HomeMy WebLinkAbout056-130-017.r
iy b
o
i
vAlto
v
:
ur
1 ,
Butte, coun
LAND OF NATURAL `NFALTW ; t:0 ElFAUTY
I ti DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
WILLIAM (Gill) CHEP2P, DIM00r
7 COUNTY CCNTHR DRIV5 - OROVLLLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
- TelapHnnp I9161 S34.A6H'1
RONALD 0.McELROY
Q Deputy Oiracfpr
Buffs Co. Planntng Corr,
April 21., 1986
APR � 3 iy�u
Orovillo, calitarW4
Tam Duncan and Craig Otrudo PX, AP 56-13-17
1,907 Mangrove Ave,Tentative Parcel Map
Chico,CA 9592
Gentlemen;
At the regular Meetint' of the Butte County Advisory Agency held
on April 21., 1986, the agency denied your tentativa p-irrel. map
on the above; -ref,, rencod prdpvrty, The snap w w dntliod because
It doeo not Irlf'ot t,h,r qui'romont;> rat' (!X(�A ov LII, lii,alth bepartmenL.
If no €rppuals are, tim-ly Viled"-within tole flay) of thn date; of the
Advisory Agencylo denial—with thr� of the Board of 11upervisors,
this actior, will b , fi.tial,
If you have any .lue.itio , rr Bard ink thi.i-it-ter, gleanm contact this
Office,
Very truly yours,
William Chaff
Director of Public Works
TO: gVtte County Advisory Agency
FROM o Planning Di rec..
8U80EGT: Report on Tentative Parcel Map for Owncan and Strode on
AP456-13-,17
DATE-. April 21, 19e6
This is a proposal to divide 146 acres to create 'Z parcels. The Land Use
Plan )hap of the Butte County General Plan designates this area as.
p Agriculturalw-Agricultur.11-Residential. The toning is Timber Mountain u
9 W acre. There are no specific or community plans For the area.
This application is one on which the environmental documents have not
been completed. Tho applicant has boon unable to comply with the Health
Dtpartment and Subdivision Ordinance requirements.
�t�.par�n�n��t%nna
F'i'nd that the applicant has been unable to meet the requirements of
Ck;`r,)A, the Health Department; the application has boon pending for an
exa"endod period o+ time, and deny the To .M, application •Far Duncan and
Strode on AP456-i-3-47 in accordance+ with Section It5104 of the CEOA
guidelines
LMTt Jm:.
cc: Team Duncan
Craig Strode
Max Albert
;Y.
f
f 1 "17
tips
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CLAY CASTLEBENRY, Dlroctor
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE, OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
Tolophow (916) 534-,4681 Will. am BilDcheff
Depoy Director
May 13, 1982
Tom Duncan and Craig Strode RE: Tentative Subdivis.i,on/.
1907 Mangrove Avenue Parcel Map
Chico, CA 95926 AP 56-13-17
Gentlemen:
Your land division application has 1,ot been acted upon by the Advisory Agency
clue to lack of clearance by one or more departments. Clearance by the
departments cannot be given until Sufficient data has been provided to the
departments so that they may recommend the proper conditions of approval.
If you believe your land division will; meet the requirements of the Public
Works, Health and Planning Departments, a written statement to that effect
Will place your project on an Upcoming Advisory Agency agenda for considetation.
if you are not able to meet County requirements for your proposed land division;
you may either submit a revised map for review or formally Withdraw your
appl.i.cation from furth— consideration. If you choose to withdraw your
applicat ont please sign and return this letter to the Public Works Department,
Pleaso inform us Within 10 days as to the disposition of your tetltative map.
very truly yours;
Clay Castleberry
GuffeCd. plammni C'6mhl. Director of Public Works
MAY 13 198
oroxilla, callfartila Original ttgned by
3OHN MENtdQNSA
John Mendonsa
assistant Director
I hereby request withdrawal of my land division application:
Signature Date
dM%ns tihing FnV
cc ronn)en tel nevi ew
Environmental Wealth
Max Albert, 1860 Mangrove AVe,, Chico, CA 05926
k A 80-11-04-05
III DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Project Description
1. Type of Project: Tentative Parcel. Map
2.. Brief Description: Division of a 45 acre parcel into
three 15 acre parcels, withhomosites located on eastern
ridge bluff. Major part: (western 909.) is undevelopable.
3. Location! 50 feet west of Cohasset I-Ii.ghway, approximately
One mile north of Vilas road intersectlan, community of
Cohasset.
4. Proposed Density of Development: l parcel per 15 acres
(however, the actual available area is approximately
2 acmes Per Paresl), with a
5. Access and Nearest Public Roacl(s): Cohasset Roa-.l
deeded private road. easement off Cohasset Road approximately
100 feet north of northern property line.
6 Iviethod of Sewage Disposal: Septic and Mach fields.
7. Source of Water Supply individual wells
8. Proximity of Power Lines; 100 + :Coot
9. Potential for further land divisions and development: No
additional land divisions probable clue to terrain limitations.
Environmental.` Sett..in
Physical Enuiygin iOnt
1. Terrain
a. General Topographic Character: Dioderate flat to sloping
on eastern 10% of parcels, bluffs dropping uff at .30*o
on the remainder.
b Slopes,, 30+,%, on most of land except near highway.
C. Limiting Pactors 304•' sIopas an western 90% of property
Some rocky outcrops on bluff topi
2, Soils
a, Types and Characteris°Lies: Aikon�Cohasset soils of volcanic
mudflow origin, woathered in place, shallow and rocky.
b, Limiting tactors, Building sites restricted to the extreme
eastern area of parcels, Usablo leach .field area may be
limited, particularly with shallow soils and rocky
�onditi.ons ,
3. Natural Hazards of the Land
a. tlrosion Potential, Slight to'mo.erate on bluff top, high
in canyon,
b, Land.sl:i.de Pote`ntia;l Iiigh west of bluff.
c. Piro Hazard' High to extreme
d. inieavy winds present on this ridge,
Appendix F - page 8 Of 0'
80--11-04-05
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ,EVALUATION (continued)
4, Hydrology
a. Surface Dater: Intermittent flowing Anderson Foxk passes
through southeast corner. of property. Rock creek traverses
land immediately to the west.
b. Ground Water Cohasset ridge has limited groundwater.
c. Annual Rainfall (normal.) 40-45 inches per year
d. Limiting Factors: Creek setback areas, groundwater limitations.
5 Visual./Scenic Quality., High, quality open land with views of
Rock creek and valley.
Biological Environment:
6. Vegetation: Mixed transition woodland containing Digger pine,
Manza.ni.ta, Oaks and Bay Laurel. Chaparral in canyon.
7. Wildlife habitat: Anderson Fork and Rock creek riparian habitat.
Within area identified as deer winter ranges (California Dept.
Fish and Game)
Cultural Environment:
8. Archaeological and i-listerical Resources in the area, Archaeologic,;.)
clearance granted subsequent to a :field survey,
y 9, Butte County General Plan designation: Agricultural Residential
r
loo Existing Zoningt Tim-5
1.1, Existing Land Use on-site: Open space no dwelling or development.
12 Surrounding Areai.
a Land Uses nixed uses in. area. Open undeveloped with small
residential 'parcels,
b. Zoning: TM-5, TM-2, on tlxo east and south. 4-2 ,to the west.
c. Grin, Plan designations: Agricultural Residential. Orazing
and Open land on the %vest and southwest (Tchama County to
the west)
d, Parcel. Sizes; 1.240 acres in area, 5«10 acre 'parcels
predominate.
13, Character of Site and Area. Rural, highly scenic ridge lan,d3cape,
14. Nearest Urban Area.- Chico, 12 miles to city limits,
15 Fire Protection Servire:
a, Nearest County (State) :giro Station: Cohasset Volunteer
Fire Company approximately 10 minutes,
b. Water Availability, Truck tank capacity. Ndivi,dua.l cells
diminish in capacity in late summer)
lb, c, o Disruptions of earth and topogi-N ar y usually occur during
residential development. Although dov, X )pmelit will, be limited to
the top of the ridge bluff (l'-�—t ac.r-ti per 15 -acre porcel), modification
of topography and displacements r~i' earth will occur from construction
of the easement road and Douses °IL this slightly sloping and unev011
ridge terrain.
A
A.
ppen ix k - page n o
8<o-11-04-05
DISCUSSION OF I NVIRONDIDNTAL tMUATION (continued)
Development of the easement ray allow erosion of sediments :into
Anderson Fork both on-site and off-site.
lh Butte County and the foothill regions in particular, are in a
moderate zone of seismic risk. This and any foothill development
would be prone to some risks.
3bi Runoff and. absorption of rami water may be affected along nearby
portions of Anderson Pork due to any erosion caused by road cuts and
residential building. (Refer to lb,c,e), This ma affect the ability
of the local groundwater "catch" to recharge,
3g,h Considerable space limitations exist for on-site sewage dis»
posal systems (only lJ$-2 acres of the total 15 acres have usable area).
The Cohasset area bas limited groundwater, as do most mountain ridge
communities. The immediate area obtains its water from a groundwater
basin "catch" from seasonally flowing rknderson Fork. Additional.
withdrawals ;from this limited, groundwater area may impact the resource.
Residents have said that well waters diminish in late summer and fall.
Oat Typical. loss of vegetation will occur due to construction of
homes and the road easements (equivalent density of development is
2 acres per l omesito due to terrain restrictions ) .
5b i This area appears to have abundant wildlife. Disturbance in
the immediate area is probable from residential activities on the
eastern end of parcels. 1-loricver, the Cohasset Road corridor has
already reduced the wildlife value of this area:
9i As these parcels are developed, they will impact the resources
of the region relative to the scale of the project. Lumber, energy
and other materials of construction will be used in this outlying area
when this site is developed,
13a,c,.fi Addition of three residences to the area may impact
Cohasset Roac AIA three residences will use one common road easement
to gain acce8s to Collasset Road.. Traffic entrances and oxits off
that easement will increase.
11, l4a,bc-jet, most public services are usually affected by any scale
of residential development, particularly in this outlying location.
)lire service is currently adonuate, Sheriff service is on call: and
schools are local through grade school, As the area grows, service
r.oeds will increase in this rural community,
15i Additional use of petroleum resources is intensified in rural.
commuter lifestyle pattorr$ as distances are increased to employment
schools and commercial service arenas (12+ miles to Chico).
Appendix F - page 8b of 5
80-1.1:-04-05
DISCUSSION 0'F ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued)
164,.b� Limited extension of utilities will be necessary.
17d: This ridge top locality is prone to high winds according to
residents in the area. Winds have caused structural damage in the
past. The vegetation iri this area is of the highly flammable
transitional woodland type, containing digger pine andespeci.ally
Manza.nita and Madrone species. Vegetation, high wands'and train
present an extreme fire hazard, in this area.
18: Solidi waste and road side hitter may increase as human activities
increase in the area.
f
I
I
i
Appendix 1~ page 8c of 5
Mr. Earl Nelson, Director
Environmental Review Department
18-F County Center Drive
orovil.le, CA 95965
Dear Mr. Nelson,
On Monday, December 1, 198.0 T conducted an archaeological
reconnaissance of two properties located within Butte County.
They are as follows:
Tom Duncan & Crai�Stro-dde,, APff56�-13`17/tRD Log #80-11-04-05
approximately µ acres of land located to the west of Cohasset
Road, approximately � mile north of the intersection with
Vilas Road, south of Cohasset. The property lies in the SJ
of the SWj of Section 27 T. 24 N. R. 2 E,, Campbell Mound
and Cohasset Quadrangles, 7.5" series and the proposed project
is to divide the property into three parcels: The property
extends down the west slope of Cohasset Ridge to Rock Creek,
The very eastern end of the property lies along the ridge top
with the remaining portion of the property lying along a
moderate slope. Vegetation of the property consists primarily
of oak, pine, bay, manzanita, California Buckeye, buekbrush
and annual grasses.
James F, Aol�ley - AP/t58-)0-09/8-RD Log #80-11-17-01 approximately
10 acres of a
Wood Road,
approxi,mately1/81mi.leealong
eas°go'the�iin, "exsec cionrlOu of Yelw.ith Oroville
Cdncow Road, east of COMMReservoir. The properties lies in
the 5�� of the SE.4% of Section 10 and the S� of the SW14 of
Section 11, T. 22 I1'., R, 4 F,., Paradise Quadrangle, 15` series,
and the proposcad project is to divide the property into three
parcels. The property 18 bounded along the north by a drainage
and the northern portion of the property is relatively Leve.
meadow land, The southern portion of the property has a gentle
slope and is covered by a Foothill Woodland type of vegetation.
Prior to conducting a reconnaissance of the above properties
Z consulted the archaeological site record files maintained
at California State University, Chico to determine if any
Previously recorded archaeological or historical sites were
located within or adjacent to either of these property areas,
No such sates had previously been recorded within or adjacent
to either of these property areasi
a i ap e odo c w �n�c� a �s Rio a n 9491 chk@#CAHog Ph 0 @40.60H
December 10, 1.80
Page 2
My reconnaissance of both properties was complete in that
all areas of both properties considered likely to contain
materials or features of an historical or archaeological:
nature were carefully examined. Due to the location of
both properties, which were adjacent to permanent water
sources, both of these properties were considered to be
of high sensitivity for archaeological sites. No materials
or features indicative of archaeological or historical
activities were observed during my inspection of either
property and it is 'therefore recommended that archaeological
clearance be granted to both of the properties described
above.
,$incerel yours,
J es p, Manning
rchae ol.ogy Consultant
i
r
i
IV. DE,m,ERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
0 1 find the proposed project COULD NOT have a s-Lgniticant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
is rEc6mmended-
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not.
be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet
have been added to the project A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
IS -RE00 LADED . _
0 1 find the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment; and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORTisrequired.
2
p
Aril 1, 1981.
Date 1 �-.-.:.-• ;,
(Sa =nature
For' ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DEPARTMP'N'T
_ RevieWed b=
Earl D. Nelson
Envitonmental ROVieW lAtOOtox
_I
A,p�ndi }x.;ti r� of g
f