Flan. While this Variance would not result in a parcel significantly smaller than i acre, it would be the only such parcel within approximately 1/4 mile. 1,0 ADT per parcel will generate an additional 20 ADT total, in itselr+,4 small number. Combined with surroun existing lots., this traffk*Iding development and c will add to the increasing congestion (30 C"stickj Lassen and Vast Avenues. 8urrouhdingdevelopments (i.e. Rosewood Subdivision) have contributed a traffic signal fund at cussick and, East Avenuesshare towards a, Appendix r - page 6 AP 42 34-48 14: `('hough not siynificantr this project will represent an incremental increase in demand for public services, 14cr The Chico Unified School District has entered � ;,, with thea lscant and has stated that this d awil an a have a project will A not have :a significant effect an the district's ability to provide sorvices. 17: The project site is located near an area where high nitrate levels have been discovered in wells. aepta. c systems have; been :4ditifie.tl :as a cOhtritWtcr to these high nitrate levels, &nd, additional septic systems may increase this levels. Xt is ret ;QmMended that the project be made sOb sect to any requirements of the Chico Area Nitrate Study should it be adopted. Residents on this property may be exposed,to chemicals used in nearby agricultural activities. 20ati The Butte County Archaeological Resources malt indicates the site has a high sensitivity. An archaeoloq.,Lcal survey should be performed. 11 MANDATORY E'iNDIUGS_OF_STSNXFTCANCE a. See item 200 C. Accumulative impacts are those checked by a "Yes" or a "Maybe" in the initial study checklist, particularly: 1) traffic impacts to the intersection of Cussick and East Avenues 2) increased residential, development in a suburban area. Appendix F - page 7 Ask Ah 42 ,,4..4,8 SUC�GE�`fED_M Z T � GRT I CIt�I_M�A�IJR�S 1. pay a prorated sham for the traffic signal at :he intersect bn of East and Cussick Avenues. Per+o,rm an archaeological survey prior to the creation of the parcels, and Adhere to the recommendations of the archaeologist if any significant cultural resources are discovered. Applicant: Carl Rattschal is Assessor's Parcel # 42-34-48 Log # (34-09-21-02 DATA SHEET A« Prr,��c,��,MDescrie�on 1. Type of Project Variance (and eventual Tentative Parcel. Map) 2 Brief Description: To create a parcel Of 0.92 acres of a frontage of 98 feet in an SFC --1 zone tthree' parcels total). 3. Location: On the east side of Bay Avenue, appr-ox i matel y :3400 feet north of Shasta Avenue* Chico area, 4. Proposed Density of Development: One dwelling unit per acre S. Amount of Impervious Surfacing; Minimal 6. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): BAY Avenue frontage for one parcel, unnamed private road for access to two parcels including the parcel for the Variance. 7. Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual septic systems S. Source of Water Supply: Individual wells 9. Proximity of Power Lines: To existing parcel 10, Potential for further land divisions and development: None under existing zoning. B. Envxrc amen al 5ettinq Phyai cai _Envy: ronmente 1. Terrain A* General, Topographic Character: Flat valley land b. Stapes: 0-2"l. to Elevation: 165 feet ASL d: Limiting factors: None 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics. Farwell clay adobe 2--:3 feet, underlain by clay loam 14 to 36 inches thio, well suited for some irrigated crops, b. Limiting Factors: Poor drainage, not st!ited to some fruit. crops 3; Natur=al Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone 'VIII b. Erosion Potential Slight to Landslide Potential: None d. Fire Hazard: llnclassi.fied e• Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate Append X Fa AP 42 4. Hydrology ao surface Wateru None on-site b. Ground Water: Abundant valley aquifers. Area of eNten_4ive groundwater withdrawal. c. Drainage Characteristics: Property adjoins the Sacramento Union Drainage Assessment District ditch to the east. do Annual Rainfall (normal): 22-24 inches per year e. Limiting �_=actors'- Poor drainage characteristics 5. visual/Scenic, Quality: Good 6. Acoustic QuaiitY: Good 7. Air Quality. Good -- -I lei 9lggica1_g0yo irnMent* a. vegetation: English walnut orchard 9. Wildlife Habitat; Small birds and animals common to orchard lands Cultural Env_ronmen 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area; Butte County maps indicate high archaeological sensitivity area 11. Butte County General Plan designation; AgriCUltural-Residential M EXisting Zoning: SR -1 13. Existing Land Use on-site: English walnut orchard 14. Surrounding Area: residential area, a. Land Uses'. North and south •- developed east and west - agricultural uses b. Zoning: A-5.0 SR -1 and SR co Sen. Plan designations: Agricultural -Residential to the north and south, Low Density Residential to the east, Orchard and Field Crops to the west. Urban side of Chico Area Oreenline. do Parcel Sizes: I to 50+ acres e. population: Suburban residential densities rapidly in -filling 15. Character of Site and Area: Chico urban +ringe and agricultural land 16. Nearest Urban Area: City of Chico 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: City of Chico 18. Improvements Standards Urban Area= No 19. Fire Protection Service; a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station: Station 4 2 and 41 bo Water Availabilitya. Tanker truck% only 20, Schools in Area: Chico Unified School District Appendix V (b) AP 42-01-62 AP 42-•34-61 Robert 6 Jeanine ]-Till 3ti00 Bay Ave.. Rtcl Box .409Marx Chico r' G 95926 ' AE 4201-63 AP 42 -34 -6,2 - Dennis Ei . Carver 66 66 LemonWaad ti�la Y Lindy & Loretta. Rob - 5 $ui�un "Ci CA 945.8.5, I Casa Del. Re . Chic Y 9 CA' .95 920. AP 42-01 -77 - W . - AP 42-34-63 James E. Bremner 555 Val7omUxaa {72 „ Robert & Pamela Jackson 3544 3544 Bay Chicq, CA 9,,2 �> venue Chi ,CAS. -95.926 AP 42-34-08 AP 44-03-146 Phil p 8 Grayce Morgans 3407 Bay Avenue Glenn Kendall Jr. etal ? Cri3cp'; ,CA, 'g5 26, . Rt; l Box 409 I _ Chicg ,. ;CA. 9-59.26• AP 42-34-39 AP 44-03-147 Paul & Angie Cava.ssa 3402 Bay Avenue Cecelia &Glenn Kendall Cha-cq,- CA 959.26 - 1115 BI Monne Drive Thqusand-!�µ9l5fiq, Qa]��r CA .+ AP 42-34.47 - AP 4.4-•04-16 Glenn & Susan Kendall Rt. 1 Iibx 409'K Thomas Schram Enloe etal 3651 Chico ;, • CA -.9592.6 . _ - Golden Leaf Drive 10stlaXe Village CA.9,11-736.1, 1Y � 1 j .t� 9 ` `1 r kr�f "r �r: ,,, ., t� Y. f �•. ,, 4' `.� �'. � �. t, � i,.r' �' � 'V ry t .�Z � i b } t `t � Y ! • f �, T r , � � 5 ' , ar � f// Y i,� n ..° � 'l J t � }r �� �h4�, ` e ,� r� �y�.r�k-• r r K s .yr rl� f A�.r � *•, !o� J�+� a,� '� t 1 �..y� �.y� ;*"� ,(t a �y r , r � � -r � .- , „�."�+�. r b�^"' v. S � d � 1 ) ''.' '�y. , r r r " � t "+ +; �` e ,,'� r { 41+-- } I V � . �� r r �� � y `�1 � �*+ ° � K� s t �r � ✓� ..,_a,. i s ' r. �� r .�+} � h 1y �..� �� rr �~�'�w'�"f "`��rwr.�y�y�,,�,ari � r�+. ;'Is.w3� '.�.r'''%� z�r "�,n"""" �.,::,I:� �, ���r, 'p'�' '` � � � 't,'� t �. ro �� �a r � t F �p � � y.y� - APPLICATION F R V A ' A outto Co. planning com►rt. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONscp , 84 APPLICANT' Read and fort Oroville, GalttaryiQ ow instruotintts as sot forth an reverse side of this form, Applicant's Name Card. Ro'ttschalk Phone No. --U6-89 Applleant`s Mniling Address - 2 -Applicant's Interest in property (Owner, lessee, other)-- Owner Owner's Name And' Addross same Contact. Pontoon tar Proleot (if other than applicant)- MVA Ptt tyvak r to h raw^- g4 near ng Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 49-34-48 Present ZoningL- Location and size of parcel(s) East side of Fay Ave Not -til of Sh tatLL_AXeja,, Street address - Directions for travel to property (rural and mountainous areas only) J J 'f ype ofvariance requested: LL X_ Lot area or building site Mobile home size Lot width Parking requirements Front yard setback Livestock requirements _. Side or rear yard setback — Sign requirements F= Other (specify) MCC Description of, proposed use and reasons for variance because of special circumstances (refer to instruction No: 6 on reverse side) To divide prope:ty into,3 parcels. One with, existing residence to be rot -m! ned by Aonlicant . the other two to be deeded. to children Description of existing land use ._Agricultural Resident; -l. 1-40 acre per Existing,/'proposed sewage ofsposal method: Leach f:i gilds Proximity of power and pllone lines `E3aY Avenue Water source: Individual, wells Proximity of water for fire fighting purposes (hydrants, ponds, etc,) Tanker Will excavation or graVing be necessary? Cubic yards (estimate) NO List and describe any other related permits and other ubli^ approvals reghired for this pfoleoI. Including those required by elty; regional, State and Fedgral agenciesa Parcel Iv G p to Pilaw t nee parse split am Amb �+ The following questions pertainbhlyf to variances to the minimum parcel size required withln the zoning district: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES* Identify potentially sighificant environmental impacts associated with the variance. What project design fontures or special conditlotts of approval (mitigation measures) are proposed to alleviate potential environmental Impacts? Schc)ol. Mitigation. Will. provide School. Mitigation Agreement, ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING* a Describe the project cite as it exists before the project, including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the afta, -nd th use of the structures. Existing sits: is a level. walnut orchard with an existtl7� re�s� ence Rat Ls- the applicant residc-s in., Describe the surrounding properties, Including information on plants and animals and any cuitural,.histol,foal or scenic aspects, Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (singla-family, apartments, shops; depart- ment stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). ~ �Use Separate sheet for longer responses. Surrounding property varies in sizes from less than et l acre to SO acres. Properties are residential, single families, Proposal, is v to devel.ope two single family residential lots for applicant's children. ..1 6. I hereby deelate under penalty of Perjury that 1 have read and understand the 'aC y p Y p l Y In irr*etlons and that the fore g statements are true, complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and befief, r Date 'riG'i T 1.� P— Applicant's signature Late ?D 'S �tp"'I i ��`.°f ` Property owner's signal Variance number — Request; Variance to Location and size of parcel(s): located on the VERl1=Y:, ..: A.P., Number(s) honing and Requirements: 0w' nershlp Location Description Proof of Agency (if needed) t-"" 16 copies of Plot Plan U.l an Date Received 1547'i�/ _lc— Application Taken B'y,,�' Receipt R ec Number Z lJl.! U. U. O Adminletradve Ofto 1163 EAST SEVENM STUET CHICO, CALIFORNIA 95426 May 15, 1985 Ardo Code (916) 891»3000 County of Butte Department of Public Works 7 County Center Drive Orovi.11e, CA 95965 Attn: John Mendonsa SUBJECT; Carl Rottschalk 'Variance Application Assessor's Parcel No. 42-34-48 Dear Mr. Mendonsas As the result of the Developer having entered into an agreement with the Chico Unified School District to meat certain specified conditions relative to the subject project, the District is now satisfied that this project will not have an adverse impact upon schools in the District. ConseqUentlye it is no longer necessary for the Count,Y to consider school mitigation measures relative to this project, However, we wish to notify you that one of the conditions agreed to by the Developer is to place a notation an the final map stating that issuance of residential building permits or mobile home installation or hookup permits for residential dwelling units is subject to the payment of school fees pursuant to Butte County Ordinance No 2463 and Resolution No. 85-40. Very truly yours, C Robin G. Thompson Business Manager/'Comptroller. RGT/kb CC: Neil H. McCabe Li utte County Planning Department North Star Engineering CIV[I]C- DMINIS'I']C�.ATI�' E C UN ry - Bu'1~rc CIS 0 Ur)E`a 25 COUNTY CENTER r)R, / OROVILLE, :CALIFORNIA 95965.33801 91s t 0 1 X34.40 41 0 c 0 0 ~bUt!y MEMBERS OF Tilt 50ARD MARTIN JrNIC14OLS HASKEL A. MuINTURF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER JANP. DOLAN HILDA W148ELER ED MoLAUCHLIN February 13,_1985 LEN FULTON Carl RottschalIc 2700 Esplanade Chico) Ca. 95926 Re: Variance AP 42-34--4$ Dear Mr.. Rottschalk At the regular meeting of the Butte County Board of Supervisors held February 12, 1985, your appeal of the Planning Commission's denial for a Variance to•lot area to allow a 0. 92 acre Parcel zone and Variance to lot width to allow 98 ft. frontage iinaPlacerof 130 ft. frontage on property zoned SR--I located on the east side of Bay Avenue, 3400 ft. north of Shasta Avenue, identified as AP 42-34 --48, Chico, was denied. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. MEER Since .,ly, MARTIN J. NCHOL$ Chief Administrative Officer MJnl:l.r cc: NorthStar Engineering ' 377 Connors Ct., Suith B Chico, Ca. 95920 January 14, 1983 0. 1.6 B4�t to Caurity Board of Supervisors 79, ��� 1985 25 County CenterDrive 5 Orov.11e, CA 95965-3397�� �f°' �Critph0_ F$UPeNV/g0R5 Attention: Clerk of ''he Board Re: Variance A.P, 42-34--4$ On behalf of our clients, we hereby request an appeal to C'ommission's denial of a variance to lot area tD allow a the Planning parcel in a 1 -acre zone and variance to lot 0=91 acre frontage in place of x.30 foot width to allow e 9E foot: rontaon the east side of Bay Avenuef northeofnPShastarAvenue, Chico. P y zoned SR -1, located If any additional information is needed Please co. contact this office. Very truly yours, NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING Myles ^t o sky(' y MLP:d cc: Car] Rottschalk 377 Connors Court, Suite Chico, CA 95926 (91:6) 893-1600 Inter -Departmental Memorandum., r.00 Board, of Supervisors FROM Planning SUBJECT' Carl Rottschalk - appeal of Denied Variance - AP 42-34-48 - Suggested Motion bnrE' February S, 1985 If the Board can not find that 'there is a hardship due, to size, shape, topography, Location or surroundings, and that the property has not been deprived of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications, then it would be proper to; A. Note that the requirements of CEQ& have been completed and considered in making this decision; and B, Find that there are not special circumstances applicable to the property including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which the strict application of Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications; and C. Deny the Variance to allow the creation of a ,91 acre parcel as shown on the site plan for AP 42-34--48 (Carl Rottschalk). If the Board can find that there is a hardship due to size, shape, topography, , location or ;surroundings, and that the property has been deprived of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifi- cations) then it would be proper to; A. Find that the requirements of CEQA have been completed and considered in making this decision; and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and B. Find that the project could have a significant effect on the environment, but will not in this case because of the adopted mitigation measures attached; and C. Find that there are special circumstances applicable to the property in- cluding size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, and that the strict application of this Chapter deprives such property of privileges enaoyed by dicatione andperty in the vicinity and under identicial zoning D, Grant a Variance to allow the creation of a ,91 acre parcelas 'shown on the site plan .for AD 42-34-48 (Carl Rottschalk) subject to the following Mitigation Measur:�. and conditions Mitigation Measures: - 1. Pay a prorated share of a traffic signal at the intersection of East and Cusick Avenues. 2. ,Perform an archaeological, survey and follow recommendations therein.. f to, Board of SupOrvisors FROM., Planning sueJscfi: Carl, Rottschalk - appeal of Denied. Variance AP 42-34-48 Suggested Mot tot OAre; February 5, 1965 If the Board can not find that there is a hardship due to slze, sha 'e topography?, location or surroundings, and that thewroPY p deprived of privileges enjoyed by other property in�the ,yv 0'-' nitynand,ueen nder identical zoning classifications, then it would be propel: Lot A. Note that the requirements of CEQA have been Completed and considered in making this decision; and Find that there are not special circumstances applicable to the Property B. including size, shape, topography, Location or surroundings P ;Petty strict application of Chapter ?� g� wh�.ch she P E of the Butte County Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vic3n:ity and under identical zoDing classifications; and C. Deny the Variance to allow the creation of a .91 acre parcel as shown on the site plan for A.P 42-34-48 (Carl. Rottschalk)'. If the ,Board can find that there is a hardship due to size, shape, toPg ��Phy'o r Location or surroundings, and that the property has been deprived of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classi,f= cations, then it would be, proper to: A. Find that the requirements of CE QA have making this decision; and adopt a Mitiga,tednNegative eDecla considered in oration; and B. Find that the project could have a'significant effect an the but will not in this Casa because of the ;adapted effect on th measures environment., attached; and C. Find C,*iat there are special, circumstances applicable to theproperty eluding size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, and thakthe strict application of this Chapter deprives such enjoyed by other property in classifications, and the vicinity and under �ident_icial.rzoninges. ry- Grant a Variance to allow the creation of a .91 acre as shown on, the site Plan for AP 42-34-48 (Carl, ROttschalk) subject �tolthe fo ,'litigation Measures and conditions: llttwin g Mitigation Measures. L� Pay a Prorated share of a traffic signal at the intersection at. and Cusick Avenues. Last 2. Perform act archaeological survey and follow recommendations t herein. IE M11-4STRATI WV I 'V -E a a'UT7,r.� 25 COUNTY L.L E�,, C>UNTY CIENTE DFI, OROVI 0 3 ... a AL.fF'OF7NIq oSflc5a3a3a / (a1F,) . rt.. e a a D4) rhil� c MEMB8R$ 01, THE ROARD MARTIN J NICHOLS HAsKEL. A. McINTURF GHILLFADMINIu1HATIVE OFMCLFI JANE DOLAN H10A 089L.ER ED Mc1.AUCHL IN LEN FUL.TON JanuPry 30, 1985 Care.. Rottschalk 2700 Esplanade Chico, Ca. 95926, fie: Variance, AP 42-34-48 Dear Mr. Rottschalk At the regular Mating of the Butte County Board of Supervisors held' January 29, 198`5` a public hearing date was set ,for. Pet�xuary 12, 1985 at 10:00 a.m. to consider your appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a Variance to lot area to allow o 0.91 acre Parcel ac a 1 acre zone and 'Variance to lot width to allow 98 ft. frontage in place of 130 ft. frontage on property coned SR -1 located an the east side Jt Bay Avenue 3400 feet north of Shasta Avenue, Chico. The meeting will be held in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Admjnis- tration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Orovi lle California. Shouldy q , you have an questions regarding this matter, pl.eAse contact the Planning Department at 534-4601. Sincerely, MARTIN J. NICHOLS Chief Administrative Otticez, MJN:1r CC! NorthSts r Engineering 377 Condors Court, Sttite B Chaco, Ca. 95926 tieLAND '�- O. F tW A' URAL !, tt l 'k Ff A P,i P PLANNINGCOr�MI�r�ICN COUNTY CENTER OkIVF - OROVIU ki CALIFORNIA 93765.3,jyj Carl Rottschalk PHONE- 1,534,4601 2700 Esplanade Janua Chico, Ca. 95926 rJ' ll, 15 RCz Variance, AP 4234-48 Dear Mr. Rottschalkc At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning, January 10, 1985, your request for a. Van Commass3an head 0.91 acre parcel in a � ac're zone and varancetColl,c area: to 9S ft. frontage allow a: located on the yean place a of Bao ft. t width to SP,_l frontage on property :1>>enu2, Chico y Avenue y zoned SR—�, was denied. 3400 feet north of Shasta you Should ydesire to a , S the youCles ppeal this decision Che Board of Supervisors you must do so, in writing, Oroville, prior to 5:00 p.m, P 25 County raday, January 18, 19 ;5', Centex Drive, ; Should you have any question regarding this matt this Office, e r,lease P contact Sincerely, c ., .',Ki cher Director Of Planning BAK : l r North5tar Engineering Civil Engineers - Planners • Surveyors November 1, 1984 County of Butte Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965--3397 Attention: Dave R Hironimus Re: Rottschalk Variance, AP 42-344-48, Log #84-09-21-02 Dear Dave; In your letter of October 26, 1984, you indicate adverse impacts to the environment, in particular, items 13 and 20a. First, we would like to make a comment to item 8 of your discussion, you state that our parcel of less than. 1 acre would be the only such parcel witLin approximately 1/4 mile 7f you will check the parcel map recorded May 1:6, 1974 in Book 49 at page 90, which lies just north of our parcels, they are 0.88 acre, 0.91 acre and two 0.96 acre. The concern about increased traffic is a fact that we would expect to occur when you develop two additional lots. If the Butte County Public Works conditions our tentative parcel map, after we secure the variance, to pay a pro --rated share of a traffic signal at the intersection of East and Cussick Avenue, we would be acceptable to this. There should be no increase to existing transportation systems, because there is none in this area at this time. The comment to the alteration of or the destruction to a prehistoric archaeological site probably would not occur, for the site is an existing walnut orchard that has been cultivated for a number of years. We can mitigate this concern by a note on the final map, or acquire an archaeo- logieal survey upon submittal of n tentative parcel map, if we can be of any further ass:i,suince to this matter, please contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours,, Ou#© Co. Planning Comm: N012THS`.C'AR ENG> NI;ERxNG PC)�/ 1 1984 oroville, California Myles � y FtLp;d _ M 'Les. I:. �ust~e vs .�� ac: Carl. Rottschallc 377 Connors Court, Suite 8 Chico, Cts 95926 (916) 603-1600 " 1" GLENN AND SUSAN KEND AL'L Roat�..>,.6ox-4os•tc .,� ,�� r 1`j� /'� /y CHICO, CALIFORNIA 041026 z/lam "'" ✓t 't1 ///M�.��{y r w �J CL b i - f C`~� '6 ;'t c.�-c .gT`� i �` s 1✓ } s +' T .l .4 \d'tc Il ° ��C'�.r��. ���.L. L .,".l.<^�L.il. '�C � �h.io.,r"�Y4�"1f.1..E'*_.�• 5 • 'x •L ' •ltC 1 +; �y, 4GGT6 Lt s -4 a i •' j,+,��4 Y�,. ,�"• C4 t `^%r '�„ G, a4 \ ?�Y�, � �'4Rr ''i.4t"'. IFr �-.�' ( ^M+ a - h 1 ��1'`r�. 5. �;-*'�r1.. `4��4:.;,1/ � h•��'1.t-+,L-'c-y,.�..-.. � 1� � �4 r �"�\ I_"�..,�'+e 13ufe Co. Fannin 9 CO�vr JAN8,198�.` orovllle "fQr4w.. Mora -7:�"` � Carl Rottschalk 2700 Esplanade Chico, Ca: 95926 Re: Variance, AP 42--3.4-48 Dear Mr. Ro tschalk 6r -A UfY r. s..vuI- i —iy..i QI, —r:c .- urtw.Y'wL-Cr F-k%.ICVI{MIA w)YO•'3,ig7 PHON8I 534.4604 January 3, 1935 Enclosed is a copy of the Staff Findings concerning your application .dor I a Variance to lot area to allow a 0.91 ac. parcel in a 1 ace zone and I Variance to lot width to allow 93 ft. frontage in place of 130 fr. front- age on property zoned SR --1 (Suburban Residential: - 1 acre parcels) located on the east side of 'Day Avenue 3400 feet north of Shasta Avenue, Chico. A public hearing has been .et for January 100 1985 at 3:30 pm. The m+:et ing will be helot in the Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Orovil.le, California. Should. you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. Sincerely, I' D. A. Kircher Director of Planning David R. Hironimus Associate Planner DRH:Ir Enc, cc: NarthStar Engineering 377 Connors Ct., Suite B Chico, Ga: 95926 CARL L iROTTSCOALK Landscape Archit:e t I October 1984 84"0 Co, Planning Comae. OCT 2 1984 Orale, Cali'tomia Mr. Rick Rodriguez Butte County Planning Commission 7 County Center bri ve IJroville, California 95965 Re: �.U.S.D. Letter Dated 27 September 1984/Lot Varience Request Parcel AP No. 42-34-48 gut Dear Mr. Rodriquez; 1'hls Letter is ire response to the Business Mang er/Comptroller, datede27eSepter Of mberr. R1984obin G those concerned as to the intent o Thompson, C,U.S,D.- f the requested 1984, as well to inform The sole purpose of :our desire t10 split a 2.92 acre parcel into three lots is to assist our two children by providing a building site for each of them while still maintaining our own residence site. Our children and their familie, currently do already reside school attendance area as is our parcel. Consequently, thenumbe n the same P,'o,iections in Mr. Thompson's Letter are not, in this instance, accurate, Although sensitive to the plight of the Chico Unified Schoold District, I find it difficult to understand flow the C.U.S.4* can have the authority to attempt to regulate the future growth of j�hico - and, more in particular. to predetermine if x may, or may not, provide assistance in 'the described above, to my owl, children, manner Thank you fur, your attention and interest in this, matter. Very truly yours, 400000000 Timmm""Al ark A Carl Ruttschalk Landscape Architect CR: vg cc Robin (i, Thompson t-`700 E5planooe i105it offirp>~ ox f 34o �h11C:C1. �c'3Gf C�f'tlls� �ca�i;y 01'ephone gia Iggs-f 073 a��v"k JJ ����� tij- BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMI-TISSION NOTUT, -OFPUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that public hearings will be held on Thursday, January 10, 1985 in the Butte Count Board. of Supervisors' Room, Administration 25 County Center I)TIVO, Oroville, California, regarding the following items at the following, ttilles: 7:30 P.m. 9:00 P.m. CAT BE ROMIENTAL REMBEW Bernard Patch - Use Permit to allow a mobile home as a tempor- ary second dwelling on Property zoned. A-5 located on tho west side of Turner Lane, approx* 1600 feet south of Burdick Road I in the Durham area, identified as A13 39-24-24, Durham. Donald M.anglis - Variance 'to minimum lot width to allow I parcel with 72 Foot frontage and I parcel with 92 foot frontage Where 130 -it is required on pxoperty zoned SR -1 (Suburban Resident- ial I acre parcels) located on the west side of EI Monte, 1100 feet South of East 8th Street, identified as AP 46-26-168, Chico, RE TCH .k^R ATI ON 8:30 p.m. Carl Rottschalk - Variance to lot area -to allow a 0,92 acre parcel in a I acre zone and Variance, to lot width to allow 98 ft. frontage in place of 130 ft. frontage on property zoned SR -1 (Suburban Residential - I acre parcels) located on the east side of Bay Avenue, 3400 feet -north of Shasta Avenue, identified as AP 42-34-48, Chico. 8-45 p.m. R. Miles Allen - General Plan Amendment f-rom Orcha-rcl and Field Crops to Ag-riculL-ural-Rosi.dentiaI on 5 acres on property zoned A-5 (Ag-ricultural - 5 acre parcels) located on the east side of McAnarlin Avenue, 1/2 mile South of Roble Road, identified as AP 39-23-110, Durham. The above mentioned applications, maps, and �xegative declarations regard- ing environmental impact arc on -F-J*.le and available for public viewing at the office of the Butte County Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSTON� B. A. KIRCHER MR11,CTOR OF PLANNING TO BE PUBLISIMM IN THE CHTCO TINTERPRTSE RECORD ON TIIUR.%DAY, DECEMBER 27) 1984,. VW 7 WAke a LAND 0 NATURAL WeALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING COMMISSION y October 26, 1984 7 COUNTY CE AJTr R DRIVE OROYILLE:a C ALIFORNIA 95865.3397 PfION E: 53,4-46()l Carl Rottschalh 2700 Esplanade Chico, CA 95925 a'rrVariance AP 42--34--48 Log #' 84-09--21-02 Door Mr. Rottschalk: An initial study of your proposed project, ,a Variance, to create a parcel or 0.92 acres, indicates potentially adverse impacts to the environment (`refer to Appendix F, items 13 and 20a). To reduce or eliminate these impacts, suitable mitigation measures are required as part of the project. Otherwise, an environmental impact report (.Ex,R) is required pursuant to the California Environmental. Quality Act. An early response to this notification, sent to the Planning Department, will expedite the scheduling of your project. Please forward your written response within 15 days --rcxn the date of this letter. we are enclosing a list of local consultants for your information. If you have any questions or comments, please contact this office. sincerely, B.A. KIRCHER Director of Planning David Ri Hironimue Associate Planner. DISI : lk t Enc. cc-' • NorthStar Eng' LIST OF LOCAL Calrl,TAN'l l OR 'E.1 -R- PREPARAT't,ON Eco-Anal3�st5 114 1Ves.t 7th Avenue Chico, CA 342-59916 (�16) Earl D. Nelson F, Assoc. 500 bVal I • Street Chico , C.A. 95926, (916) 8.93-0491 Cook Aszociate-s 2060 Park Avenue CA 95965. Orovi13-6457 (916) 53 Geddis , Driscoll 4 A%soc. 220 Grand Avenue OroviIle . 00685965 (91.6) .Ion A',. Anderson, P -L, 968 AI.yrtl Avcnur. Chico, CA 9592.6 (916) 343-7396 North5tar Engineering 377 Connors tOux't a Su:i, Ge E Chico, CA 95926, (916) 895-1600 Riegel Assdciats, 331 Wall S -tree' Chico-, CA 95926 p-16), 343•-5.841 Ba-rTthart, Brown & Assop.O.Box 1576 1881 Robinson Street Oro -Ville,, CA 9",965 (91.6) 534-1911 OTHER CONSULTANTS Bi p. Enterprise:?, Specialist Archaeo inica.. Sp Dr. Kingsley Stern (Botanical Survey) Chino State University J i m Manning , p. 0. Box 1865 95927 Chico, CA 95929 (91:6) 895-5331 (,5356) Chico, CA (916) 893-9656 (916) 343.:5358' Peter ;Jensen 'Research Archaeoxogist. Jim jo'Rerst y, (Rntanital Survey). 'Boy- '3 Chico State Uxzversity Rt, 1., Oroville, CA 95965 Chico, CA 95929 895.68111 3459515,895-45Q0 (OFE.) (, �-9n29 916) _53 (916) Archaeological. Services JeffrQy Prouty potanlcal, survey) professional, 241. Old Oregon Trail CraIiEo�rnia Native Plan Redding, CA 96003Society (916) Chico "542-0273, P"wrad-ise 872-3184, Chico State Unwver ity Redding 246-07.61 Chico, CA 95929 (91.6) 301 633 Jim Snow len, Biologist Dept. o f P i sh 'Lnd G,tM0 RoUto Box 551 CFlice, C11 959�6 NL6,) i43-250�1 APPENDIX H NOTICE OF DETERMINATION ro: Secretary for Resources 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 County Clerk, County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 FROM: Planning Department 11 County Center Drive (Filed) Oroville, CA 95965 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance wi . th Section 21108 or 21152 of the Publicjesources Code 0 A A Project Title Variance AP 42-34-48 Carl Rottschalk State Clearinghouse Number (If submitted to State Clearinghouse) Contact Person Telephone Number K B.A.ircher, Director of Plannin)z (,l 6 534-4601 Project Location On the east side of Bay Avenuey _rapp�roximately 3400 feet north of Shasta Avenue. Chico Area.- Project Description Variance to create a parce",of 0.92 -A acres of a frontage of 98 feet in an SR -1 zone. 111,1b 15 LU UCIVI.5e 'cTlaz the Butte County PlanninR Commission (Lead Agency) has made the following determinations regarding the above-described project: 1. The project ❑ Will have a significant effect on the environment. will not 2. An Environmental Impact Report Was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, and was certified as required by Section 15085(g), 1.4 California Administrative Code. A Negant to the was Declaration as prepared for this project provisions of CtQA. A copy of the pursu Negative Declarationmay be examined at the Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 9596S. 3. A Notice of Exemption was filed indicating this project is exempt from environmental review. 4. A statement of Overriding Consideration was ,$ E:1 was 'not, adopted for this project. Mitigation measures adopted by the Lead Agency to reduce the impacts of the approved project are: signatUre Date Title Ask APPEIvu'�'a� 1, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the project described below has be reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California; Enviro azt (duality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code 21100, et. nmert,t,i determination has been made that it Will not hq`� asend a effect upon the environment. ave a Significant 1 Lag # 84-09-21-02 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: AP 42-34-48 Variance (and. eventual Tentative Parcel Map) to create a parcel of 0.92, acres of a frontage of 98 feet in an SR -1 . 5. LOCATION OF PROJECT: ..one On 'the east side of Bay Avenue, a pproXi of Shasta Avenue, Chico area. matey 3q'Qp deet ita+tli 4. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT APPLICANT Carl Rotts,::halk 2700 Esplanade NorthStar Eng: Chico, CA 95926 377 Connors Court, Suite B 5. MITIGATION MEASURES Chico, CA 95926 6. A copy of the initial study regarding the environmental, effect of this project is on file at 7 County Center Drive This study was: y broville. Ei Adopted as presented. Adopted with changes. specific modifications supporting reasons are attached. and I , APublic hearing on :his Ni k ng body, gative Declaration was held by the decisioHearing Body Butte County Planning Commission Date of Determination Determination; On .the Basis of the xniti.al stud information presented at y of environmental impart, the Proposal and our atvri knawledgenanc independententreceive. on the r�o We find the research::. on proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect adopted. the environment, and NEGATIVE DECLARATION We find that the project COULD have a�significan on the environment but will not in this ease because of 0 attached m'itigat' measures of i . t effect em 5 above which are by this reference made Conditionstof Project approval.. A condztlonal NEGATTV'E DECLARATION is hereby adopted. 51.�na•tui•e Date Adndninlradve OEiico 1163 VAST Sg VRNTH STREET CHICO, CAIIIIFORNIIA 95926 Area Code (91 G) 891-3000 Buffo, Co. Planning Comm u0i !a 1984 October 17, 1984 Citoville, CaliforwA County of ButtP Planning Commission 7 County Center Drive drovi.11e, CA 95965 SUBiECT Carl Rottschalk variance application Assessor's Parcel No. 42-34-48 Dear Commissioners: As the result of the De�eloper Scho l District to to m etvinentered yrertain nto an agreement with the Chico Unified the specified conditionssfa ed that the varianceuitse f bject willenot have District is now satisfied an adverse impact upon schools in the District. Consequently, at is no longer necessary for the County to consider school mitigation measures relative to, this project. Very truly yours, Robin G. Thompson Business Manager/Comptroller RGT / kh cc: uttHCountybPlanning Department Butte AdmlrQetr"Ve oma 1163 EAST SEVZNM sTnEET CHICC, CALIFORNIA 95926 Area Code (916) 891.3000 OUffe Co. Planning CotnM October 17 1984 ()('T 181981 t�ravalle� CpGf�rntq County of Butte Planning Commission 7 County Center Drive Orovil,le, CA 95965 SUBJECT: Carl Rottschalk variance application Assessor's Parcel No. 42-34-48 Dear Commissioners: As the result of the Developer having entered into agreement with the 'Chico Unified School District to meet certain specified conditions relative to the subject project, the District is now satisied that the variance itself will not have an adverse impact upon schools in the District. Consequently, it is no lor.ger necessary for the County to consider school mitigation measures relative to this ;project. Very truly yours, Robin G. Thompson Business Manager/Comptroller RGT/kh cc' Neil H. McCabe; Butte County Planning Department October 1, 19$4 Carl Rottschalk 2700 Esplanade Chico, CA 95926 BEAUTY 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE- - OROVII.LE, CALIFORNIA 959653397 PHON Er 534.401 RE: Variance AP 42-34-48 Log # 84-09-21-0' Dear Mr. Rottschalk In reviewing your proposedro`ect for P J potential effects on the environment, we have come to a point in our review where we need additional information. Yourprojectiro`ect lies n a P n area where archeological sites have been recorded ,and potentially exist on this development site, so an. archaeological survey by a qualified person is necessary before we can complete our review. At this early stage of projectrocessin P g, we have identified 'I this need for archaeological information because of site sensi- tivity, and are asking for the survey at this time to reduce subsequent delays. However, after further additional. information may be necessary in orderctoecompleterlthe environmental. evaluation. We are enclosing a copy of a list of local consultants for Your information. If you have any questions or comments office., please contact this Sincerely, B. A. KIRCHER Director ;of Planning David R. Flironimus Associate Planner IJRf f : l.l`t Enc. cc* Northstar Eng. 7ST OF L(WAL. CONSULTAitr'l'e. FOR E.I.R. PREPARATION 114 West 7th Ave°nue .ion M. Anderson, P.E. Chico, CA 55926 968 Myrtle Avonue Chaco CA 9592.6: (91.6) 342.5991 (916), 343-7396, Earl 17, Nelson f, Assoc. 500 Wall Street NorthStar Enp,neerixxa , Chaco,. CA 95926 (916) 993-04,)i 377 Connors Court, Suite B Chico, CA 95:9.26, E (91 6) 853- 1Gt)0 Cook Associates, 2060 Park Avenue�. Riegel 6 Ass�aci.�tes Oroville, IA 950,65 (91 0) 53.3•-6451 .331 Wall Street Chico, CA 95926 (916) 343-5841 Gecidis, Driscoll & As•sor_.. 220 Gr -and Avenue ' Barnhart Brawn, F. Assoc.. ' Oroville., CA '95965' , �8S7.Rau�nsan 5t�reet (P—O.Box 157 OroL M0,. CA 95965- (916) 5.. 3-2068 (916) 534-1911 OTHER CONSULTANTS B. P. Enterprises Jim 18'fi Archaeological Specialist Dr. Kingsley Stern (BotaniP. OMaEnninox Chico, CA 9592.7 cal Survey) _ Chico State Uni.vors: ti:y (916) 893-9656 (916) 343-5358 Chico, CA 95929 (916) 895-5381 (5356) Peter Jensen Research Archaeologist Jim Jokerst Chico State University (Botanical Survey) Chico, CA 95929 R`ti. 1 Box 312,0 (916) 895--6811, 345-9515, 895-43010 (OFE.) ro-v lle, ; -CA 95965, Professional Archaeol,ogi.czl, Service$ 241 Old Oregon Trail Jeffrey Prouty Reedding, CA 96003 (Botanical Survey) ( )coo 34?•{�273 Chico paradise' 872-5154', �6 ' C'�1 i Earn.i n Nature Plant Society RecTdi�?g 24_fi-0761.. Chaco $nate Unitrers.i.t • Jim Sr�ot�'clen, Biologist(916) Dept, Chico, CA 95929 345••6334 OF F,.i5h and Game ROU t0 .3 BoX 55 Chico, CA 95926 (91.6) 143)-2804 5f? LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING COMMISSION 7 COUNTY CENTFR DRIVE - OROV1LLC, CALJ'FC RN1A 95965 October 1, 1984 PHON-" 534,,1601 Carl Rottschalk 2700 tsplanad Chaco, CA 9592 AE. Var i anc e Ah 42-34-4 Log # 84-09-21-02 Dear Mr. Rottschal.k In reviewing your proprjsed project for potential effects on the environment,. we have come to a point in. our review where we need additional information,. Your project lies withi,,n the Chico UT ified School. 'District. The district has identified impacts to one or more of their school facilities for residential projects in recent months. It would be to your a.dvantaLL , to resolve the matter with the school district within the next fear weeks. At this early stage of project processing, we have identified` this need to contact -the Chico Unifiers School District and are asking for you or your rep1,eFent1t1ve to contact them soon to reduce subsequent delays:. However, after further project evaluation, additional information may be necessary in order to complete the environmental evaluation The person to Consult on this ,natter is Neil McCabe, attorney f0T the school. district He can, be reached by telephone at 342-7561 in Chico, His mailxag address is P. p. Box 3155, Chico, CA 9.5927 Thank you for your assistance in this matter, Sincerely, B. A. KIRCHER Director of Planning David R. HiToni.rlus Associate Planner DJZH , lkt CC. North -Star EnginoorIng; �✓:�y� � R,� A � t�.qt. �,F��t�.`� ".'"^,.._ 01' la ''�,jj[, p�'fh�f �� �r `" �;ri(✓iY�N'��+Yr, t hMi LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUT1 ,� M PLANNING COMMISSION 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE — OROML.E, CALIFORNIA 75945 PHONE: 534.4401 Carl. Rottschallc September 21., 1984 2700 Esplanade Chico, CA 95926 RE Ap-►Iication for Variance AP 42-34-48 Dear Mr. Rottschalk This is to notify you that we have received your application for a Variance to lot area to allow a 0.,92 acre Parcel in a 1 acre (Suburban Residential -1 acre) zone and Varianc© to lot width to allow 98 it frontage in place of 130 ft. frontage, located on the east side of Bay Avenue 3400 ft. north of Shasta Avenue, Chico. An initial study of potential, environmental, consequences anticipated in connection with this project is 'being completed by the Butte County Planning Department and will be forwarded to you Should you have any questions Tegarding this matter, please feel free to contact this office: Sincerely, B. A. Kircher Director of Planning -0 Bill Turpin Senior Planner BAK/BT/wr, cc NorthStar Engineering, ` 1 P BUT`fE. CGLIFY PLA mING COMMISSITI r COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95905 PHONE: 534-4601 TO County Public WoiWz8nCc.P1&nni�vjComnu AWTE: September 21, 1934 e, R; PROJECT 'REVIEW AND ENV1R%RdENTAL EVALUATION �'wP.�VB���t �.ril�l�Oi9arf3 Enclosed as preliminary data our office has received or generated concerning the following project: Carl Rot,tschalk - Variance to lot area to al flow a 0.92 ac. parcel in a, l ac. vane (SR -1 anu v .xiancO to' lot width to allow 9'8' ;frontage in place ref' 1301 frontage, located on the east side of' Bay Ave. 34001 north of Shasta Ave . , Chico. AP 42-34-48 We are making an assessmez= of possible environmental impacts and will be preparing an environmental document, either a Negative Declaration; Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report - Please provide any factual statemen'Es, ideas for investigation, or opinions you can offer in your area of concern or expertise that relate to either physical,, social., or economic impacts that this project may generate,. Please respond, within 14 days of the above -noted date. If no response is generated by this inquiry, then i -t shall be assumed that there are no significant environmental impacts which are potential from the project. ''+ 6 , M � �4� , r �� ��Y i, y� �,�, ;' ' � ;�tt u �y, '* ' ,,� ^, ,y i 'y'., ».t, ). ��, ,{"� U. '')a � ^� � , J . s; I ,. ;• 1 *; �, �� '�,, �~� u r"� �� 4 11 , �. �: �� ,; .�,,. �, � u �, Y,�> �;. � i `,�; , �� ., . , �� �'�: J ,ti �( s � yti +. � i . .7 ) zr �� � � ` �}, { • ;� ,� : � ) ` �i r' �� 't � �°e # 1 � I �' � � )k � { 1 I' � ) x. ) # 1 � I �' � � )k � { 1 I' ' AP BUTTE, COUNTY PLF„ �� I0 COMMISSION � COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVIL.LE CAL?FOaNIA 05965 PHONE 534-4601 TO County Bnvironmental. Health. DATE,: September 2.1, 1984` R[): PrZOJECT REVIEW AND ENVI OD74EN`'AL EV Ai,UATfON Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or generated concerning the following project: earl RottschalR Variance to lotarea to allow a 0.02 ac. parcel in a 1 ac. zone (SR -1) and variance to lot width to allow 98' frontage in place of 130' :frontage, ,located on the east side o1 Bay Ave. 3400, north of Shasta Ave,,Chico gyp 42-34-48 We are making an assessment of possibl environmental impacts and will be preparing an environmental document, either a Negative Declaration,, Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental. Impact Report. Please provide any ;factual statements, ideas for investigation, or opinions you can offer in your are,: of concern or expertise that relate to either physical, social, or economic impacts that this project may generate. Please respond vd-thin 14 days of the above --noted date. If no response is generated by this inquiry, then it shall be assumed that there are no significant environmental impacts which are potential from the project. We appreciate a',IY assistance you can provide. Cm. Dina. of Eriv. Health Sincerely, SEP 2 5198 Ot"k, QJ1kfW8 Bu}te Co. Planning Cort M- R3.ck Rodr-igu%e z DEC 20 1984 Planning' Technician C�ravllo, California Comment ,: -41 •A. r� ; W?�`t4 ,'i� "1ltP "r.e ut l4.1., •Yr• x tr. ,n 1 .trh��sr� �=rL(A, t ri r_;. � 5 e �. .+r'_ . +r � .yy art t �t r, a jirkt. �f ! .�_. 1. e t.� 7 c a I" t t.a CA M—Ite ort e in U act~ } y.� p provided re tarn tltir, ohEe t BUTTE COUP F, ,. C rY FIRE R� n�P�Rr �ENT FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS REVIEW 46 ' iE9'l�o,,1f&i�Dttmg ' DEVELOPMENT NAME Carl. Ratt&chalk �-�------otts �An 42-3448OC1 41984 LOCATION a Bay- Avenue, Chis -- DATE 10 roact mus This P j t meet the requirements in the Uniform Building Code amended to Butte County standards, `"'`' Q� ealiL Department of Forestry In accordance With Section 13,00 t3utte County Flre Department (Fire Standards) of the Cooperative Fire Protectlot Improvement Standards, the water requirements for this parcel/project are; (Applicable standards are checked). ( C{) 13.01-1 Requirement Class 1.RICCHARD D. TILLER A Water Supply for , ftr'e Paran tectt�tyilj not be required, Bettailon Chief (: ) 13 012 Regul remeny4Class 2, systain'with adequtlate numbers of hydrantszis prey 1 ferred, but if this is not feasible, the following option will satisfy the fire department require- arFtce (qre) e91.2e9 merit for water, ( ) a, Water storage tanks with a capacity of 10,000 gallons or more, equipped ( ) b. InCgroundess �swimming Pools e equipped wit (S-29),with direct al weather 9 department fire i ) C. A dry standpipe system length. dpto atreliablefwateresource.or�suchdstandpipecsystemowill not exceed l,pp0 feet in length, There must be at least 10,000 gallons of watpr• available and strategically lccated Or portions thereof. (Example; 11 dwellings would require two separated Sources).far each l0 dwellings, made to insure that the water stored is always available and accessible far use uner all si ( ) 13.01-3.Reguiremettt� Cis 3, A pressurized community water system is required,or Prll weather must bi odrant � `cati'ons are indicated on the attached preliminary maather conditions, recorded on the final mapp P y P• Final locationmusberexactly eindiicated and Number of hydrants required -� maximum hydrant to hydrant spacingq-l=���-fee;t, hydrant size '� name an rro e and installed according to Butte County Public Works specification S-27 and re uir q ements of local water agency. Required fire flows are Mitigation flows listed under other conditions. 1,01-4 Re uirement Class q, Water for fire protection is required, gallons per minute. system capable of meeting the fire flow requirements. If this is not feasible, a system nvnlvin q , The preferable system is a hydrant pendent pumps, static water storage and dry standpipes may be substituted. Such a system is subject the approval of the fire dciiartment, The available water flow from such a system must flow g trade gallons per minute. The minimum volume of water in storage must be 1 to be made to insure the system provided is maintained to its design capacity, ( ) 13,01-5 Requirement Class 5. Pressurized water for fire protection is available wfithQnsl 000ovtsions must created parcels. In lieu of bearing the cost of installing a fire hydravaila the Within er m the fire department hydrant fund. Pay in -lieu fee into feet of the —. y Pay into on $1.25 per frontage foot. Frontage is indicated by the red line agriene attach��hydrar ximatet fund bfeed is $ Final frontage calculation to be made by surveyor and recorded orr final ma calculation will include both sides of the street on included streets, P App ( ) Required water system for fire protection must be installed and operating r' P� Frontage XX Other Conditions: � arcels4 g prior to building construction. Pa 122 .00 into c()t,t fund for urchase of new fire a st-4nn an.wesf; •-----r-�,•.-.��.sa.de of Cti�.c--- ( ) Response times for the first 3 fire engines is ds follnws; 1 Station # CDF/BCFD .; 2. Station 3,. Station -N = .minutes : �..• ._ _ �.minutes aement o fire hazard rea, f the Butte County General Plan, this project area is G1 . ( ) In the Safet Elasstfled as a WILLIAM. Cr TEIE County lire Warden By 1/ Local water agency requir stents for A-- hydrants may be more restriitieChief -- ,� S h 7 .. r ,... x Or r lr i s _� i � �� O l i A C � p � '� F 5 —.tee.—_ ���_ � ._.�_ y 4 ._ f i ���+' � �r a � � C��' `^ s v � r ���� � � � —�� � � � s —�, __ r � ,, ,�<, •� � . ,, ,. r � ;�x r� � ♦ �� s r r r �,--r �,�%; � s ° i � (v a x� � i ' �, '�� � � 1 � � � � '� s Sly ✓ r ,�� w i ✓+; r'� t a R � x • e • o,,. ,x;C �r;' � `;�,. 1 i. ..,1 �^, a..x -. , � M..ii 4' ;• , i t.. n . i. t:i% +,, •. i yy; i' ,� , � �`�r `„ Y.� ..'A'�. ':G;' ��r�� ,t '��I � � '. ''t ki r., IN -. . +r ..�� 4!',I 5'. "•�, . x. •,h �� � �L° n1'� a `.i ', � ��C"... � �. ��, ,� S h 7 .. r ,... x Or r lr i s _� i � �� O l i A C � p � '� F 5 —.tee.—_ ���_ � ._.�_ y 4 ._ f i ���+' � �r a � � C��' `^ s v � r ���� � � � —�� � � � s —�, __ CHICO Ul`6I1` IC6 :SCHOOL DISTRICT 1163 CAST SEUEHTN STREET CHXC , CALIFORNIA 9592E �i91.-3CIQ4 Se=ptember 27, 1914 40 CO. COMM OCT 11984 fib. edit Butte CountV.Planning Commission t"ounty renter Criv Or ouille, Calif, 95965 Attn Rick Rodriquez SUBJECT: Lint Variance Request for the Carl Pot•tsctjall� Marcel AP No. 2-34-4& Dear 11r, Podri.guez a The project in question is located within the area serued by Shas.ca Elementary School Bidwell Jr, High School and Chico Senior High Schao:i. The district's pro ectioni indicate that the project in gue-;tion would le5d to the creation oV two residential units which wuiilrt be expected to generate 46 -students at the elementary level k e►. -20 >-,(uderis it the junior high leu(>1 (7-9", and .20 strrden+s at the senior high level 4'10-1.21) 'these itljdents, when combined with trjriw,nts generated From projects in the same 561001 attendance area, wo(,.ild place Shasta, E ementai-V School and 13ldwe;l Jr. High School beyorid Wapscity, The District's pro )ecti,ens indica re these projecis will generate, 7:11 a"jditional elementary studenta within the Shasia Elementary School ,a+lendancre area which t5 alreaciy three stude.iti, bevord capacity, and additional junior high students within Bidwell Jr. High School attendance area .although there is only additional r-apacity +or S30 junior hign student::.. 'Trus,, the .;umulata.un ekPeet of approval of tht-se pro iec rs „ including the project in question, i5 to place Shasta Elementary "School .and +3 dwell. Jr. High S hoof 111 and 1,043 students bey and their reopective capacities It should be noted fir 3t the 5crloo t di-,-,trict has previously sijomi't'teo J drarwument.a+i.a r to -he ioard OF Super".ii ors r°egardy.ncr rand? tiorts o i)er rowdi.ng and th,- ".;card helm a hearin,,:) on rhiI- ,ub rtes+ on Januar}) 10, 19834, l am enc lo-� , ng t'or- your i,nt orma- t? oro a "aQ0V "ai the letter Butte County Planning Commis52an September 27, 1984 Page tvoioht tartan J, Ilicho s, Chief Administrative UffxverA, wr:�)te to the President of the Chico Unified School District Board of Educati,o , dated February 7, :1984 tcopy attached;) Mr, Nichol* indicates than the Boardof Supet-o-sdrs ", , .supports 'the documentation can conditions or overorawdinq, , . _' Thus, -the Soard of Supervisors has recognized that overcrowd .ng exist in the Chico `Jn7.fa,Ktc! School District. Yhe cumuIy 'I.,a,.e effect sof aporoving land divisions wl+Nin the area ierued bA °: Basta Elementary School and Bidwell Jr. High School, Lnr_ ltjd- °rg -the project in question, xs-->ignif idant and adverse because of ti-,. r-:-,ndi tions of overcrowding discussed above. Please advise how 'i'hj. c lmulati.xje impact is to be mitigated prior to approval of the su°•.1F. t project. xncere 1:se , ' x "Ob In riompson Business Manager /Comp tro L. e PGT: vv C,c : t�teil i'GCabe Ottornnte I`1evei0per/Applicant i C{ilco UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 1163 East Seventh 5tt,eet Chico, Cly 95926 Date September 27, 1964 (916) 89'1..8004 Ilrc�?rkct Cl'..�i ( lYi11711rG'M___ GiUCi151� ��Ii=_ {�Y G6 4 s On �i'L� i1. ,. Housing _ Hous.Ing. 42-34-48 (A.P. 1 M I'1Q '. ..rrtr 2 Units � .1"�or Parcel NCame;�.....��.. SU�7�1 /1pl1 �� Carl Ra4,".,schal k, Chico. Senior Shasta T.� Attendance Areas'. ;Areas ��. .mow ... _�.r .._ ementary Bidwell Junior �� �. _ __ ., Senior Junior Hi iJh 2 Units X .43 .86 K-12 stu ients _ n86 K'-12 students X (eleventary factor) = � .46K-6 s#tudentt G K»12 students X X16 (Se:ondary factor) .� 0 � 7-12 st�ade021) r *Assigned to:J►.:nior High Senior Ffi,h Junior {1i gni Senior High Elementary Schaal Sen�ar_.� -- Shasta r. Bidwell Junior _ � _Chico _...� 11£5 Cap, 1 712 4':8 Capac i Ey Capacity 1954-85 Enrollment 481 1984-35 Enrollment 855 1584-85 Enrollment _...r____ - 1143 .�._.....�.. Student Stations (4) 3 Student Available hle Student Stations 330 Available 569 4" Available Generated Students Generated St Students Generated from Subdivision students n Subdivision From Subdi v`i si on - 1373 List � 554 11 ��o� -y..,.m.�,.�. or (fiver List Under or (Over) ------- _ Under or (over), (1043) Capacity 15 -- Hader ('114) Capad ty --- �. Capae.i ty Response due date; _. _____� - 7077 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE C. ICE COtJNTY O UTTE 25 COUNTY cENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95985-3380 1 (9i(t,) 034-4831 v s 'e Q t1' ME DORS 00 7110 BOARD' AL SARACENI MARTIN J, N000 JANE DOLAN CHIEF A01A;N4OT1 ATrvE opMEq February 7, '1 984 H:I.DA WHEELER OURTHA MOSEL.EY LEN FULTON Mr. Robert Ross, President Chico Unified School :District 1163 East Seventh Chico, CA 95926 Dear Mr. Ross: Re; Chico Unified School District Request for Board of Supervisors to Adopt SB 201 Fees, This is to inform you that the Board of Supervisors has considered your request to adopt building permit fees pursuant to SB 201 and has rejected the proposal, While the Board of Supervisors supports the documentation on conditions of overcrowding according to criteria in the California Government Code, they did not support your District's contention all reasonable mitigating measures had been considered and appropriately disregarded. Alternatively, the Board of Supervisors offers a suggestion for Chico Unified School District to seek a bond issue election as set forth in the Mello Roos Act of 1982. In that regard, our Board wishes to recommend a committee be formed to pursue the election to be placed upon the November 1984 ballot. Members of the Board indicated a willingness to actively support the measure. Project committee Suggestions to work toward this end include the following persons: Bob Jeffries, Jane King Marta Fuqua, Karen Vercruse, Jere Bolster, David Jones, and Pat Furr. V J y�, o r , Martin .'Nichols Chief dr inistrative Officer MJN/MP/jac R. FEB EXHIBIT B U15_�, T 0tlT10N 1.Is'Y I V COUntY Pubs oR i at is WorksIRRIGATIONWATER City of Biggs C�tfn��i�cdn9v�y � 99��4 firldlej il1t r Dist. fC++fi�,t�,y pr�°� Gridley 9 bs' f Ma 0. i :A ( � Durham ir�`a Dist tpAYf /L� gb,�gPIry / Ci t.,Yof vi 1 6 Town Of Paradise ���p.6 tll'N a + � �Y 4 Dist. Ct,��t'iuS� 4. 41'1�.ri.R County— r� p wa n D 4 .�.., �.n Grrpablo illtn. r.a Dist. "'aq' ° ��t+1s4 i+epp ..p «. 4 OLA T i q�i�+ tl� r6�' � u 6r I rf° !� n 'A� I� Berry Y A'w Water WI �3 FA � F L I T I E 5 . '. MOW Mtn. Mutual Water 1"� %� td t11 6i tl ��� 411 4fi .ter ! 4 W i Co � Chico Arca Rec. F� ark dist. a.�...»v«�..m. q p n . f B Brush Creek Estates Waterr Distpict --� �. � ���� �, ��Dist". -��� � �,a�6���� ��{�t eac��� x"a 4��yatrrte .a ' Water@,+ a . HA (Chico {1}���a yk,����c 6" � .- _" f9 tt' l� l� �.A� k/ -``S C., til f „ w 672 Pork 1d R� � t a t�L ;�fyry ya �YServicey �y: (4, urban+� y u ban area p� O V l@G. � � � � `l �*"d � I Del Or water C0 � � .r L+>42U. �9 R�,� 4;��i�n to p rk {gdr't @" G� � 45 6J7� aA Aa ; �� . � �" �%' f�a�6 k, �a f.'t eC Ejpj` (Paradise Pines) ��#GJar a.. �A Pacific) Forest, RanCt8Gran Mutual <74z'anse'n +',7 pGridley Fj� _!J} +w• Camp 3t0 v ri. at , 0dU��J {a1* i�ry Dist. qS1 alfa ¢' Dist,UThaG! <{e Merry fta. Union M�G.�i.„ qq'Water Mulberry gg chg,ico) 1.�f�t ��'r `q;isC'�' 4&ire:d.�i„� ,.... Mnr,( wct Mutual (Forest Raw)) it .. R fiiU e'z '4-6ata' , -Id U � ,:_ �f 7, L � ��Q�Uomentary -. SPV46ngs of LivingClatur s 3 (RrrICqhar �$s��� ��Uniun Hilil �rIfled fson pr ing$ ) � ��,.� �ryry pp�� 9.3,aionl (Diaorrd 1"Urr?iau$mnal Vista Mutual ( Durham )u0. uC41 qn COMMUNITY SERvICES Lime Saddle Cowqj,. �,ery DRAINAGE w Ups4 n ��� �;y�r�dz��'�t; ti Dist. u tc-' CvO.04 UrAa nage Dist. ¢sanlc°v" P u b a �.� y Di a r�r�; ELEC �R_ICA1 t 3 � u ,���2 a Ear T 3r w :Y1i`'Ar erp v' �� g� FIRE l tl P J i to Ya l� « d q, *: h' ? d']> at, t'C"'V°j ��rl+ $i���ft. a .,. Ll i'lce"O Fire P rO UIC. air. v'' w 9 4Dis r'; N l u Cl :d i �f b` r�� tly 4 EX 4 S t e S A 2 C„,' JRCC M/aNAGVjNj” County Piro Department - � ' ��.«�J' Ir�'� a tor,,P U q� P4 Forestry c� lr4%*U '3tor 9'�ec�Ai�'U rags Do a;« o Uw � 1'7:7 v7 U d 1 4,d A 9 y + � f Ii rU� pp�� +�� R I C T G's� �� � "�IT'— 86tte « (. �;.. f {�} LH e�'3 k;: R°� q tiw Land t-9 a na �r�a,� n ur�' r,oUnty PLL C E P Vi g h�AyyiY uly��l y P a W r G 1 07TH �.. ._.,�-Hwy.�aF,,isms;..a.,a�zw�.�a.�w•r=.w'.e.:..k.«»:.,�w+.mw..r.�.,:,,y,.:,w.. *yam k 2ttttNlftfli r.cin.wmys�cwsru>ta®w•#w►au®1»CwpvPi@3►7A10'BiU9A'1C�0.1�1'!0►tiiiWW111 1111\1 1011021 r , ,x ^ ,,rrte� r / N. R N M D. cli 4447'o;Y Aima Codw e t P t ,.39. 10 Ac, 16 e,6.,r 2 j'4'✓,,r�t,)i`';.6.•...} _ _ 14.//"'It4 4.. - t'� ✓ � � 30AC t, y �79 .t32 �7 zQ jh�.�� z+y,0 $:665 oC a r �\ � 'J �i � ".., "" M1""•, �y ty t. r A^'��. 3 �1 Vit. I `.!1%!�'� M �%$t 97 ro t s/ y' 3 0�"J� y ''*` r r 1 _ } +v. �, `r,: '%k O 1 :���� to 7 qac' 3 a 4 4 I•(3 X6.35 AC y�y eru \ r �4 44 M 35 Ott;' � � � '�„ (86 P 37 �sa� �1" � ✓ r -D 95 Ic Zb x3. 46 �.., c672 A y ,fit : ja iJr$ �ba 8, A4Z NOTE—ASSESSOR'S xiAcr tv u a i?. sx i pa /r R .SOR'S PARCEL BLOCK � . c' & LOT NUMBERS, SHOWN Coun 'y� �al BLitte, Calif, IN CIRCLES NO , BUTTE COFILE No. � D �'�E ivy^ �CAtL EXIST'IN . � ., to 1''+ } � ,r• l e M i• � ,1 Y.. 1. � �� f •`y 1 ' r' t �r 1 �� � 1: � ^ • ". rs. :,xLf. `'�. •. , f •; f ���r � ;ft ''r �� •"'r ..,... , ... rr:. ,P _ ,-:,'• . .. :, .:.+f�. .'i . n� �A ' r R i r a'