Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout056-360-012- � SUBAREA -- ? WELL - 6H1 RRECIP .— DCE MILL RIDGE rn o 00 2390 GSE = 2380 2384 r-� 2370 lL v t—+ 238(1 d Llj J L.ca 2350 2340 _ 30 C 2U z u 2334 ..». d CL ami o' ¢ �` ti •i -�� d a 1586 i987 1985 AR pp, x v '�j'� th.lt t f� " - SUBAREA -, 2 WELL -- 8G1 PRECIP' DOE MILL RIDGE rn 112 2340 GSE = 2340 2320 r 2300 v, Z t—i '2280 5 Lli W 2260 3i C 2240 8d ow b 2220 j... ....... ^• a 5.. y 1_�� r V `3 w 7 G CC7 A 1986 1987 1983 ION,p I� , SUBAREA 2 WELL -- 32E1 PRECIP DOE MILL RIDGE Tb E =s 2520 •. 2060 looll ,-� 2040 L� Z, 2630 W W 2020 2010 _ 30 �Z C 20 x 8 io z 2000 s.„.•. ::.......: ...,...... a...., a Q (x J' !- u z CL v ¢ n :3 u o: M ca w 1986 1987 1988 p po”, �tu E. L A-R s v r I� • •. !k 1i '• y^fit ll SUBAREA -- 2 WELL - 32A1 GSA = 2930 '-- PRECIP DOE MILL RIDGE TI) 74 2910 2900 n 2894 \ X� A �.jej Ld u 'J P Wll „, I 2e7o I 30 C z8�a 2u ,. :. :...; .... •....•. 0. 2850 N..........� w X986 1987 1988 } • NA" wm E� , WATER QUALITY SA. 2 - Forest 'Ranch Electriclal conductivity (EC), a measure of the coricentratiol of dissolved salts, ;and pH, a measure of acidity or alkalinity) were assessed .semi-annuail.y in -the Forest Ranch sub area. Table shows average values of Ec and pH over the duration of the study. Water Quality Summary (Table ) Mean Range EC (µmhos/cm) 163 84 - 262 PH 6,01 6.7 7.3 EC For wells in Forest Ranch indicates good water duality with low to moderate concentration of dissolved salts which is characterit,r.•c of ground water from volcanic rock aquifers. These values are very similar to EC values from Tuscan Formation groundwater in the Paradise sub area (mean = 140 µmhos/cm) However, Forest Ranch Ec values are higher than the EC values from the Cohasset Ridge Basalt aqjLj:der (mean = 95.6 µmhos/cm) H for Forest. Ranch Formation grow .s � Correspond�.ng�.y. p ground water i s`m ilar to the Paradise Lake sub area Tuscan 'Formation ground water �, (mean. = 6,$) a*td is higher than Cohasset Ridge Basalt ground water (meati 6.4) AIW r�efa�, rq rm 111('. " c i,r it Ground water quality from Forest Ranch, and Paradise Lake Tuscan Formation aclW.fers is essentially idn'Ptical. The higher EC and pH i;orroeand Water from Forest Ranch may be due to two factors; ` 1. Tuscan formation aquifers :are Chiefly volcanic sedimentary units (channel deposits) whereas ground water from the Cohasset Ridge Basalt is extracted primarily from fracture systems. sediments y g.. , are Characteristically tno�.e soluble due to reduced rain size and move surface area than fractured hard rock and thereby releases more ions into the solution. 2 The younger Cohasset Ridge Basalt may be less weathered than rocks in the Tuscan Formation. Greater age coupled with longer water migration paths along contacts and in volcanic sediments may promote more , -weathering in the Tuscan formation. GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL in the Forest Ranch sub area, existing grf]`h(kwater resources appear to .be adequate for present residential dehbityi Although our investigation 'uncovers no new Sources, it largely confirms th?� "o "nstrarits on development cited iri previous steadies (DWR► 1975): j,-tkcause water is generally available in localized areas; but is riot avallable uniformly throughout tie Forest Ranch stub areae water development is potentially limited. ,Limitations identified in this investigation are: � �{I+ d w bit' .r,►'" � '� d M" The high net drop in average groundwater level over the period monitored (15.3 feet) The general, decrease in ,well yield with increased well ,de-pth in Tuscan Formation rocks Possible consequences or over -developing Tuscan Formation aquifers, especially in the upper zone, are: (1) over -di~a `t and (2) increased incidences ;of intermittent well failure. The developrient of wells which penetrate the Tuscan Formation and ,intercept either Auriferous gravels or the ponderosa Way 1Jember of the Chico Formatioh is more promising than, development of wells in p q y the Tuscan. Formation. Benefits of develo ,in community wells an th a ponderosa Way Member (as opposed to continued reliance on domestic wells) has been discussed in previous Studies (bWRj 1976) The cost of lifting water 800 feet or more coupled with distribution systems make such development potentially` expensive. 9 vnrll., 1-1 IvyI ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SHEET PROVIDING INFORMATION DESCRIBING CONDITIONS: AS OF DATE Q- .FILING AND WHICH{ IS NOT INTENL=i--iJ TO AFFECT RECORD TITLE INTEREST AW LIPPINCOTT 'S SURVEY N 007 BILLS AQAD - P.O. BOX 671 PARAPSE. CA95967 - (9 6) 877=4300 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: MpARTWX CF f UjLIrWWS THIS. SKEET IS BE-ING CONCURRENTLY RECORDED' PREPARED BY: WITH OWNER`S CERTIFICATE FOR. PARCEL MAP FOR LARRY R LOERKE AS FILED FOR 'RECORD IN BOOK. OF PARCEL MAPS` AT PAGE ON GARYT. LIP€'INCOTT, LS 56311 AT -M. t AS OFFICIAL RECORDS SERIAL NOr AT SHE REQUEST OF LI.PPINCOTT SURVEYING. r.0, NON-jb(Ct-WlVF- > Rn -4 asr Eswr FOR BENEFIT » .• �OF PAROLS lit" SK 77,P/M-63 "Is F O. �y- v ♦ t p94:LapR-470.00 r y t; L.311.46 a , ` r r I '•�Et'%fC Et,1FLL� v' : i 5 - v _a v C� ��.. ..� ,ys CyT9p �k S,Qe$EAL i =�a�'� ot,C �paRQF� N- _ N r `,.i s y r k_ 7. 3 JQg �2 �Q �3Q r r.�• 4 .. i No ,53 kQ3 87 4ow uTC.Aelt. - .JQ Se/`, y5 C R,✓1f L;v �+ e.trsrar -E T/C 41 o rc7 `Q r �� . :fiL' O 5H8_•i_a3'."1r C.7LTT - r F'01/4'I:E WI7 a`- .y� v F ,BON BAR 1 Je Lr tqp s4$a�r< `�.rj:, r X25. \�`� . p 1 .• 5 PCI.t / o f. NOT`sA PART r t s wx BK 77. PIP 6-3 Ir i C t` T Z4 N Sec 3t`F Sec 32 Sec 6. r 5ec5 t l t. LOCATION IVA.P NOTES _ CEL MAP • ^.: DENOTES FOUND CAPFEo 1/2" REBAR LS 2843 FOR £T — SET 3/4: I.i: CS.3634 LARRY R. LQERKE The Basis for the bearings shown hereon was the Sovlherly, Boundary fine of Parcel 3 Being Parcel3' P/M` 77-63 and CISO between found corners as shown on Being ;a .porlion of :the S 112 of r Bk- 77 of P/M' -63 as'. being 'tit 7Q'35'Il"W; — � Section 3{-32^ T 24 Pi_ - R. 3 £-" IAD-Blfl Near Forsst Ranch. Butte County. CalRfornia LIPPINCOTT SURVEYING I Ow a,LLE ROAD-.PAIMO,SE. CALIFOELv1A,vorA>o6T1 PAGE 2 OF 2 ta. suo: r•,c(9041877-M77 m 41 0 :. w T 1 tL� Tq: STATE OF CALIFORNIA TN19 RLSOURCES AGENCY d not fill {Ij' te' 'Cay DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES WATER WELL DRILLERS REPORT N0. 366995 'I l,ur,S itltsttl No. J State N9611 No 0xim$Vermtlt34p or Date AIV <j 56-3-1'! 011ier Well No, 1� 3 = . at ItS I tirl y I �Erke 12 WELL LOG: Tolai cictUt 800 l fl. Completed rlt plft fl« t ". front ft to ft. T`8nnulfon'(Describe by color, character, size or material) ! aicf! .� L n it y r Lll' t, 10 755 %",h'T 1,)N OF WELL (Sec instructions): is 'trt is r#' Butte Owner's Well Number _J 7,59 Axe V. ass At li fertllt ft i Ulm °'' IjJ It 2 For ea t H atich !(K1. :A.iTarf k _ ' i2u th n >v �` .u3�an�i>"tt+ 'A1�,ro, a ads rajlrsmtls, G:i g c•• 0Q: ,:� ariC:Il O t t�Wfz 3L. '- t r d�rezt' e (3) TYPE, or WORK; V �J Deepening IUpe g © G - _.. i li{eWnslr�itliUl tw Reconditioning 0 � 1 Ilorlmnial Well O t r�Destrucilon (J (17r:sr:ribe t1e51uresructiep materials and pro- edin►lcht l2) �/ �U .., r t : , I BJijy� C4/ I: ROPO$CI U Domestic (\%. 1rrfgullon Indttstrlal �'' ( NN _ ut TO! Well ❑ _ p Muuict �/ fj O ter . _ brrf;l, L,OCAT16N SKETCH 4Ilse) !i jis)fi7+lrNY CRAV CK! .Air m - net bt We �fr.zr � Buck c+l roNi �- l} i ,G + ""+R:twTlf4ilt:STl+I.I.Et)„ l8) PF.R Tl _ rrelf it tlnftleid$. ryneot fn bncxNrtor �% Cage or 7 " t SIG. f i t. MCI' 1. size, � w y f}y WELL SEAL- v'arbufrcru3nrrseratltrovfded7 Ycs}Q�t tJiy i� rryrt ludc{slb 7g _ rr _ Yer�:�tznVssedir.•ili�,tfu►1'txihtulnli� Ycs� Nn �,l rnlrr�ol ._ _ lf. � _ letfltvJbrlrrtifnil: - _ 1Vorl:wlarlcif - tU�,. Ctltiftictetl t{7,^_, JO 'WATER, LEVELS- WELL DRILLLER'S STATEMENT; rrprilvrrim water, itinown 760 +an.�asgttfvolatter»ne)t�+rroifteiian 66� ft _.... ft h�c�sof vtknalvl l�niit%�f ttltst!sdfcttn'it �ilrl litrl Ir)rrlrt if trot! it) i�jfG I)) WELL `TESTS., ve.K Ird11Pm IndtlCEtt YMY IVU q ct,lest Ionil, 0 11 S'i!S• b w t11N1t7 . ; (Well PH11er) NAAIL - Eat 4Ral-kan-Wp-i +r�lt1%rtuwatrtdlst�tttrftGhl - IC elle t36t I mtn'nhcr,t Inlltts Atewloflitil- - ..II(Perstn,rlrlh,urcltrlicitutlntt)(Tyl*.iltit ptlillerl Y ditldn% AM 5_ `p]13Raof 11dii.rletnjseruluro ftbntk;9ldraty►tfnude? Yet0 Noyj _ �l3tj t II'yl,ybywbfilll? (,flyllhiL"L)..r CA /jP.gg�j�j'�/6� `dt t rxStle lr ; ttt> ii+ Yi s i �bbIT10NALch vlti#i d 49 % f, l� Dalo fir IIlls l'clflttl L I V s 0 xT iC yyp liryy in qy,y cACL I91i Nit. . I IRwx Nl SI:CUTtVCI,Y NQMk3EREt1'pORM eb o4lss ti' vii 7. a Mw � "" _- c _ �� j , 4aex �-.�.� K }fit.. ,� w ...•j,. a. r �w, r .*-s, sp'.iy zr� `- S ;�" 'mow },•fid < � �' r e. � P� F-. o ,,,f• y.-,, "�, ru! �. `: fy`dp�ip�- a,-• �doN �'�G's�'�"'' „ t .+.. ae - _ �tp ��'' �.'"'. ..r..a+ doe. �. . " e.F. i.G� VM � a .'r w, r ){'.1 ML ..� it ..'1 i, M y, ,• ... Ok�' v t` 11" R �t .. aM' °,.,-t -.+r ..,� _ • --3 'r Ilk 0 s P. & 4+ a: �..T �1w' ' is s # �-N"`�~•� - -.:» - � < C i.N 7�+/���)� SP.SI ��A( Ft 1 SN.siplp S3 • sl4 ,, - Ye b.r..r bn-,sy/•fM. 'a ..vJ2. i6...p' a _ 4'r -"r.rF s ,.�, �' � ,y-.R.a.. - _ -,`s3 h. `. ,y�Y✓5Y w.rr yY' _ `. ".` ..:. ;w o - _c'% - �: 'tr .,(+,+<...i i a i ar•a��' a� , r _ c'. 5✓ � « �I,YJJ:�.: 2 � , u ,� N w .,- ', Y N 'D __ 2► : a{.�. t�Rl �4 4 G 1 l� -.� � t Yn!"Qww "�. ' '�" :%L ` " ':s.* .{ +r c s4vi= " fi i{�' . .i i *'t T° 'a• , _. 5+� �_ r' _<. -q ,F °.�'y-,e, - �:�w � "- ' 'C'�y,�• �. ry � Y ; i; : a� .ir t •i �'r "Ssns'S '�ii`„'h r®' � 4 cve — t';'r � m'• f y,. r!R'Sra r!t"'�.. __ .�a.Y'" f -. 1 h S.,[ter. •+{ w`. �. a.;n x x t ''ls.,�i � � 1r �` �v� j -u+�='�x�`.�r +1r tem? .PS„ fOGG:..k- lS,'•�`.`. _...{_,_- �,.. �+Kvlr+aaa r �'r r "r a '� +.s �'. 'u+f•,t....w� S4 u � µ J tz' .r a,'Fi t'>w i"• D,,.�r��r _F� .�.,� �� X .'dl"`irAe'��'°$�� .F+ <` .7' .w• � �- �,� - •a'�'p'fi sr4« �� . 7 M'l. ci,s •!' t d-.-.. 1' r�yj ite"�f., �'p. -• G ti y.. "!' k at s - � t-.ti r ph'. :... .4 a:. vkaa •xw'r,,,1 ^saV .3, _ _ - " x.ai. d 3`-� ?� ` � T• ^'k`-a i �� � r � .�s`e_ �' ``•,�r� i; y� �`�r� >��` �" '•.r.: k ba.; � a.� ""."^� t +Lm '°"�� T,t< r S �-- nom"' � '',"�"{#, *Fk`irY „ - _ _ Sj�• r T 1;y��: w•-,.,*. • �. __ � �+.F.�`i"'^�� d -p .-..��^'S`�S� �+�h� y,�.. � `» � fi±h "T'.Y�.Y �,�ti.s�� a - r f-: i.r ° r a.¢•a4^+ a�i+�� y, >< 1. - w >�T�"T:e3 N .i• 6.i �,c"^5t.-( _t� .T �^ � _ _ � K a� •ate iY.� '�'-' a `1i`. ''t+f a "'.Y�.E y �., t�-.�r ta«7j'9P1*'+• = 7 T' .Y+ R1 .+rr _ �.:.� +r �s' ,.,$ 'O,arY,.,.' �•KG:+y.- .;hLa+:"ter.XrwF.`. w a - ••.� � L • ,. mar _ m __.. s � )+ • '� r y�r . Bch.. .l c s .l -+ •• ,,,,,,..�c , �ri£`' ,par � � =-4 . • _: ,-,,,,,w �� i ':t~ A � jam-, > � t y',. � S r� >1 �•'kT• � �;e,� 3�:�G^ A h . AAi«•• v n.1 I f Cultural Resource A cultural resource records sea^ch and a field survey of the project ejite were conducted in January 1987 by Jensen and Associates; Archaeological Consulting and Research, In addition, Native American repr"Isentative Ms. Priscilla Hunter was contacted and asked to supply any i information which she might have concerning heritage or other sites 9/ithin the project ,area.. No historical or archaeologicv, resources have i:: -in previously recorded on the site,, and the field survey revealed no s,+uch materials.; No response was provided by the Native American repre s,,o- n tati ve. The site is thus recommended fur archaeological clearance# l•lie archaeologist's report is available for review at the Butte County j Planning Department h1 Potential impacts No archaeological or 'historical materials are known to be present on the site, however, subsurface materials may be uncovered during excava �! tion or other construction activities. Mitigation .Measures 5.1 If subsurface cultural mate encountered, all construction I activities in that area shal",- %d until a qual i fled archaeolo- gist can examine these maters 6 i 4 and mal4.e a determination of their ti;gnifica,nce. ,. t r p 6 Water Supply i. An evaluations of groono-water conditions <lyderlying the prriect site" and the surround-lilig area was conducted by Lawrence and Associates, engineering geologists and ground -water hyd ro I oq i st s,6 The following. discussion is a summary of the technical report ,prepared b, Lawrence and Associates. A copy of the full report is available for review at the Butte County Planning Department. The ground -water evaluation was',based on in-house data plus review of well logs obtained from the Department of Water Resources. A total of 59$ logs from 64 sections surf--bundipa the project site were evaluatedi pourteen of the logs were from Soctioh 6i 793N; 93�.; within which the project site is located. �3 r' a �:.'1 The project site does not overlie a well-defined ground-water basic filled with al,l uvi al sands and gravels, where the depth and volume of ground water in storage is easily determine, Instead, the site is underlain by "hard rock." In hand rock areas, ground water occurs in cracks and fractures, and its movement is linear and tortuous in these fractures, unlike movement in ground-water basins with homogeneous sands and gravels. Therefore, it is very difficult to quantify the amount,of water in storage or to accurately predict its actual movement. Notwith- standing these difficulties, it is still possible to make reasonable assumptions about hard rock areas that allow the qualitative evaluation of yield, recharge, and -the long-terirr availability of ground water. Well depths and depths to ground water as reported on the 1.4 well logs from Section 6 are stuwn on Table 1, Figure 4 contained in Appendix 2 The data reflect perched or semi-perched water levels and a deep regional water table. The latter lies at a depth of 300 to 500 feet. Figure 3, Appendix 2, illustrates the configuration of the water tables. Well yields in Section 6 and regionally are shown in Table 1, Appendix 2 Locally, the median yield is about 20 gallons per minute Y (gpm) with a range of 4-50 gpm. Regionally, the median yield is only 10 gpm with a range of 0.03}-1000 gpm.Because of the small sample size in i Section h, and because the regional count predominantly reflects well's < e drilled in the same geologic formation, the regional median yield is y probably more accurate a.s an indicator of expected yields from the project site. The potential -for interference between wells can be estimated based o+1 formation transmissivity and other factors. The curves on Figure 5, Appendix 2, show that a well in the project area pumping continuously for ' 100 days at 1 gpm would halo,, for .all practical purposes, a negligible interference beyond about 5-.0C.J eet. Unoer typical residential conditions pumped than cnntihuouslys , Vie where wells are um'ed periodically, rather potential ,for hell interference would be much Less. The amount of water available for ground-water recharge ih the area cao be calculated based on average ahnuhl rainfall less evapotrans'piray tion and runoff: In the project drainage area, about 1.4 feet of water per unit area is available for recharpe, This equates to 0.85 gpm (1224 g p day) g a Water consumption in gallons per iia per acre throughout th� watershed, s areas similar to the project site is usually governed by water availa- bI l ity rather than demand..' Minimum domestic use can be estimated at 300 I 1 ons per household per day. Thus, the amount of available recharge !/ C' 16 oppears to far exceed the demand on the ground -water reservoir. Ground -water quality in the area is expected to be excellent. j���ilfG 149wever, it should be noted that there is a potential for saline water to occur in the vicinity because the Chico formation, which outcrops to the Wiest of the site, is a marine formation which typically contains saline _ _ grater in most ,areas of the northern Sacramento Valley. Surface water w quality tests ,of iBig Chico 'Creek showed no evidence of saline water being present in the drainage basin. Potential ,Impacts ! The ground -water evaluation found that sufficient ground water should be available to serve residential development on the project site, although the depth to ground water and well yields may vary considerably. Test wells on each lot would be needed to conclusively d,-termine whether or not the .wager supply requirements of the Butte County Health Department can be met.. Well interference, including interference of the I$ planned wells with each other as well as with' offsite wells; is hot expected to be significant provided that the wells are at''lea�t- 100 feet 40art4 Grouted -water quality in the area is expected to bey adequate, ' PO Ligation Measures 1 6.1 To minimize the. potential for Well interference, wells shall be located no closer than 50 feet from interior and 100 feet from exterior lot boundaries unless a variance is granted by the County, 7 Sewage 'Disposa a, 'Sewage disposal Will be provided by individual' septic tanklleath- field systems: The systems will have to meet the ,standards in effect at the time the project application was submitted (Tuttle, Butte County r Planning Department) Under these standards, the leachffeld area ,must have at least two to three ' feet of Sol! above the grouhd water table. �- Le-achfield i'nsta1lation is permitted in areas with7 feet or more of 'n soil ; with a 160 percent replacement area. Where the soil is less than 7 x Al , kA A Strate-ODCal DEPARTHENTAV&F ,AT NAME Inv M 77t nliiari P- -WW1011, GROM WATER POTENTIAL, FARMS IN THE FOREST INA I ti i. Cog Q q(, j4emoranduin Of At MARCAl.19M m Rom ef MEMORANDUM To: 1 Philip J. Lorens DATr starch 17, 1976 2. Robert G. Potter 3 Albert G. Poter SUBJECT. Ground water P'otenti,10. for 5 --Acne Parcels in the. Forest Ranch Area FROM: Ralph G: Scott Associate Engineering Geologist This report presr-_nt:s a preliminary analysis of the potential Ind water supply for individual 5 -acre lots in the Forest Ranch area of Butte county. The focus of the study was specifically on water supplies from individual domestic wells. This investigation iriuluded a brief review of available geologic literature and several 1 -day field recotnaissances. Tile. study area. is shown on the following map (Figure l.). Tha potential is poor for devdlnpment: of adequate water supplies thrCug'h construction of shallow domestic wells in the Forevt Ranch area. In t"ac», most wells drilled in the area are failures. Climatic, topographic and, logic conditions are unfav*drabla for shallot' ground water develop- ment. Although average annual precipitation is about 66 inclhes, only 12 ptrr.eht or about 8 inches are available fox deep percolation and ground Water recharge. Steep slopes transmit 'soma 'ground water away from areas of use. Geologic conditions are unfavorable because the entire Forest Ranch area is underlain by volcanic rocks of the Tuscan Formation ahi.ctr,, Appear to be essentially nonwatet-bearing or yield water to wells only grudgingly at best. In a memorandum dated December �2, 1972, entitled "Potential Ground Water 'Sources for CohassaL Ridge and sorest Renc:h Service Art!.as" (Reference 1), it Wasconcludedthat the best potential sources of grog .'nd wate;t; were da ply buried channels and conglomerates which underlie: the Forest Vxibch a at, depths of about 800 feet. De�tp community Wells may, ba the atcswer M,o local wager problems in the Forest, lunch area, liow eve`s° treasiitg energy costs could mean that water from deep we17s will be v axpenrive Geolo `.Clie Potea�; � � s+. Lea is about l5 miles' east of Gl ico in butte Coin rr The tdt ain v..ra.es from steep btush" and ti.mber'-covered slopes djong the creeks to relatively flat, timbered land along the ridge crests. The ground elevatiot`tt varies from abnut ij 700 feet to about 51300 feet;. Potent Ranch is ori the southern fti,nge of the GASCAde Range where :he major creeks Have eroded through the Plioedne volcanic rocks Into the undeVlytiig Pdltotoje and Mesozoic bedrock. There are • i rte major rock units in and near the area. metamorphic rocks, the Chico Vormation, and the.Tuscdn Formation; c/: wq i ly, /y r a ,Al, �� x -.✓f ./ ��I 1r� !. .. . ....�—�,/..�')V �-•-.,auJ 1+Pwtie�d�..,'M.w,»„µ.,.r nm��'('Yrz"�!,..wrrw�+le.. A"""; _.. . , Mo 1.)r�• I r r Irtl� x:.:..,�, • 1"rq 1 I• (% 1 41 r"� , i? P a } a } 11),,J (.ts',� 7/. • 16,ti'' i , f'.15 '.1 :►r.°V 14 ,: 0 -., u••, ifr �, t 7`.X / 'fj3' ) ll'Lt '� !b •'!°' 'dal ' Yr �`1 i.r'' 1� (�,% v i A.S�" /.'1 ''A. 1 ,�j������ �S',�1�'�1. M, d�tJr v f."„y"�", ,� � � YI, V � t � •� y J i n+Sr �� 1,.,'.6 r'! � t'b I IAS:.{ r,\` I() 'th ,,i l ��' .✓''a `� "`-� "w (' �, ,�f 1 r t l..�ar✓ •:. +, N� �i ry.. ttl -� -xl 1 r ) ,:r" ,r I \ C 'r/J�1 .i + ♦ r" r' f, )� ! Illi' CCr V )1,I1%t rf J 1 '') i�f ill �tl 1 �tl tiC,� f l aC >. !• c ,:rt yrl ', wy� �'4C" �, tt�1. a •, .jjt/•�^.; It r mr Liw /� Ate,. y�•l V `►.�" , 1� fila 1 , ilt ,t,,y/r� '.F lre `AIfIl70l2i�i ' �,`, ). ! , f '" T, S f r{ry lr y4 l ""� a` n .�,w. , n V r 5 v ((' .•.I •�Iw { ' '+�"� �t...� r� C w'tC .�rl,, I, `w.., i.Plw.I` I r t..b• 1 21 a*a 2r_. _ �•.' 23 > .�: a..r(I � � �erq •-i4: '�!" �,i�,.�-, /.,t ���1 r ..i. ...+tr. �*r ��., 1 �'. i- '�»e"".. 1 '� f• ` ?. ;1' �ltS 1 �'•. , ` ]cal..• � r. r r~...a, ..,,- ;L _..7.=.. •Y+; ` .. I + ..,;=a...,..:�. .. �.r.�} sr �' �r h; a aj ,' � • t, C�± .•� , , d i ."cr :.•'� 1 ,) � : i Eorka a4 �' ay�ti. 1 + �, q't' ( ` �•,r` s�,) i:� llattc �yf" :} ;.. . ►� ta: ? •.,. � .^;.. 3 J IC -, t!!.. '.".'ld tl „ .. . - u4 1 �. 'a ' 1 !t4 a . �r++o(�� Hot r� �y"{rt .t�1'f _ 'i'�1„i.}¢ Iliel.. • J )1f its' ' 1 ''t'� 1 �° f����� a '♦ A. �i}�`,.la ,•�,. _. 4 1`I` C' ♦�, j#�� 1,. iS "j{' * �"�� e o �•4as-.eh M't (� 1 a J " aJy, / J r ,n +x.er r' il'A;h hlaln5rnl �y�l 1 1 _' IAI�'. "l •'4 :'f �;"�.i _.i,,.A...�a�ll (f 'S) kHer '' ' 1 1t Yet J� �, • �1J 1/` r r ate( y.rr'raV, � Y�r^�1'+!� � " t`.•�•" �.( � Ci yr �� ,/"0 �� � !i/ iR �:. � r� 7w: � ; tr/. 1 { j{?T ! TO mull l!! xt lTet,x,11 4l�/rai7 ✓/ '"�l� I_�"J ".•"✓,(,h''�.::•� `►t I 7 ( 1` �� 3�ty`,�ltl...w." , I+++., iCAr � .�•;;j •} '' �•r r G3� ` % I '�,t' i,r. i{ ri r �a '.��r' f �%�' t..:.t.6.t.''*'�C x�. ljf ,tiw `I r"1 4r�•.: tt1 j r. ,.r}-tY i• -,I !i rt 1 r '�,r) i,j �:i..lr, Jr 'r,i• r7+ t�.. ++',J� �,. Si .' 1 !., , 4 ,} I , t, , ",-s, "�r� ; t h1 1 �� ,�,I�►ll!�j A)st•�'S...s-)i •�, .J '�'�I�r�1���..%f`a..,,I''_ r1r�1X�� ,/�'��*+��N6�� r� iif. y '� ,:�` �'C1�tCaC �tr�Rt_t*• 1y .J ..r•�c • �..r ,. e.� 1 t � Y. ri' U • i''.t•r. •. i > �. t Iy t II 1 { .? > !�`� 'AY'i�ry.:.1 1 r d'/,%IJ ¢.r r • I r» �, 1'>r...JI�S"u' c "i',,.. ' 1 ` `� ��•� i� S��r' rte. ;r; SJ t J b � �aY'"1, rr �r 111 [�'.+ C {`n } k,rA'}iM �• ♦ » tl'.a All' , l ��,-.�,''//�� ''"� � S�,�r�' J' _ � �)Jr, r r 1 »-'J ��r°� b St •'�_ � � 4s `�tMir�e -�». �' :r!I , � ,fir �y , t;. ``'t1UtM��•..t C w...' � '.'f ° o fr �'rt1 �'r,1; ``r 1�r1� ,' � il�`� rti� r i k c Y saA e � { � h �-• t e c l t. �l�"`,1! <,,.- ��11•!' � 1t�1�'�' `'. ��� .r` R A' � � 1{ r �; ��.• cl ;�` _ E A� tll� '��a:w4rr ��. y A V.:rJ. ,L:\'• . tY d «. ; i } i �� �..1....... 6 r 1t. 7ftl f �,,.� / '�. a � J�• �'rlr ti. ri,�� ` � r } r � 1• `�U/>'t` �aCr �4P n .trr f: •.r/ ��:/'/ '%•` ;(+'13 �.K "� �''" E9rrj/-j(j(11,i ! -�* „r a""� 1G,� ar � � ` 75)x! t45 ...f y+i .j r...,J°'d .� . I . ��( rIJ.`. .lir �.` 1. t 1 outk'`trit fle 1 uia� , rtx ; .. ( �,� � r y`� � i 1 r f l t' 4 t w rist y �» `���. JJ" j'� sti2)Jt,�j i r p�Z /�.; .A t�.it' " °� �• t=s:�:. I `, �,'� a •Fjji �.'�.'o f. (. �1, e,, 1• ' ,C, ) '•' a%� � ••'T'.�ff "�•%'�'R (.-'t.� :.� r..... r��:r�I�t�rrsGd .�_ �....,. r A't . 6 �• yrr .,..a sj � ,. , ( 1. ;tly `"••. [+,p Y � � 1 +kyt. "i' ' l . � � r :.t+t.+, � � � r' - r ,�,i � � `°r .^ a ,t � ('\ ' y � 1; 1 1 '+• .', " �' r i' S w� JJI. � :Jy ��7j) J � 1;°k �J � is � wr.a.�,� • � I! '11`" ' r� rl �'r�r.R'4,....Y.r�".f rJ 1rc*'! � T,� f ,Iln �a 7:1 ,.'' rer /f '23 t ', .,1 � • ,>!E f f r.f K �:`�1' r. ,p • +,�� , iw! � u ^ `� 1' 'Jw � p .��,` ,/ �•`r'� .� �••� 'x"Iv. 1 Sr t„[ `".; a �,%yj � 4,�„�;'; r • �� � q�rc�,� t�iJ 'il r' r' ) \ s'7 t y.,s + {'+ ter. f "itrrt "'� °>4 �� to - 5 �t�tr �v' J�, i r ),' i t\ •:� r F'i +:,s .-,y-. .�.:...�-«,�.,1.. w ., ...�b .�i.}�� .f" r•. , �' Et"ti ly�t t �r t..,. i `{... �}:�y� .. .._..rr � -* +•�- J • r _4 �.raj.lY 1 � "J ..•� i '� / yt .i f.� ���`4` I �r litl�a,+i"•4 �'"� r � ��./ Jr• � k� � r � � iy. �t ` r f '` it � • /I".:. 6 . Y� , ,. ,. • ) k� ` / , } � jr � 1 a grit ' A , I '�• r. y" i )r i x� �.� • 1 Wit. t ?"t � � +�•� L 254 �p {wi ,..JI`s.+�wl/^1`U llr)/�,rJlp ��i'1•�1 fd`�+i ;) 1J,.• 1�r� '�'11 1�, ,frd a1 °^'. µ -o r�'J .»� 1Ll 1.��(�Crrril�l �;,�11 1 • c ..a-�.rfr`i' �'�r' ,.1.' � 1 . CONTOUR INTERVAL 801 SCALE I "= I KALE a , i i'0' R EST RAID C AREA 'a r , The entire Forest stanch area, including Doe Mill Ridge, is i�composed of Tuscan volcanic rocks, which are underlain at depth by aurif" erous channel deposits, Paleozoic metamorphic rocks, and Chico rocks. Tile . Tuscan Formation is composed of volcanic tuff breccia, flows, and possibly some intervolcanic sedimentary rocks. Auriferous channel deposits are known to occur in ancient channels carved into the metamorphic and Chico rocks beneath the Tuscan, Formation, Whether these deposits exist beneath the Forest Ranch area is not known. Dven if they are present, it is unlikely they would be intersected by a well; The metamorphic rocks are schist, phyllite, and greenstone The: Chico Formation is a Crctaceous marine sandstone and shale with a basal conglomerate, the Helltown member. Ground Water Geology r The geologic units in the FoZest Ranch area are. divided into two groups: nonwater-bdating and water -bearing,. A Water -bearing unit is one that absorbs and transmits water and yields it readily to wells. A q in unit is, from which wells y d nonwater•-bear. g produce relatively limited quantities of water or none at all. in general, the. Tuscan intdtvolcanic sedimenta and the auri- erous channel deposits are the best known water -bearing units in the mountainous area east of Chico. ;Another potential, ground water source +.; in the Forest. Ranch area is the Helltown conglomerate member of the Chico r .s,., Formation. Water supplies drawing from the auriferous deposits or. the Helltown conglomerate would require. wells about 800 feet in depth, A more detailed discussion of these deep aquifers is contained in Deference l., ' p p For individual domes tic wells u to 4 00 feet in depth, only i he -Tuscan rocks can be penetrated in the Forest Ranch area. The Tuscan a t,, Formation is known to contain excellent water -bearing i,ntervolcanic sedi•- mentary layers', but Lalso has areas which are essentially nonwater-bearing ... Unfortunately, in the Vorest Ranch area the, latter may prevail.. in this .s- report the Tuscan is considered as essentially nonwater--bearing, ' The best producing shallow Veli in the Forest Ranch area genes orally are located to take advantage of the typography, The ground water in the weathered horizon of ';Ascan tends to follow the topography 'y} an p p i g )' d concentrate downslo e ate �n de ressYons (ti ere 2 Theretoreg only a few select areas along -,pLographic Lows and small. valleys near � 31 !"Forest Ranch are situated so s.a to yield modest amounts of ground water. w As previously mentioned, inte'rvolcanic sediments do ,exist in the ,; Tuscan and are generally good aquifers', however, in the Forest Ranch area tip well production seldom is more than S to 10 gpm, which Uuo-gedts either z r" that the intervolcanic sediments are seldom intersected by wall, or that they may be poor aquifers. It is possible that additional fliture wells °! could intersect good aquifers, I ,u .Fay., '• • II i Z l"Ult ELL 1, i,ty • A "� �•`.n A .t Y ,!�:. 4•'f �i !• '� ;,� SAS ik1 F, S M1,�7n�>��rti�•c� ,y � Y r��u,,` •` a'�p !'�.� �`4 / , ,,� �r 4l. y. M. •'� a}Y>•."1'``"1'v-, S »� .va i, ".. n n'1 n� `lt! i 1 •, y�j�„ �� �Sa ,1 r� ; !�rK�u �Y �J^'�w � � id��ya� 1 \ •. 7.`N r » a 1'\ J 1:;4'1 u15'.Yr' s4,h°i' aYM.� ' S i " r '1 WG LL •� " w lyf' Jr) ' i\}' i it YYiG«?t'«ya �v�'�,'fl�.. i• y�1`PA ���•,� /, / • tw r �.. } ��_, �,> '���y` �� � A �1.1,,rS. �•1 ✓' rpt,. ... •• , .meq - ,,.. '� f ,r, ��� s Ag�j,.� .� ` •tYr e��«�.�'��"`' `�r': '1 :`'�`� � •7'y..,J:7V�` V�r . �' ry �,-.r.....� �° • � yr (3J �� t ,{,. P A Y M�p�,f f~F ,rkb ` t •� � ,�. #.w �{, '..' {/+ 4. Y � �/. ' i• Jrl.�Ut �I ' l'r`I'fl4 "i� 'Yl+.+ix'G'¢<f'1`.xr `ltt,a \' ^�'/� • fI +'' "��Iv,`'•r•' r/ �:? r fi y +4•i+rz ..: Y . eV Y�% y:l �r`t�i..r r.�»�R,F;r� ,rp �i�r �'•'�t�,j «.y 1 ».�'6;ati » r., � �` ✓,� ;. .� ...�.r� ./ �. _.k ,« Y_. •. J;✓4"•;,"ntl�.q. wtl✓ iy' •` P I�y � e ' 1+. r , �'3+v GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC SECTION r *.TEAR FOREST RANCH U. in the Tuscan Votmation averages about The residual soil (A) ndy is 12 feet thick and is composed of fi11e-$ralderials�neabwhich e Sablafairly ndl . loose in place. 'Laboratory tests oermcabi.i.similar materials of about 0.0002 foot per a tate this material has an average P it general]y yields wafer. to Wells aay. Because of its fine grain size, very slowly and is considered essentially nonirarer-bearing. jr y enings l The weathered Tuscan rocks (t) have frequent secondar oP 'p "aint shear zones, and faultss because of the Tela-. such as fractures, 3 these fractures are generally ,C �, Lively shallo tdepth ransmit and than 100 feet), There i s seldom softs open and t and yield water to wells. '',1p - tUrate. this zone; so the iJater tends to migrate to and ,.� ciertt water to saIotas (i3s) A accumulate in topographicThe unweathered Tuscati tuff breccia (C) is consolidated and of it has very small primary openings {voids between permeability, rali y are not. lame enough ,3ndiv3dual grains, i.e. , sandstone), tahiclt gene . do allow movement of andufaultsmay contatrsonieeiJater but nings mseldom cd by fyiel.dres; Foints, shear zones; water at depths below 100 feet. Wells l and 2 would pen4trate a thick section of weathered per minute) .Tuscan rocks but could have £w.rou dction water(wouldsbeaencourttered: C1ei1 3 Ai,., , QAC, because only a small amaurtcause to �{= could have a modest productio�n(�� sstu�aredliaea�:heredons pet iTuscanbrocks it would intexsecti a thick sects dry er ods Wella l and 2 could go dry oduction from Well ,,Dux3ng y P ana pY i4t;,�could be severely reduces a llydr6logy r, i r The Forest Ranch area is on tate crest of a narrow, flat -;topped ridge about 4 miles west of a s.�mil.ar-appearing ridge occupied '•y De Sabla `and Magalia. Because of similar topographic, geologic; and cl.ifiatic con - 'editions between thr,se two adjacent areas, data developed for the "Nagalia }*,Reservoir Watershed Limnology and dater Quality Study" (Reference 2) are applied to the Forest Ranch area. Precipitation falls In the form of rain and snow. Though the �snowpack has been measured as deep as 4 feet, it generally does not remain ;4for any lengthy period of time and does not contribute .runoff into the armer summer months i Precipitation data on the Forest Ranch area have been collected at'a station '0.5 mile northeast of Forest- Ranch since ],954. Long-term 1 :». } ,.precipitation data have been collected by the Pacific "Gas and "Electric Company at the De Sabla'Reservoir site since 1904 and by the California `� Division of Forestry at its Magalia Conservation Camp since 1962. Theses ',4data were used by the U S. Geological Survey iu compiling an isolyetal, map that was published in 1969x This map shows the precipitation falling R.Ileon the forest Ranch area as having a mean annual, value of about 70 inches. ,Since 1954 the Forest Ranch station has averaged 66.4 inches which is },+1:.88 inches more than the De ,Sabla station. In order to obtain. information ran water Josses from evapotrains- fpiration (ET) ft ,i the forest soils for the Magalia study, a master clima- tological station was installed. This station was located ae and operated Iby the California Division of Forestry at its conservation camp 3 miles ,Anorth of Magalia, Evapotranspiration is the sum of water transpired to the atmos- phere by vegetation that evaporated from the soil and that evaporated from free water surfaces. These data were developed for the Magalia Reservoir Study (Reference 2,) and modified for the Forest Rdnch area, �tt.ey�d• 130 , ESTIMATED FOREST RANCA IIYDROLOGY (Based on da.ta developed for the Magalia Area) 1m� 71ata in Inches z'. Estimated }". ET Soil Average ,Annual Native Surface Deep Preeiipitation Vegetation Runoff Percolation 66.4 50;5 7.S 8,1 Seventy-six percent of the precipitation 3.8 consumed by evapo- �trrznspiration and 12 percent is lost by surface runoff, Only 12 percent JAit'orrc�F8"n1.e3ili� o{percolation and ground gate atinually r ie"chareAssuming th3ndividua�lots ,�re5 Acres,}suggests tha t jthaverage annual ground water recharga to the shallow would e; �; , . 5'- f 5"'acres x 43,560 ft2 x 8 inches R 1x+5,200 cubic feet or 1,089,000 gallons for each 5 -acre rfarce.Y Assuming a per capita water demand of 250 gallons per, day, a family of, Cour. mould requite 1,000 gallons per day or about 365,000 gallons per year: ,. It appears t,}ts"t on an average annual basis, about three times as much water goes to dedo percolation on each 5 -acre parcel as would be required by a family of four. However, even though the water is evenly distributed over each parcel, it slowly migrates to topographic lows, , Therefore, the water is generally available in localized areas, but is not available uniformly throughout the Forest Ranch area. This analysis appears to be substantiated by the many dry wells drilled in the Forest Ranch area. in addition, it should be realized that during dry years, ouch as this one, there may, be no deep percolation to the shallow ground 5' water zone and even favorably situated wells will be affected. ( f References = �c; 1. California Department of Water Resources, Potential Ground Water i" Sources for Cohassat Ridge and Forest Ranch Service Areas". Northern District Memorandum, 1972, 2. r�Magal a iteservoir Watershed Liutriology. and Water Quality study" ___�. , Northern District, Paradise Irrigation District and Butte County Report. April 1973 PSR «: X lel ia•' I, 4f a�- 1 e Office of Planning and Re rch. Rt7 � County �� Butte Co y 1.400 ,Tenth Street, Room 1.►y Planning Department Sacramentoi, CA 95814 7 County Center Drive - or SEP 25 1390 Oroville., CA 95965 XX County Clerk CMDACE j murnoutte co CIAk County of Butte By . ppMdhl Deputy SUEJECT F'iling� of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code: Project Title AP I/ Name _ontative Parcel Map 056-360-,012 LarryLoerke Otate Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Telephone Number cif submitted to Clearinghouse) John Mendonsa, Public Works 538-72.66 ' �r►othe eastaside of Forest :Ranch Road app roc: 500 feet north. of Peregrine Road, in the. Forest Ranch area. Project Description Tentative Parcel Map to divide 10 acres to create two 5 acre parcels. This is to advise that the -Butte County Advisory Agency (Lead Agency or Responsible Agency) has approved the above-described project on Sept. 17, 1990 and has made (Date) W .,,,�ftowing determinations regarding the above-described project: ' ala'T; ` pre j Q pct ,will, , will not, have a significant effect on the 2. An Environmental lmpaca.: Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the ptrovisions of CEQA. XX A Negative Declaration was pretated for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3 Mitigation measures Xx were, were not, made a dondition of the approval of the project. 4 A statement of overriding considerations .was, ?2 was not, adopted for this project. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is avai101e to the general public at: Butte County Planning Dep-irtment 1 County Center Drive Orbville, CA 95965 Date Received for Fixing and 4 Posting at OPR _, Septa IL 199(), i > Sigtatur_" *'4, 0, Craig Sanders: Assistant Planner Title r ris brt i /1sr. nhfle w d Co /it f tAI)d OF NATURAL V'CALT1.1 F t: r hTv% f 116 I,,,i.I V DEPARTMENY of PUBLIC WORKS WILLIAM (8111) CHEFF, Director 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIPOItNIA;95V- Telephone (916) 5387681 RONALD D McELROY CERTIFIED MAIL direetc> September 17, 1990 Larry Loerke RE AP 56-56-12, 326 W. 8th Ave. TPM Chico, CA 95925 Dear Mr. toerke } At the regular meeting of the Butte County Advisory Agency held on September 17, 1990, the Agency adopted a negative declaration with Environmental. mitigations and approved. the tentative parcel map On the above -referenced property subject to the conditions listed On the attached sheet: If no appeals are timely filed ---within ten (A) days of the date of the Advisory Agency's approval --with the Clerk' of the Board of Supervisors, this action will be finale When the conditions of 'approval are complied with, it will be in order for you to file your "final map" with the Butte County Department of Public Works for recordation within twenty-four (24) months of the date of approval. by the Advisory Agency. If you, have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office i very truly yours, Bu�Fa�o.Plenning�"�br>mm+, William Chaff Director of Public Works 01 oV,119, California f8hn Mendonsa sistant Director JM/ds attac ment cc: &,arming Department environmental Health Department Lippincott surveying — 117 , U k rt DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WILLIAM (Bill) CHEFF,Director 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE . OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 Telephone: (915) 538 768I CERTIFIED MAL RONALD D, McELR01' Deputy Director August 13, 1990 Larry Loerke REt AF 56,-36-12 326 1, oth Ave- TPR : 'hico, CA 95116 Dear ter. Loerke Please be adviaeri that.the Butte County Advisory Agency will hear` your application on th, above -identified property on September 17, 1990. The Agency will be reviewing the findings from the Pla.nrring Department and will be considering your tentative parcel h p. Public Storks will recommend the condi€-ions of approval as Listed on the attached sheet. 'the meeting will commence at t).00 a.m. in the Foard of Supervisors' Room, County Administration E+rild; ng, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. If you have any questions regarding this 'rt:Er, please contact this Office Very truly yours, William Cheff Director of Publir Works 1 John. Mendonsa Assistant Director JM/d!§ attachment cr Planning Department Environmental Health Department L�.ppincott Surveying ttu'h�e `o, plaw"19 0*nm G1 cn�t C?rdjiifln, Ccdifortlio l� I,� w v - ra IQ Y gutte, Coun y � LAND OF NATURAL WLALTH AND BEAUTY x uc DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH x«x„np DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH " ,•w Y. ="" «° Address 0196 Memorial Way ❑ 7 County Center Drive C1747 Elliott Road Reply to Chico, California 95926 OrovIllat California 95965 Paradise, Callforttia 95969 Telephone; 916/891-2727Telephone. 916/538-7281 Tela �, lTelephone.- 916/872.6308. 90fe co. P160*9 Carr T' June 1.3, 1990 j im 1.4 Vq C.)W4111*' California Larry Loerke RE: Larry LoeYke Parcel hap 326 W. 8th Av. Es Forest Kanch Rd,,, Forest Ranch Chico, CA 95926 AP# 56-36-12 i Dear Air. Loerke: This department has advised the Butte County Departmentof Public Works Land Development Section that we are prepared to act on the a6ove application. )3ascd on present information, we can recommend apprcval or conditional approval.. Recommended Conditions for Approval i. Showa 50' leachfield setbac',, from the drainage way on parcel 2 2. Show a leachfiel.d setback for four (4) times the height o.f the Cut on parcel 1. 3. Shaw the unsuitable areas for sewage disposal'..' 4: Prove that the required quantities of: domestic water are available to parcels 1 and 2, IE you have any questions, please contact the Chico dffice listed above; Sincerely, ,,.T homas eft. E. H; S Supervising Environmental Health Specialist Division of Environmental Health Public Works; Planning• Lippincott Surveying r, 7 ��. to Count LAND CSF NATURAL. WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNINGDEPARTMENT a•', 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORS'liA g59G5.3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7609 July 24, 1990 Larry Loerke 326West 8111 Avenue Chico, CA 95926 Re; Tentative parcel Map Dear Mr. Loerken The Butta County Planning Department has completed the environmental review of YOUr project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and forwarded to the Butte County Advisory Agency within the required 105 days pursuant to the California Public Resources Cade Section 21151.5. In addition, the Planning Director's report required by Sections 20-63 and 20-99 of the Butte County Subdivision Ordinance has been completed. 'Please find enclosed the Environmental Documentation/Planning Director's Report which has been ,prepared for your project. ' Please review the enclosed Initial Study/'Planhing Director's Report with conditions of approval if applicable. if you note any errors or omissions in our evaluation, please bring them to our attention. The Environmental Documents and Planning Director's Report for your project has been sent to the Butte County Advisory Agency for their action: California Government Code Sections 65950 and 65952.1 requires the Butte County Advisory Agency set hearings and approve or disapprove your project within sit months from the date on which your application m received and accepted, The six' month time limit for your project mandated by state law, will occur on November 26, 1990. The Advisory Agency will notify you of the time and place of the public hearing for your project: evaluation Of y011rIt there are CpCOJ� to l 11 rbpero�gcut, not related to mitigating an identified impact, reg iced. l a / Lt i Larry Luerke, TPN, AP 56-36,1'2, 2'parcels located on the east side of Fores+ Ranch Road approx. 500 ft.`,north of Peregrine Road., Forest Ranch area. Engineert, Lippincott Surveying Public Works conditions: I Verify legal access. 2 Provide 'two-way traversable access RS-8-LD-II to each parcel from a county maintained road or state highway. Access to be reserve(. in deeds as per county ordinance and offered for dedication on the final map. 4 Show 50 ft. building setback line measured from centerline of access " easement. 5 Provide road riaint6nance agreement. 6 indicate a 50 fti building setback Zrom the centerline of forest Ranch Road. 7 Show all easements of record on the final map: Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to rec.)rdxtion of the final map: 9 Provide culde-sac at the end of the street. 10 Obtain encroachment permit and construct standard road approach providing adequate sight distance at the itatersection of Forest Ranch Raod and access road li Pay any delinquent taxes or current taxes as required, 12 Deet therequi'iemotnts of the �',,Itte County Fire Department, Health Dept. conditions; i3 show a 50 ft, leitchfield setback from the drainage way on parcel 2. lir Show a leachfield:setback for 4 tames the height of the cut on parcel 1: 15 Show the unsuitable areas for sewage disposal. 16 Prove that the required quantities of doMdO'tic water are available to parcels 1 and 2 1.7 Show the required setbacks on the map from lakes, ponds and spring areas. I Larry Loerke AP# 056.360-012 Tentative Parcel,'Map Mitigation Measures: 1. Place a note on the alternate or additional map sheet of the final map stating, "Automatic fire suppression sprinkler systems shall.' be installed in all new residential structures in accordance with the National Fire Protection Associations Standard for the installation of sprinkler systems in one and two family dwellings and mobile homes, NFPA Standard 13D. The purpose of the installation of sprinkler systems is fot additional safety and property protection in the event of, res dent of fires. This installation will reduce the delmand for structural fire protection services in those instances where they ,are installed.," 2. Pay $200 per lot, to the.Butte County Fire Dept. for the purchase of a water tender, 3, Place a note on the final map that States, "All lots to pay any applicable deer herd mitigation fees in effect at the time of building permit application," 4. Provide documentation to the Planning Dept, prior to filing final map 4+hich outlines quantity of groundwater and rate of recharge. A stable water :source mustbe quantified: Provide projected quantities of drafting and, recharge for the well site. Drafting and recharge estimates shall reach equilibrium. %jlo e _ ...:. ;. .. .fir..;.. p Inter -Departmental Memorandum TO: Butte County Advisory Agency - FROM Planning Director SUB ECT: Report on Tentative Parcel Map for Larry LoefKe, AP# 56-36-12. DATE: July 24) 1990 This is a proposal to subdivide 10 plus acres to create two parcels at 5 plus acres each. The present zoning is TM -5. The Land Use Paan Map of the Butte County General Plan designates this area as Agriculture( Residential. The proposal does not conflict with County zoning nor any adopted or proposed element of the Butte County General Plan: nor any County, Specific or community plan. An Initial, Study was conducted in accordance to the California Environmental Quality Act and a IVlitigated Negative Declaration is recommended for the project. Allenvironmental documentation has been ,forwarded to the Butte County Advisory Agency within the required 1:05 days as mandated by the California Public Resources Cotte Section 21.151.5, Recommend approved of the Tentative Parcel Map for Larry Loerke,,,P# 56-36-12, subject to the following mitigation measures; 1. Place a note on the alternate or additional map sheet of the final map stating; 'Automatic fire suppression sprinkler systems shall be installed in all new residential structures in accordance Nvith the National Fire :Protection Associations Standard for file installation of sprinkler systems in one and two family dwellings and mobile homes, NFPA Standard 131). 'The purpose of the installation of sprinkler systems is for additional safety and property protection In the event of`reside ntial fires. This installation will reduce the demand for structural fire protection services in those instances where they are installed,`' 2. Pay $260.00 per lot, to rhe Butte County Fire Department for the purchase of a water tender. 3 Place a note on the final trap that states., "All lots to pay any applicable deer herd mitigantion fees in effect at the time of building permit application." 4. Provide documentation to thePlanning Department prior to filing final map which outlines quantity of groundwater and rate of recharge. A stable water source must be quaraified, ce! Larry Loerke Lippincott Surveying APPENDIX i :COU PTTY OF 3300,Pk� ENVIRUNMEN 'Air C i:CKLIB' !. WORN EVAtUATxON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 1,e i4o. $6-36-12 LO9 No. 90-05-20-02 AP No. 56-36-12 J,:,, f,,,'.I.ACXGROUND'; 1, LarrY Loefke 21 326 west ath Avenue, Chico, CA 96926 J, Project description. Tentative Par2el Map to divide id acres to create two 6 acre parcels. v sUvne ND ---�-- I3Z8CUSSON OF ENVIRONbiFNTAL EVALUATION � :MANDATORY FINDINGS OF BxCNZFICAZiCR ` i„ Does the project have the potential to degrade the . �x This proposal Will not slghtticantlY degrade the environment, quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wTIdllfe poputa(fon to drop below sellusustainthg levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or ellmtnate important examples of major peflods of aallfornta history or prehistory? 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve X This proposal Will not Impede long-term eny,ronmental goals. short --term benefits to the detriment of long-tetm envttonment goals? o �hott-term Impact_ on the environment is one Whtcli occurs In a tel'dllvely brief period of tint., while tong -term impacts wiil endure Into the future.) a, Does the project have Impacts which are Individual IV k This proposal may have a sisnlflcant cumulative impact on the Ilmlted but cumuiativety considerable? to project ehvlrontnent, may impact on two or more separate resources where the Impact on each resource Is relatively small, but where the effect of thetotalof those Impacts on the d0fronmeht is significant.) a. Will cause s directlyl Adver # effects or* which X 'this proposal WI11 not have a stgltl'ficanl adverse �effect on human y ngs. Ot her Will cause substantial advetse ,fleets on, human beings.. ctlyl n T I_s DtTERMIN T n ON n► i I at eva I ua t on the basis of ion: t/WE I'Ind the proposed project COULD HOT have a 0anlflcant effect on the environmehi and a NEGATIVE bECLARATICN Will bpi prepared. ✓._ w cant eifect In this t/WE fold ?hal, although the;propose"u� „,ct�e�onbl�h�V�t�tach�dls'tieelthavf.bct on the environment, theta not be a 7dgniti case because the MITiCATION MCASMEy a been added to the ptoject, A HtakrtVti DtO.AkAtroR WWI I be prepafed, 1/WE find the:ptoposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an gNVI4"E p IAPAcT-ntpokT I's required, CCtltTY C hl TJAErrr bXTE: )une its. lggti try. bKen h, ooCe, weYleVrcd by: 2 nnv ro=" a»tal Checkla.st Hvalumtion ag:HAV3 iron&e— utal, Impact IV.„ E zit ENTALIMPA CTS vL� MyBr t4 DxSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL _ EVALUATION I will the result to sYgnl Y lcarlt; 4 g, Unstable earth conditions, or changes in X - The proposal will not affect subsurface earth conditions-. geologic substructures? b. DistUpt[Or! displacement, compactlon of r _fc_ This proposal w111 result In some disruption, displacement.. cvercovering of the soil? compaction and overcovering of the site as a result of development of structures, driveways, parking areas, etc, Due to the topography of the site homesite locations will require some earthwork. In general, the tertaln of the project site is mostly a relative fiat ridge top, The Butte county Crading ordinance Is anticipated to mltlgate any significant Impacts caused by necessary earthwork associated with developing two homesites. C. change In topography of ground surface X The project sate is characterized by a rotatively flat ridge lop, Due reliet tealuresl - to steep slopes associated With the canyons, residentlal`development Is 11 frilled to the ridge tops, d. Destruct /on, -:overldgor trodiNeat fiinof any_,, X. the project slid has no physical features which Are unique to Butte unique geoloy'tc or, physical' features? County, e' r' , r eithersonior srit~oter eroslbu a” `wiIt, X Wholesale exposure a soil during the of srais off development willmpor rilyUdtion temporarily se of allowed by t col ipderinprolect sr the of as shalIOW 'solls, vegetation type, sigope size, and Incl lnatlon,sand the frequency and Intensity of rainfall, soil erosion ton otentIa It ve�y high.l t I S anticiphted that the Hutto county:cradineordina se wll Control 'erosion during the constructlon phase of deylopmentto a less than significant level, i. changes In deposttl:on of erasion of beach x . The proposed project Will not cause siltation or erosion of streams, sands, of cYianges 10 slltatl'on, depoiltibri rivers of creeks, of eYosion which may modify the, channel of la river or stream or the bed Of the ocean' 'or any bay, Inlet. Or lake? g Los Lost of prim.. agficull ufally product,Ve X 'this proposal does hot tootgsent a algriiticahl loss of prime $01 41 outside ifesignated Urban areasf agricultural sails, the property Is characterized by residual soils fromouudh rock bUtcroppings, boulders, cobble stones, shaflolflosolis y g Tuscan formations, such soils have marginal agtltultufa) values and lfurlted grating opportunities.` h, Exposure of people qr property to geologic _,x SII of tiuite county is In a Moderate earthquake Intenilty zone: viii. hazards such as earthquakes, lands Ides,. cohstrudtion of bul Idings to uniform Building code staneards WI mudslides, ground' lailute of similar provide adequate proiectlon to occupants in chse of seismic activity. hazards? a.,, AIR., Will the ptopbsai resul'l In substantial" a. Alt emissions of dettlriotat.iari Of anbteht X - lncteasihb the densities til:tesldehtlaf deyelbOr6ent on the ptblect air qualltyf SOP' Will tdsult in a cumulatlye impact on air quality due to related Increases In (tattle generated by increased dehsities lot residential deVdlopment,, The Calllarnia felt kesoufees control Hoard had Identified butte County as a nohattainment area in meeting the standards of the callrorn)a clean Alt Art. The county alt pollution control pian pfoVlB. no mitigation measures lot such a small tesldentlal prolect. bue to the size of Che project the cumulative impacts are considetdd insignititaht. u, 'rite adatlon of cblectiohable odots, snbke -. Sane shott teem air gUafity Impacts will probably result during the Of` fumes? i,, construction phases of developing residential housing. Increased Mnv3 rOXI*' ntal ` Checklist Evaluation of En'Oiror menttal :impact k 3 2'V'. MIRONM NTAL 1"ACTIS (continued) Yes 4yyer No DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION, (continued) vehicle and equipment emisslons as well as increased dust wi 11 occur, during earthwork stages of development. C, Alteration of air movement, moisture or - x The proposall will not affect the atmospheres. temperature, of any change In climate, locally or reglonailyt d, wATFR2 Will the proposal result In tubsta- lal; a, changes In currents, or 'the course or X The proposal will not affect the course or direction of water direction of water movements in either movements in either marine or fresh waters, b, martrie or ftesh waters? changes In absorption rates, drainage_x The proposed project will cause some minor changes In the absorption patterns, or the rate and ainount of surfacerates and resultlhg amount of surface funoff dud to impervious runolff surfaces related to paving, parking areat, drlVeways, roof tops, etc, -- - - No significant altering of the basic dtainao pattern is anticipated. C, - Need for off-site surface drainage X No ofI-site surface drainage Improvements Is anticipated In order to Improvements. including vegetation removal, acconnodate the proposed ptoject, channelizatlon or culvert Instaliatlon? d. Alterations to the course of flow of flood r X _ The proposal will not alfeci the flow of flood Waters, waters( e, change in the amount of surface water In any_ The proposal 'wlII not affect the AmoUht of surface water 10 any water water body( body, f. DischArile Into surface waters, or In any X The proposal will not impact, surface Water quality, alteration of surface water qual11IY- including but hot iimMid totemetatute. dissolved oXygen of turbidity? g. AtteratIon of the direction or rate of (low _ X The proposal wlII hot affect the direction or flow of ground waters. of ground waters? It, change In the quantlty of quail of ground >z The project like Is currently dependent upon groundwater, Higher Water's, elthet thtotigh direct a dltlons or "an uanslties may avetdtaft the existing aqulfer, cuffently, there Is Withdrakais, of tht'ouph Interception of no statistical datd. on the quahtlty of groundwater or rate of wi Aquifer by cuts or cavatidoiv recharge Of gtoundwalef In the Forest Ranclt Area, Historically. the pores( Area ,tial ekpetlenced Water shortages. A stable water source should be quantifled Which Will ptoVide the water demands of the ptopbsed density. 1. Reduction in the 'Amount of water otherwise X- see ah above. available for public water,cuppilest It. Exposure of people of property to Wate.t- X the project site is hot located within a flood zone area, The related hazards such as floodtngi propoSal *111 not result in the exposure of people or propetty to water related hazards such as flooding, 4. ptANT LI will the proposal result 1n su b s Va-RT t; A. change, In the dlvetslty of tpedles, orUmbel k _'. The diversity of plant species Will be expanded as residential none Y of plant (Iand (luau 3fhtt y native landscapes are installed. soetlet ttedtplahls)? b. Reduction of the numbers bf My unique, taile X No fare plant's have been identified on time project "sites, of endangered `species bf pir.ntst c, Introduction bf hew specles of paantt Into k the'ptMosal Wilt hot affect existing plant life, an area, of In a battler to the 'norma.i �I 4 XTiia ENVIRONM&bT'T'AL DMACTS (continued) vFs MAYBE No DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued) replenishment of existing speclest d, Reduction In acreage of any agricultural x_ The site does not contain any commerclaily viable agricultural crop. crop? 5.NIAtAL__._a LICE. Wf'11 the proposal result ih s—u6s—taut—Ian a, change in the diversity of species, or x The project site Is located Within a Door hertl tango for the East numbers of any species of animals (birds, Tehama Deer herd. The area has been utilized as the Winter ranges land animals including reptiles, fish and for the East Tehama Deer herd, In 1983, the california Department s ef s ,bentc.otgan Bros orInsects)? of Fish and came commisslon Identified development In the foothills as encroaching upon migratory deer ranges, The butte county Board of supervisors appointed a committee to Identity the deer herd range in Butte caanty. The committee documented the impacts of residential development on the migratory deer ranges, and recommended mitigation measures (of protection of migratory deer habitat affected by residentfal development. To date no policy has been adopted by the Board of Supervisors to mitigate impacts of development on the migratory deer herds, The proposed ptolhct Is located Within a desfgnated deer herd development zone (DDZ), however, no Impact tees have been established to fund deer herd range mitigailon;measures, The county of Butte currently requires all maps In the DDz to place tho following note on final maps. "Deer Herd Impact fees- shall be paid at time of Building Petmit Issuance if Applicable." b, Reduction in11he numbers of any unique, rare x The rile contains no rare animals. of endangered species of ahimalst C. Introduction of new species of animals Into k see 5a above. an area, or In a baffler to the migration or movement of animalst d. Deterioration of existing fish or Wildlife X See 3a above; 6. Nbl§, Will the proposal result In substantlall A. increases In exlstlos noise leveist k- _ 'the proposal will not result In a substantial Increase In noise created on site of In the Vitlhlty, b, MosUre of people to severe hoise leVelst x the Proposal will not o0ose people to severe noise IeVels. 'r. LICFrY,. cLaltE. Wi11 the ptoposai 'produce "x..: The ptopo"s 1 will not result In a 'substantial thcre.ase in light or Tnl can ,gn and glares' glee bred ad on site or fel �lhe VIClhlly. &, LAND Ust. Wl.li. the proposal result,In a substantiae' k.. The ptoject site Is designated by the Butte county General Plan as a`lterai�ion of the present of planned land use of an agflcUI Wral-Resldential, The N olect site is zoned TMs which areal requires a Mlnlmum of live acres per dwelling unit, The proposed parcel map conlorms to both the general pian dosignatlon And the zoning class,ification. The proposed project is consistent with he charactet of the sutroUnd)ng area Which Is typified by five and ten acre home"sltes, 9. NA'51LI L rdEsi7tYCm Will the ptopbsal result in su ST a r 'A Increase in 'the rate of use 'bf any natural k The proposal Will not affect any natural tesbutces, N-15MCes i b, bepduiceft of any hon-fehewable hatUral X_. The proposal Will not deplete any natural tesoutces, 5 m iviranmental Checklitst * 9vbL1W1lts.0x1of ' :Envkk,6n aentA.. , Tmpa ct IO. EN71R0)HFfMTAL nWACTS (continual) YES MAVh _ DISCUSSION_O?F ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) 10, VsK OF L)Pu . Wlia the ptoposaI Involve: a. A risk of exploslon or teleAIe of hazardous _K� The proposal Will not Involve the use of hazardous materials, hot Is substances (Ihcludihd, but not limited to, Ibcated close to any facilities which stare or utilize 'such oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in miteriafs. the event of an accident or Upset condltions7 b. Posslble Interference with an emergency _ _ x The proposal will not affect any emergency stirvices, response pian or emergency eivacuatlon plant 11. POPMATION, v1111 the proposal alter location, fir_ The p,oposat will not slgni f icantiy affect the popUlailon of the area rslrlbut on density of growth elite of the human be-ause the propbsed protect is consistent w lk what has been planned Populatlont and being develofyed in the area, 12. atN 111 If the pfopotal affect ak`istfng housing, __z L_ The. proposal will not significantly aftec,t, housing demand. or create a demand tot Addltlanal houslh.gt —' 1,1,ANssxtnATiO►a/CfRCiJl:n1 iUr+.. WI'11 the ptopasal a. - Generatlonof substantial'addllaonatvehicte- x The proposed-Ihro)ect Will gi,Inerate appro>(fmately two vehicle trips moVemeritt per hour per lane on A P.M. peak, such generated by the _traffic ptoOosed liro)ect Walf trot subttantiallY Impact the exlttfng tten"spoftation hetwpfk, The existing ttanspottation ndtwork has adequate capadlty to accommodate such traffic generation without a degradation of the level of service-. 6. Effects on ekistlhg parking tac1titTes, or x ^� L� affect parking bectluse the proposal wfal have proposal demand tot hew patkingl not to comply with ►he parking (egUIremehis ctintalned Withah eUtte county CThet odeSill tion c. aubstantlal i" -pact on existing �Y ` _t',_ see iia above. trahspottation systemSt d. signlficant. aitetatlons to presentpattErns . _ - Th6 proposal Will hot slgbltlCahtly 411.4, 'present traffic patterns, of cIrct,tatlon or mayeine,tt of people and/or e�. Alterallans to wat:etbotne, fall of alt "1t:, The proposal will not affect watdrbokhlt, tail or at: traffic. tralf ld? f. Increase in ttaflle hazards to motor ;, �k�,. The Iiropcsal will riot sighIlldant.:ly in'creas'e traf'fit haxatdt, vehicles, bI dyclistt or pedetttlahst td. OLMLIC sgkyiOia, Willi the proposal have an eftdtt upon.. or result in a nee(► tot neW or altered governmenLseryl cos s A. Piro ptolectlont -. x:� ,�, The proposAf will re'ult In a ihcremerital indrease In demand for lite proletlon Ih the area, The butte County Me Od0Aftment callforhTa ouralt on of Foteslty has Indicated l,hat 'cumulative development In areas will Imphct their ability to 'provide file protectloh services. COQ has proposdd as a mitlOatloh meatUte.all„iesideiitial suppressloh sprinkle► tytlems thalt be ihstatlrid in all restdeiittnf tituctutet In accordance Wlth the National Fite Protedtlbn Association standatd tot the lnstai Illtloh of 10k 1010 Witems In one AM two family dwelilnes alit mobf Id home's, NPPA standard Tali. rtie J. 6 Ip, EMVIR020MTAL I. WACTS (ontinued) YES mAyng No DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL 'EVALUATION (cont Inuedl purpose of the installation of sprinkler systems Is for adrfltiona► salaty and property protection in the event of residential fires. This ihslallatloti will reduce the demand for structural fife protection services in those instahcen where they ,are installed,' b. - Police protectiomt x- The proposal will result In a lncremerltalincrease in demand for police protection In the area which cannot be serviced oy the present Sheriff's Department, Since 198o the population of Butte county has Inc teased by o�,r 25x, while at the same time the police force has been decreased in ersonnel by 50% due to fiscal difficulties being cioefienced by 16ul,ie county. outfentlY, Butte county has the lowest - officers per'capfta in the stat[ At recent Legislative 'Committee Hearings ort BUtte'coUntyls Fiscal crises, county ofIlclats testi Iled that police protectlon srrvices are presently inadequatf,, and do not ,—et the servlc•a eXpectatlons of the public. continued rural development has PesUlted in cumulative Impacts on police protection 'services which 0gtinues to reduce the Sheriff Is Department capacity to provide adequate police Services', C. School At x _. The proposal will result in a incremental increase in 'demand for school setvtces in the area. However, school Impact fees collected by the local school districts Is ahtlelpated to reduce school impacts - - - - - --- to leis than a significant level'. d. Parks or other recreatton al tatI111lett - it --- The prohrishl'Will result in a Intilemehial increase In demand for park and recreation tacilitles In the area, e> of pub is tac„Iifles.Inclu d rig X The proposal will result Ina Incfemental Increase in the need Tor .toantenance toadst matntenahaf of roads and other public facilitles In the area, f. Other governmental servtcesl x - The proposal"Wilt result in a Incremental Increase in demand for ail other governmerital services In the: atea, - .. I$, t:NtgdY, Will the ptoposal result In: A. Use 'of substanllaf amounts of fuel ;or it._, The''ptopoial Will `not Utillzc subs:tahtf'al fuel or energy. energyt b. suO tantlal,'inctease trrdemand u on ekistlhg st,urces the X-- The proposal Will not substantially Increase the `demand tot energy. of energy, of ,require development of qew soUtcet of enef9yr �6. 1,910 Iles, Will the, proposal tatUii In a heed tot, new systema,, or spbtUntial alteration`s to the following: a. Power or natural gast X-- The "proposal Will not affect eldt:ttical powet of natural gas distribution systel . b.: DommunitstionS systemst X _ The pioposAI Will not aliedt comUhltatich systems. c. Water aVatlablilty:t x Thopropbsed project Will Ut111id Well Water which has, not hlstoricallyproven to bestable source of water. Prior to tinal .a tecordatidn of the map tillailty and quantity of Water should be documented, d, sent or septic systemst - X The oebleet sites ate located in ureas characterized by shallow stills, rock oUli:roppings, and 19YA caps. 'the sold chatbe1Bristles of the project sites ate bftnn prone to septic and due Ieachtleld system failures to poor toll percolation cappacity FaIIute of len results Ill the seepage of Waste Water into t4c sur ate layer of soft and 'onto the orourid,- LCacittletd tallutes play enter nearby stfeams, Nk mxvironmental Checklist * '$Valuata.on of EhV ron len al InlpaCt r' IVMWIRONH3WTAL IMPACTS (continued)Yes: l�ynr; No DISCUSSION OF ENVILRONMENTA]'i BVAL+UATTON (continued) related organisms, water suPtioestrict(oadherencehtortheltJuttelgcounty' OVironmental Health Department requirements Is arLticipated to mlttgV a the above concerns, e. Storm watet dralnage? X _ The proposed project will not need substantialstorm drainage improvemegts to accommodate the proposed development. f, solid waste and :di sposal t X The. proposed project will have a cumulative Impact on the butte county sanftAfV Land FIJI and the disposal of soild waste within the county. 17. HUMAN HEALTH. WIIi the proposal result In; A. creation of ant+ health hazard or potential Sl.. The proposed project WIII not create any s'lgvrlffcanl health hazards, hazard (excluding mental health)1 6. Exposure of people to potent1161 health _ X -- the 176 above hazardst ta. AESTHEYIcs. W01 the pr000saj resul,, In the _ X The proposal will result In an aesthetically offensive View. strutai of any scenic vista or view ol'en to the public, orII II the proposal result In the'creation Of An ae!,lhdllcally offensive site open to the public v►,ew? IC reone,,tlni Jqualit nitres?quantity of existing `- andfecctteatllonafacislities,an incremental inc.tease In demand for park;' osat result In an Impact _ X oppor 30. cUt`rlRA't pEscutcEs. A will the proplsalttesult in the 'At Iteration X The project site is identified as an area of tow sensitivity for or destruction of a prehistoric or Iosal rosul 1. 16 adverse II sfor Ic archaeological resources, archb, or Aesthetic tWI I I the ic eftelngcttfto a rot Is ladle or hysIdal X the proposal Wi(l not oftect historic sit�3. c. Does the propeNtat have the polthtlat to X The proposal will not affect cultural raulrtltcel. cause a physical change Which would affect unique ethnic cultural Values? d, will the ptopbsai restrict dXlstinh _ X The proposal will not Altect ttilglous tesoutoes. rellgiout or sacred uses within lite potential 'Impact areal V., SUGGESTED !jjETId"AlX6N .MEASUABS 1.'PtbVide documehIAtIoil to the Planriitidbepartajent all' residential structures In accordance ��yIth the prldt to filing (fhal map which outlines auaht,ty Natlohaf Fite OfOLOCtiOn hssoclatlon standard for of grorundwater Arid late of td'chardd. A stable the installation of sprinkler systems In one and water 2placeured must a note tyn'Ie Ouan he mapIWhi two family dwellings and mobile homes NFPA Yr n The �sutpots of the Installation of l standarrd is , i addlti.ohal safety Md stales,. Deer Herd sptlhki ystems s for impact tees shall be bald at time of Building 'lopert protection In the event of residential Permits Issuancd It appilcabie." firt:a, This ihttallIatlon will 'reduce the demand for strtictutal fire protpctIon teryledt Ih those �. Place a notes t the altethate or additional map )hstaoices where they are installed.' sheet or the W..al map Stating ,automatle,, Ord suopresslon tprlaahlet systems theft bo i�hsttil',��d: in � I. 7 8 9 . mpaciv. a.ai:onmontal ChecMLIst * .EValu.Rnvaxc►rlaltr �er ,. i67- ENVIRONMENTAL T IPACTS (continued) vet M YnE NO DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued) DATA S14E io Archaeological and Historical Resources In the areas Low w„ prolect nescriotion 11. sensitivity A'tea Butte county General Man ties ynation: Agriculturaj= I. `rype_Of Protect: Tentative Parcel '.wp 12. Resfdentlal EXlsling Zoning: U-5 2. brief Descrl tion= IPM to diVide io acres ld create two s aqe lots. p 13. „ Existing Land Use On-site. vacant 3, Location: on the east side or Forest Ranch !toad approximately s110 feet north of Peregrine Road, Forest Ranch Area. '14, surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: forest, ural residentlal r R: 5. Peoposed Wnsity of Development: iunitl5 acres Amount of ImperV'tous 5Urfaring, minimum b. 7oning: TM-5 c.. Gin, Plan Designation: Ag-Res"1 n' an DSites 6. %_ Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Forest Ranch Road d, Panne! 5 10 is d, Population: Low Population a, Alethod of Sewage Disposal: septic/L0�:chlleld source of hater supply: PrtVate wells 15, dbaracler or site and Area: Rural' 9, 10. :_ Proximity of Power Lines: Adjacent to property Potential for further landrdiivisions and development: N/A 16, 17. Nearest Urban Area: Chico Relevant spheres of Influence: N/A ta;, Imptovements standards Urban Area: N/A 13. fhV ronmehtal setllhn 19. Fire Protectlon 5cevices a, Nearest county (state) Tire statlon% Volunteer station PhV"tical Environment- 024 at Forest Ranch, b.. water Availability: Water Tender Only 1 . TerYtn 20. schools In Area: Chico Unified school Di lrlct a, Cenetal Topographic character: Varying from rela'tiVe;y flat canyon bottoms 16 extvemely steep cutis and ridge tops, b. slopes: vaty from 2 to 574 C4 Licvatlons 24001 ASL d. Limiting factors., None 2* softs .a 'types and characteelsticst soil is mostly charac"ert by the Alken Stoney Phase: stones co< rise apptOXima;ely, 501 or mote of the volume of the soil. soil 1s do ' OXlmatcly six feet deep In the project area. Residual $011 lr0m'iaVa 11005, tough tock oUtcroppingt;, boulders: and steal row tol is overiyfng TUscah'formations alsoa.,fist# on the Lille. b, Limi'tln�i Vactors: shallow tolls HatUral HaZards of the Land a, tatthgriake Zone, Modefate Eatthouake Intensity lone b. 00 lon Potential: Hloh C, Landslide rotentiait Moderate d, Fire Hazard: Extreme. e, Expansive soil Potential; Low 4, itydroiogy a, SUrOce Water; yatlr>us creeks and springs b, Ground Water, UBRPOwh C. Dralnage ' Project site dralrls into the sig Chico creek Dralhage basin. d, Annual Rainfall (normal): 3o-351 e. Limitiho Factors: Putentlally limjted woundw:kter S. Visual/sc'inic r)uatlty: txeellent 6. AcoUstic Quality, Good Air @tial 11y, Good nlolonlcai 'EnVirbrument: o, Vegetation: Dak woodlands and pine tote>t with tock oUtctops,, rock bluffs, Wlldiife 1labital, small birds and anirnafs common to foothl",t areas, cul tura 1 60 tohTeht': *r roaynenta Cho k7.i€ t°" Srraluati+on c�� Nnpiranmeititta' xm act %! P. NNVTRONMENZAL XAPACTS (continued) Xr—S MAYBE NJ DISCUSSION O% ENVIRONMENTAL_ EVALUATION _ fcontlnuedl ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAI, I ,:May I1-� EarthgBual,e at�d F�U(t Actlyli� .' Sel' ml cd a7? yby G ph., to oun y I Cenera an reYI 4 2, MM -0 11-2, Ll Uefact,lon Potentia.l, Selsmi Safety El m& itl,� BU t� County Genera i Plan revised el -77, by 3 ). l 1 1 -1 Subsidence & Lands l fide Potent is SSafety HenientzM HJl,fi gUtte County General Plan revise tt I�77, by 4, a 111-2, Er $Ion Dote tial f ty.F n t, Butte opunty Genera 'Wtan rev se i-7� etiy CHHi i I 5.1 Mao. i l 1 3, EXp2t�S five Soils afety. Cr�e�eHnitl,l Butte Co my c;enera an revised Ii7, Y 6`1anl revlsedls1-'77, by Noise County General 7. auotte County nGenea� P� n.reAseenlcl J�4ghbjlyCIT2V.l?l I B M p InII-4, Natural P I t e Hazard Cl as es. Safety CWS Wti,l Butte County General ,Plan revised I�77, by 9, fornuu°tiegcountyeP�annir'N parbmen mei98 .Mannln9 14'. gchbot District Map, Butte County Planning epar meat, 11. fl Nitra Stu dp,. Nit ate Concehtr do 1n aI,Iow We r, Yh b 6 artme t o .41ator HsoUrCes' or thwe�5gtt rn t�lsrr ct, --s Agent , state of Cali�ornla, iie. Resourt,. '12.p r Idu ttt al Preserves Map establ isl she by RNsoiiution e6etnt r1,68 1 8, 1911 County Board -of .yUpery f sors, 13* Proodam, FeueraiREmergericy �.�ahagementlAgency, 8ce. 14, USGS Quad Mans, Corha2sset, IVO. 15+ 5011 m� t Colil Aar cu (19'26) Ar'eay U,S.:Deo. 16" Ueop'artmentYoi Agr�c°U1925 'Orovil ie 19226,) Area. U.S. 17. auttf ouh "r Pl a Protection 1Urisdlctlons an Cay It �' Lit td cou❑t f(re Deaartme�CC0 ay a o irtnent of Fo estry. Utte P I ann i ng $epatmenT, 1' 0 eL Suitet T Y H ANb BEAU LAND OF NATURAL WEAIT PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 «�.•r `."'• TELEPHONE: (916) 536-7601 June 26, 1990 �r Larry Uerke .:326 West 8th. Avenue Chico, CA 95926 Re: Tentative Parcel Map, AP 056-360-01.2 Dear IVIr. Loerke initial stud of your Proposed pro;�ect, a Tentative Parcel Map, :ache �� {,tia�lrlyo An i Y adverse imp7,cts to the environment (refer to the enclosed environmental reduce or eliminate these impacts, suitable mitigation measures s are rued p as part n to the project: Otherwise, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) q California Environnnental 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 from the date of this letter, Should'you have lease contact this office between � any questions regarding this .matter, p 10:00 a.m. and 3100 p,m Sincerely, B, Ai Kircher Director of Plariftin' Brent I-, Moore Associate Planner BL,M lr Enc. ` cc: Lippincott Surveying COMM OF BUTTE DEPARnM OF PUBLIC WORKS 7 County Center Drive Orovlle, CA 95965 (916) 538-7266 May 25, 1990 Larry Lorke RE AP 56-36-12 326 W. er Ave. Tentative Parcel Map Cai.co, CA 95926 Dear Mr. Loerke Tnis is to notify' YOU that your application for a tentative map for the above-referenced property is being submitted to the planning Department and to the Environmental Health Department for environmental determination) for its review. This application will be considered complete when we have received alth artment and the Environmental Hets notification from the Planning De pThse Department that all necessary. addti nal�iniota have ben eraLation.theyemay requiren will contact you regarding :any very truly yours; William Cheff Director of Public. works f J tiendonsa AsIn sistant Director PJM/k1c cc planning Department Environmental Health Department Lippincott Surveying 13u�f� �.'I�ARnM9 " Qroville� Cali4 ,' ID 1120 (wised 2/88) _ eLn .,art 44: .r i` s TOTAL. INFOkIV i I Fm�ryv�l 1 _i ri vo Lsrvr�r s TOTAL. INFOkIV i I Fm�ryv�l 1 _i ri vo TITI G Co`5. 7��NRY SHEET 3L� �3D �sVISiC12�r5 Larry '%oerke g# 90-05-29-02{; Lo 326 West 8th Avenue, Chico, CA, 95926 Anthony G. Wren. ` L MAP to divide lb acres to create two 5a' o e DESCRIPTION TENTATIVt PARCE of Forest Ranch Road approximately 500 feet north of ON On the east side ,Peregrine "gad, Forest, Ranch area PSSIZSSORI S PARCEL NUMBER (S) 56-06-12 TIS-5 GEI,7ERA.L PM-4 Agra PROaECT CONSISTENT? .0 PLAN CONFORbtANCE REPORT 519190 DATE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE li-D :CONSERVATION ACT CONTRACTS? MATE, .APPLICATION `RECEIVED 6I"' / 0 E?'/SURVEYOR/CML ENGINEERS Lipp incott 5tiryeyangY L? 55 . P.0 Box 671, Paradise, Cf.� 95967 _ Pz 'PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPWq-1,' PREPARED '�J : �"IV jlrtR.0ENTAL CATECtORICAL EXE%TTION DATE FILED : JrZT &141 NATION ATE NEGATIVE 'DECI,A?�TIO;�, �^ DATE ADOPTED �.. MIT2GA'�E17` NEG. DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED' ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE CERTIFIED_______ STi, t'L" dttARSNGk�00SE NO. SUg_ COMMITTEE MEETING DATE ADVISOR'! AGEVCYEARINC DATE , DV-SORY AGENCY ACTION, r �PE.ALED APPEAL HEARING DATE BOARD ACTION � ..�. COMMENTS POR ttANNIM0 DTRECTORl5 REPOfkT }y Gx a FOR ICE USE ONLY: ,Butte County Plannin pt. R'ece L) 7 County 'Center Drive O;-pville, CA 95965-3397 Applicant (glb) 534-4601 AP Subdivisio Name(if applicable) APPENDIX E Date Filed LAND ,DIVISION APPLICATIONS Supplemental Information for. 'Planning DeUart+ment 1. List,and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this , projectinclud J g those required_by city, regionali state and federal agencies: a=�,Al,•r-' 7_. Proposed scheduling/associated projects': I 3. Anticipated incremental devo_lopment phasing of subdivision unt'ts, fUtur,e development plans) l� 4. What method will be utilized to accommodate surface drainageli Describe how on-site and downstream drainage channals mill be affected, !'z 014 G 12-2 � t r i0? J'?.� ,�,G F2 0 ca 5•1 Proximity of water for fire fighting purposes (hydrantsi pbnds,i etc.): W &U. -t 5 '6` 6. Will e'cavation or grading be necessary! Cubic yards (estimate): x 7o Directions for travel el to prnpex'ty► (rural and mountainous areas only)i zb4 r44 m'•= / M_tW,- 44-0, I` ,! 3 Z 7-10 ��*f �tf-'(�rti+-o , , . �-t� ati-�.G 1--�rr=c.-�.t�-- 'jZi'h:.t� %� t�►�-,� h,�p l� arc 41 e riC dzc u , + � w Bi ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES* Identify potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the land division. What project design features or special conditions of approval (mitigation measures) are proposedto alleviate potential environmental impacts? JeOA •1y Wj uc„ M w_,q pc.Yt 9. ENVIRONMENTAL ;SETTING* a) Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, :soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. " y ting structures on the site, and the use of the structures. LA-v4 O I'> lKaO� �.-,..7 6j_et2c a '7i,"O jl._: L nRr� W c 1Th TF+ I eAL r6 r4,u.4 ►t•" --40 Lha/?+ GiR-,7 jg�y�y�-0 .•s j ,L / it'h'✓C�`"i 'S•c,Q-i�-cw-NAi�Gb Pfd-a+'�'+'�,*7c.-►. �i cif, t_nr /�y�i c,.b �3tV�1^aGc"+y —• � 'SJ`rti..�.n,tc3 b) Describe-the surrounding properties, including information on 44'r s. plants and animals and. any cultural, historical.•or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of, land use (one.-family, apartment houses, shops, depart- ment stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). '�5 (b (t" u►.- #,,100 O-C• 7;'l t- J'--eL-t' L C`'3 A-M-cr ` '* hL•G z_12--C 3 I Dc.yv Gc`s, �1.`YLh-i1t" "r � fi�a+i-'a lflvi'7?�' 77 r►ti � e.`rl... /h+-�C� !,s k'OtYLe.SJ�++.0 r�. CERTIFICATION: I hereby ce!,ify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhib " present- the data and information required for this initial evaluation co the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are: true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Dat- 7 ) _ ;e 5 gnature � f Por *Use separate sheet of longer responsds ':SeS,1u8li1db�ai,8(] Pue'1 • , rrrr - f n i 'MIX= COXTN7''Y SSE -fir pOI`TFOF2MA�7CE REFt7A�C ite=s 1-4 to be completed by applicant- . � j1. APPLICANT NAME AND ADDRESS: x PRf3= DESCRIPTION: CL ASSESSOR'S :PARCEL.,NUMBER(S) /49,131;/1, -'' •,�D (?/ I 4,� ?'ROPOSED USE: ttiy following items aro to be completed by tha 'Hanning Department': Cr,,Y= ZONING: , "y'� LA14D CONSERVATION AGREEfE M =a'i1tAL 'PLN DtSIGNATIOH: iitional Criterie3 ACCrLTL-RAL-RESIDEHTIAL YES HO It is recomsnende�i LY�at you perform the 1r, Agricultural Compatibility following checked items: Water and Sewer Capacity ~� ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS :SCK 2. Adequate Fire iac.lities BOTANICAL SURVEY3b k. Road Capacity wid Maintenance GEOLOGICAL SURVEY S. Access to Commercial and Schools YES, NO C?» --kRA An FIELD ('„BOPS W11THIN DEPARMI= OF FISH ` AND GAME DEVELOPMENT ZONE: L Predominant 5-ld At. Parcel Size 24 Vicinity of Urban Boundaries WITHIN FLOOD PLAINT Ag. Viability not Impaired WITHIN AREA '' SPECIFIC / ' OR Staff / Ssi 11ete'rmistation: Substantially conforms to: LAND USE P�,AN» L GENa-RAL PLAN: 1« Land Use ........ If Yes, 2. Conservatidn Name of Plar. 3 Open Space �,WITHIN URBAN RESERVE: it. Safety v 5. Noise v If Yes ----- Name of Reser-re 6. Housing �� % C lation' r ` AIRPORT LAND USE PT -4411 yam L' .;• 1 L�. v,NI:1G CSXj1 !1'iT.r � � r�.:I ,�i7� '�!� I. � L •ti ! `� p �„/%� /� , rf_. /T'r C�'% '.. /� .M � Staff Signa .. Data -' AS CONFORMANCE WITH 'HE rQUESTM AL PLAN AND VISzouIOtjIAN AWARE OF TH ABOVE STAFF bECE aNATIOU REGARDING AS � APPLI R ZHE I-AND.bIVISIOt G: ) Dd' t2d ,:._.� �: ' � �,.,•w.,........Signature of Applicant ..' � ✓ *itis report 4Mokpire and be discarded sit (5) months from a dare of the s f Sigzsatur Lb 10,OA (tavisecl 6"87) t� X Planning Department NAME: TARRY LOERKE - Environmental Health Department .y Attn,. J. Craig areas north of red line AP; 56-36-12 CDF (Forestry Department) ---- g on map) X Butte County Sheriff PG&E (check :title. report for easement) Pacific. Bell Butte County Mosquito Abatement OR Oroville Mosquito Abatement (areas within large map i'n cabinet) S of District ,(wall arp) Water Company Vif individual wells are not indicated onapplication or map) Durham Irrigation OR Durham Mutual Water Co. California Water Service Company 'Chico area) Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District (Oroville area, SE of river) 'Thermalito Irrigation District (ThQrmalito area NE of riven) Linessaddle Community Services District (Paradise area along.Pentz Rd. to lake) Del Oro Water (Paradise Pines area) Buzztail Waterworks (Doe Mill Ridge/Forest Ranch area) Paradise Irrigation District " City of . . , (check -call maps for spheres of influence), Oroville Chico Paradise Biggs Gridley %,' V'ILLE AREA ONLY': Lake Orovil!n Area Public Utility District (see large map in cabinet) T'eather River Eke!reation District (see. large map in cabinet) !:Ill Medio Fire Distilet (check wall map, a small portion of Oroville only) BI+CCS, RICHVAIE, GRIDLEY AREAS (SOUTH BUTTE COUTY); check wall map and title report to see what applies. .Some areas overlap. Drainage District Ift Drainage District #2 Drainage District #100 Drainage District X200 Reclamation; District #833 --- Reclamation District #2056 Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District BuLte Creels ,Drainage District rN CERTAIN CAS.E5 Superintendent of Schools (only for subdivisions) Dept. Of Fish and Game (near water .and in rural and mountain areas) Cal Trans (near Statd llwy. 32, 10, 99y 149 (Chico cut-off), 162 (Olive l�wy. & .,.�..W_ Rithvale Hwy;), 151 (Clark Road) State Water 4un-li..ty Control. Board (projects with more than 100 lots or units) Uni.ted States Forest Service (it project borders USA land --check AP books) parks and Recreation Department (property near Lake Oroville) state Resources Department (ptoperty nea.i' Lake Oroville -- watershed) _. Rock Crr Creek Dist. (writ of Chico Airport, south of Rock Creek and easy: of Hwy. 99 (see wall: map, Chico Area Recreation & Park Disu (only for subdivisions) SPECIAL CASES; chdck tittle report eor any mention of special services or easerttents such is to Thermalito Irrigation District (numbered items) LIPPINC O 1 Jl GARS' T, LIP L S, S634 SURVEYING 1007 BILLE ROAD • P.O. BOX 671 •PARADISE, CA 95967 =(916) 8774300 February 26, 1991 County of Butte Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA. 95965 RE4 Parcel 'Map for Larry R. Leorke Ai' 56-36-12 JOTS No. 90-04-065 Attached hereto, please find a copy of tho Final Map for the above referenced application. We respectfully request your iew of the ma for its compliance with your condition(s) of rev p approval. Please notify the Land Development Section of the Butte County Public Works Department to clear the map for filing. Please notify me should` it not comply or you need additional information; Thank you for your prompt: consideration of this matte; . Very truly yours; LIPPINCOTT SL) EYING '! J Susie CF Prater, Secretary GTL:scp Attachment AUGUST 5,1991 8M— W 'f, KREST PL RESP= Susi.+e C: Prater LIPPZNCCi17` SURVTXING r t'tituiulJG urs 7��0� `{� i v� yr r-wvv WHEN RECORDED REURK TO: I&ART Eff OF Pt1LIC "KS THIS, SHEET IS BEING CONCURRENTU- --=CORDED PREPARED BY WITH OWNER,`G. CERTIFICATE FOR PAI. � : rte MAP FOR LARRY R. LOERKE: and KAREN_ A. WMIE, AS F€LED FOR RECORD: IN BOOK OF PARCEL: MAPS AT PAGE ON GARY T. LIPPINCOTT, L 4 AT _.,ht . r AS OFFICIAL RECORDS SERIAL NO, AT THE REQUEST OF L.IPPINCOTT S"AIRVEYING. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. OF APPROVAL P.EQtTIRr�II BX ADVISORY AGENCY OF BUTTE couN ON' SEP'BER T7, 1990 T.- A 50 loot bu.il.ding setback is required from the centerline of Forest Ranch Road:, Z. Automatic fire suppression sprinkler systems shall be installed in all neer residential structures in accordance with the National Fire P.rotection:Associations Standards for, the installation of sprink let systems in one and two family dwellings and mobile homes,• NEPA Standard 13D.. The purpose of the rstallat on of sprinkler systems is for additional safetyand property protection in the event of residential. fines:. This installation will reduce the demand for structural. fire -protection services in those instances where they are installed. 3;.s All lots to pay any applicable deer herd mitigation, fees in effect at the time of but1ding permit application. - vo1PKC hj COD No. 3634 -tet � Expires s�q 6-30-92 rf'OF CAI -k �s PAGE 1' OF 2 ADDIT101 AL INFORMATION SHEET PROVIDING INFORMATION DESCRIBING - CONDI I IONS ,,AS', OF HATE OF FILING AND WHICD IS NOT INTENDED TO ,fiFFECT RECORD TITLE INTEREST LIPPINCOTT S' SN 1007 B1LLE ROAD`- P.O- BOX 674 PAAAMSE,CA95967 • (916):877-+ 300: WHEN REC(S:DED RETURN TO: DFARINT OF PIIELIC. t fiKS :c,`,-t.t.iP�•���� PREPARED BY: 1. Nob , 3634 GARY T. LIP P INCOTT, LS 3534 Exp;, es 6- 0-92 CRti`c�� r T nST, Fort T FEt¢)7o5Es ,` rv'vt% unk.r Y NON-EXGLUSIYt.a _ .�'agsl- /ESMT FOR BEREFT% a®asr f of PARBK -7-P /&1-63, S � f R.,qa, rR*3 SE QcM -ti` s •��c ra aoos :s�a- 69a g8. L3I74� i r t..{k�' 1c �• / .� �� 4AaR i Po `yL. PAR ami- . z, s ,¢• M >. is _. i.= L- ti'7 AC� - o 1 S7 c,raeAIW �f ti i :S$9`4T4a-w , �..+nRON. OAR L PCLI 34 -PAM -3 r / a- c .k: k NOT PART c �•' BK 77 PP/M= 63 T -24:4, sec 3rf sec 32 6 Secs LOCATION MAP NOT To SCALE WTES or --DENOTES' FOUND CAPPED I/Z" REBAR' :5: 2841 i. FOR T o --SET-3.g U" Ls.36 LARRY R. LOERKE The, Bastsfor the bearfrs snow barean-- Being= Parcel 3 P/M 77-63 and also was the Southerly Boundcry Itne of Parcel -3 between found corners as shown on, -W. Being O .portion of the S lf2 Of 31-32-T. 24 N. ^` R 3 E:~ hi RB; hi Bk. 77' of P/M' -63 as be [AT N' 79-3571 I Seciron Naar Foresl Ranch. n'ut;c COunly, Caltfornia LIPPINCOTT SURVEYING- - - - - - 1007 DILLE_ROAD •: PARAMLSILCAkiF0nxtA.0300D0071 Z OF"? to�ete77ae77 sc etmoo- PAGE -_ 1 LIPPINcow VAkY T. LHT NCOTT " �i 34 SURVEYING 1007 BILLS ROAD - P.O. BOX - PARADISE, CA 95967 - (916) 877•43U0 f JunE. 17, 1991 Brent L. Moore Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 REt TPM for Larry Leorke, AV 56-360-012 Dear Mr. Moores Enclosed are copies of various reports regarding the water situation in the Forest Ranch Area for your, reference in oder to satisfy Mitigation Measure #4 of the P'lanb.-.Lng D rectoc's r,eportr dated July 21, 1990, Also enclosed is a copy of the Well Drillet't; Report for the well drilled on Parcel. 2, indicating the well :is 800 feet in depth and -would produce approximately 25 gallons per minute. You will note that between tyre 755-800 Foot level., saturated gravels were encountered. This region of auriferous gravels described i`o the preliminary 1990 report by the Department of Wate: Resources "can provide high yields and have excellent water bearing character- istics," The 1976 D,W.R. report also indicated that "it was Concluded that the best potential. sources of ground water were deeply butied channels and conglomerates whichf`underl:4e the Forest Ranch area at depths of about 800 feet, This is exactly what has substantiated in this case. 1h addition, since it is indicated in bnth reports that there is actually two different zones of water sources, the upper zone<bel,ng between 50-150 In d.eptl•t anal the lower gone beim,, between 470--700 feet in depth, it is not likely that the lower zone wells will interfer with those of the upper levels. Add tic-nally the 1990 report states that "wells drilled in the Lower Zone are mite likely to have adequate yields than are those in the tipper Zone.,!' p The 1976 report also indicated that the groundwater recharge over a 5 acre parcel during a normal rainfall year would be about three times the amount necessary for an average .f=amily of four, meth of the T"otest Ranch aVea was rezOned to 5 acre plug parcels partly based' upon this report. five aate parcels would also allot for adequate spacing between 'wells (100 feet) so that we would have mimimal impact on the others, , J, I 4 Srent Moore Butte County Planning Department .June 17, 1991. PAGE 2 This project is to divide a i :e parcel into 2 5 "acre parcels; The Subdivision -rds requires that we)--1!`s produce a minimum of 3 gallons per minute during the period of July through December. We have more than met this condition and those neces- savy for the approval of the Health_ Department. it is our opinion that the information required by Mitigation ;Measure #4 has been adequately addressed and request that the Planning Department clear the Parcel. Map through the County Surveyor`s Office for filing purposes: We also found It very interesting that since this project was approved on 'Septpmbc�r 71, 1990. and just prior to your letter of ,March 15, 1991) an approval, was granted to Mr. Harry koenig, on March 4, 1991, for a 3 parcel. division on the property immedi- atel.y west of this property. Reviewing the conditions of approval rand mitigation measures for that division reveals no concern about the groundwater situation: The only condition dealing with water is a standard Health Department condition which requires "proof that the required quavt `ita es of domestic water are available to par'celd,1 2. and 3". We are having a very difficult time in trying to deal with the fact that 2 properties located _within 60 feet of. each other would have such extremely different requirements from the Planning Department. achy? Please contact my office for any additional information or questions r(�garding this matter. Si.ncetely, LIPPINCOTT SURVEYING 'A `f. LIP 1 COTTA p cc.. Larry Loreke U F28,-LOERµLTR.1i7RK t'' r Yq I s! {{ 1 J x syr kro'`Wm + a1 r - a�� �'�' rtyF i��++r,c5 ��� k Q��Q--yy ryyr:'»♦.�.,�,�F'd�.ygyyq.�;��('�'" .I�I.. �' N�L�. ..i�ry . r v -Y n .rY .ti.G.eM- r LAND OF NATURAL VVzALTH AND REAUT`! PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 590,5-3397 TELEPHONE: (616) 538-7605 Nfarch 15, 1991 Lippincott Surveying 1007 Billie Road, P.'O. Box 671 Paradise, CA 95967 � Attention Mr. Gary Lippincott � c ,e RE,- TPM for Larry Leorke, AP x#'056-360-012, Job No. 90-04-065 Dear Gary: After reviewing the data submitted to the Planning Department concerning groundwater drafting and recharge for your project, the Department was unable: to make the finding of a stable water source. Subsequently the Planning Department cannot approve your final map -for recordation, due to failure to comply with Mitigation Nlea ure 04 of the Planning Director's Report dated July 24, 1990, The Department of Water Resources, "Butte foothills Groundwater Study concluded the existing ,,groundwater resources of Forest 1Ra'ncb appear to ba adegpate for present residential alopment only and will jo support continued development. The study hydrograplh analysis ladicates9wamaing. of the existing grow-dtiwater resources I's presently occurring. Between Sanuary' of 1986 to November of 1.988 the Nvater level dropped an average of 15.3 feet. This drop in average water, le, -el exceeded the Butte County Foothill region -wide average water level decrease' of 1049 feet by 4.4 feet,. The Department of Water Resources also concluded recharge. of groundwater is local, The reports state "The close correspondence of precipitation and water level peaks shorvnin the hydrographs of Forest Ranch wells indicate that recharge... is local." As .such Forest Ranth wa�pr supplies are dependent on normal precipitation each year, itliout adequate precipitation the groundwater resources will be depleted arapidly, il' r,,rA\tit�OF: CALIFORNIA -RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKhISjIAN, GdVE or DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES �.p „ { ( J� ag,"I IHERH DISTRICT V 2440 MA04 STREET f�. 0. a0l% 407 �•� �1 IMP SLUPF 1080 Tanuary 7 1991 Mr. Lippincott Lippincott Surveying P O. Box 67:1 Paradise, CA 95967 Dear Mr. Lippincott: As you requested; here is a very preliminary draft of portions of our Butte Foothills. Ground Water study. This is the gist of What We know about the Vorest Ranch Area from our 1986--1988 investigation. Although the x;eport will be thoroughly reviewed in the District and ,4acramento, and the forra of the final product may be somewhat different from the draft, the substalice of the data and our analysis will be the same, subject topin mind that this is a draft report P and Please J,'ee ort Sincerely, tht Way e S„ y, hief Northern District enclosure 5 s� y_ r �, Sub Area 2« FOREST RANCH '.r.e Forest Ranch sub area comprises about 12 square miles of the qreater Forest Ranch ridge: The community is perched atop a north- northeast trending ridge which is bracketed between the deep canyons of Chico and 'Butte creeks. The ridge is roughly parallel to Cohasset Ridge, which neighbors to the north.. Vegetation, primarily mixed conifer interspersed with oak and brush, is relatively uniform throughout th.e area. Elevations range from 1.300 feet to '3100 feet and precipitation averages 65 inches per year (1951 to 1980),, and 55' 'inches per year during this investigation. Like neighboring Cohasset Ridge, the Forest tanch. Ridge top averages a half mile in width and slopes about 4 degrees west. The ridge is incised by ephemeral and seasonal streams which create local topography of wzullies and steep= -sided spur. ridges. Local. 060100V The Forest Ranch sub area lies entirely Within the Cascade geomorphic Province. Figure I shows the Local: geology. Underlying the area, at a depth of approximately 606 feet, are`metamorVhic basement rocks o Tupper pa,ieozoic and Mesozoic age. Unconformably overlying the basement 'rocks is the Chico Formation whose thickness increases westward (;iaggart and others,, 1984) APO PP 9)9'o't firu• yy r r � rra. r 4 l� A.L V • y. j t 32E1. •32A1 1 tt. d w � � • ICC32K2. • i f 5 1�`a 6i -ii r 1� 5N1 T�-t TT Q W iii Y S 6(11 5N4 { 602 5N2 -f 5N3 -4!" 't ' j 8G1 Pvb Pt f�1 •• vb r u b Area 2 -- •t !c1 J my lPtu -� { Forest Ranch Ptu., rms Kc [ - • { `� 0 1__. 2 Miles LEGEND CENOZOIC MESOZOIC M Qls Quaternary Cretaceous Londsllde Deposits Kc Chico Pdemat(or Tertiary Jurassic pvb Pilocriev Meta Volcanic flocks — Basalt Meta Volcanio flocks sedimentary Rocks Ptiu Tuscan Farmatlon Nolt- Seo Text for Desct;ptloos of Units, ., SYMBOLS . 'r,,_" Geologic oontact � *�+ W" iWq, Fault, 'dashed. where appraxim' dto or conom3lnd Area Boundary beL.. monitored Oiii • Wells Witli wat3 wrl�driliers re�p�t.>limbered wells were 'for ivoter lar�oier acrd or water f,. .0 r T17e Chico Formation and basement rocks may be locally overlain by --�~ ,auriferous, gravels deposited in.paleochannels. These deposits, ytlorked for'gold in the Dix mine located above Butte Creek, occur in channels whose extent have not been totally defined, and do not Uniformly overlay basement rocks or the Chico Formation. The Chico Formation and the channel deposits of auriferous gravels are, in turn, unconformably overlain by successive flows of lahars and volcanic sediments of the Tuscan Formation. Basad on drillers logs and gravimetric measurements, the thickness of the Tuscan Formation varies ,from 500 to 700 feet. Conformably overlying the Tuscan Formation rocks in the Doe Mill Ridge region is a flow of olivine basalt correlative with the `Cohasset Ridge Basalt. it is approkimately 1001 feet thick. Faults and Joints one fault is mapped in this sub area. It is downgradent from the monitored wells, and though it may dorm a local ground water barrier, k its effect on monitored wells is unknown. it is probable that minor, unmapped normal faults exist in portion's of the sub areai ubints and fractures are not ditcernabld in air photos because of soil and vegetative cover: cliff ekpoyjj&es reveal vertical. jointing in Tuscan Formation rocks along canyon slopes. all. ,�,ayrw .. .. 11 t ,�. Nt• f 1i '/. i� A't�l _�� `�� i« ;t1,�//. 1 �`i%• �^ ,`err �� tai �� 7 � 42 P .+, .:� � elf¢ �i� "� L• ,i u,P .R °`I S .r a r , , „ con—' i All contacts between major rock types in this sub area are depositional Angular unconformities mark the Chico/Tuscan, auriferous gravels/basement, and Chico/Basement contacts. T�*addina tIlthin the Tuscan ;Formation, beds consisting of parallel flows, tuff sayers or intervolcanic sediments form a layered sequence: in the. volcanic stream deposits, especially in sandstone, cross beading is common. Coni%ersely, within individual lahars and tuff breccia units, there is little bedding and rare grading. Occurrence of Ground Water In evaluating the ground Water resources of the Forest Ranch sub area, 78 well drillerls reports Were reviewed and 15well's monitored# in an analysis of these reports, two discrete water bearing zones became apparent: An Upperg ccurring between depths of 5-0 to 1ra'0 Zone generally o . feet and a tower Zone from about 410 to 700 feet. ri 19"4 � .,1r,tr*jR 9 4�IY � L�"� h ','ppKK�^^jjy�y�y""iiSyyyy77��� �.F,C� �r 4. el :,li oilI��tl • 1 k „ r (I HydrogeolOgy of Forest Ranch " uscan Formation i Ground water in Tuscan i-ormation rocks occurs chiefly in confined Aquifers compoJssd of volcanically derived stream sedi1rLobts • which wore depooi;ted in sinuous channels. These were covered. by successive ;layers of relatively iipermeable tuff breccia and lahars. The Courses of these channels may meander over considerable lateral distances, .and not necLccarily'follow the axis of Forest Ranch Ridge. consequently, it -is impassible to determine, on the .surface where to dr'll to intercept one of these channels: As evidence of this di,lem'ma, a dry well foiir hundred feet deep may neighbor a good yielding, shallow well.. Ground water also exists under confined conditions at cori,tactrs between impermeable beds such ate lahars and breccia flows. Alone road cuts or cliff -faces, seeps and springs are seen where 'such ctozl-ha(ts :Intercept the surface: Vlater In confined aquifer condiltions occurs in lower zone wells betwesn 4170 and 700 feet deep. This lower most zone may mark the 'bAj .a:Z,t between metamorphic bedrock and overlying Tuscan rocks, Gkound water in Tuscan Formation'racks also occurs in water table ct5od.i t f ons in spail and weath.. ered rock near the sutfac,and I secondary fracture sy'ste.tn-- -mediately 'below the weathered zone: 7;4'!!� jt Edi MW .j MEts1 t 91 k� i Ik, � •'��"' ..rS � �,�` ata '�l:iRi I Water found in these conditions probably supplilBs wells drilled in the ubpE r zone aquifers between depths of 50 anid 7.5o feat deep. �ir>rLForrtati on ,�,rte E'onderose Way Member of the Chico Formation, a conglomerate, has boen identified as a sot;rce of good quality groundwa-- I'UWR, 1.976) o7,Ay a few wells are reported to intercept this ;member with yields r;#�nging from 250 to 500 gpm. its thickness is nearly (500 feet at its typd' locality in Chico Creek, but thins eastward. with its onl:ap onto baseime;nt rocks- Aurii.ft-rtaus Gravels A:Urafiirous gravels ,provide high (y1600 qpm) yields Where. encountered by iivells in the 'Magal,ia area.. Their channels u;t pt. lay at least a portion of the southeastern portion of the Fore.8t Ranch sub area (IOWA, :,)''76) . As loosely consolidated, Well rounded pebble, cobble, boulder river deposits, they have excellent, water bearing ah?;ra�cteri.sta.cs 'unlike the i` agalia: area, however, the depths acid trendis of Auriferous gra'v'el Channels beneath the I~rjres�'-. Ranch sub ar'eA is UnkrsoWn. As in the similar sedimentary deposits in the overlying tt'usdan Formation, drilling to intercept the Auriferous gravels Would be a matter of CWI,thcer Without Ute of geophysical exploration technictues. i Iq 11 PI 4 U e� Basement- Rocks Groundwater may occux in basement rocks under confined condition', beneath the 'Chien Formation and and lahars and flows of the overlying inch Tuscan Formatiart. PErmeability would be provided by secondary structural features such as slaty or jointing. if the old ,basement surface has a weathered zone beneath the pile of overlying ka roundwater storage may be enhanced. rock, g _ Given their regional. extent, these rocks may provide adequate yields if dQveloped, only one wells iodated on the upper portion of r/0 - mill Ridge is believed to intercept basement :rocks' ggtA_rcye d The alone correspoindence of precipitation and water level peaks shown clrographs'of Forest Ranch dells indicate. that recharger at in the by c least .n shallow agz.i fers, is local Such recharge occurs by infiltration Of ra:nfal and snowmelt through the sail, with subsequent 19 'phis Prat"�.on .inty weathered and fractureC' rock zones , roundwater :ohsstitutes shallow; s,`s intercepted by unconfined aquife g i, shallow wells on Forest Ranch Ridge= louse Forest Ran narrow, pa,nched spur of layered �e :h Ra:dge is a yang., -' the exact means of deep infiltration is speculative: volcanic rocks,, . rs on this The two passible recb,arge p_ - p ned aquifers pa to dpe unconf�. ridge are: P zL.Wl } �I Direct infiltration along nIat to and. Chico Creeks upgradi6h . ixoln : the sub a ea,. and, fl Lenkage through fractures from shallow, unconfined overlying perched aquifers. v4ell Yield and Depth. Relationships; � .he relationships between. well yields, depths and aqu;,feL maty r .ais were looked at In two ways. ri'rst, well drillers' reports cWete used to summarize what was reported at the time o: drilling, this Information is shown in Tables la b, c. second, an: analysis of corrected well yields was done to determine how much of a reported yield was well casing storage as ci4posed to direct yield from the aquifer. The summary of drillers' reports sYjaws that thero are two discrete ,Water bearing zones ik Upper tone. blttweeh 50 and 15.0 feet in depth« • bower ''Zone -. between 470 and '700 feet in depth,. The upper zone consists of sail e weathered rote., fractured bedrodk; and hdar,`surface coni fined valcr►nic sediments. The Lower Zone consists chiegly of beds of Ntoloanio ed.,,,tentz in cohfi,ned cond!itionst fMm A4 ARI pp i • The bul .c� wells iti the U er Zone are drilled between 7a and 12" feet; in,,this Lower Zone.. between 550 and 700 feet. w Twenty-five percent of all wells are marginal (yield less than 5 qpm) Virtually all wells with corrected yields in the. marginal range are drilled in the 'Upper Zone; only one well: drilled to the Lower Zone ha& a mEirginal corrected yield. This shows that wells drii:led In the Lower Zone are more likely to have adequate yield'o than are those in the Upper Zone. Tire Lower Zone mean yield (14 gpm), is less than the average I, yield (1:1gpm) in the Upper Tone.. Lower Zone well's are liiited to areas drilled above the 2400 feet elevation contour line.. whereas Upper zone wells are indiscriminately scattered tirotghout the Forest Ranch sub area. This elevation limitation 'suggests that a deeper water bearing hot.izon exists only in the. upper" elevations of the sub area or, than shallow 'water is not as available in that area,,. An undetected fault# a pinch --out of voldabi' c sediments, a g g p y xcplaih, r a charx e Y �n � ontin atterr, may : also; e the �hbsence of Lpw/•t Zone wel',s below the 2400 foot elevation c.J' r-itoUr. a r Y4. A,,,,, Y� `9jj' 1 +� "t jt k4tM II. f u iiYk uiY' . l 4 1 ,6i a i i d Corrected Yield Analysis_ Corrected yields were computed for wells with drawdown and yield data The results of this analysis sh'ow''that; ' j Corrected yields range from 1 to 5o cpm with a median yield of 18 gpm, while Uncorrected yields range from o 340 gpm with a median yj.zld of 12.5 gpm. g " the significance of corrected versus uncorrected yield can be seen When determining the adequacy of a W0..1 for domestic use. The number of marginal wells (<5 gpm) is shown in Table Total go. Wells Pio: Corrected Yield Wells 93 56 No. Margin'al Total Marginal Wells 18 g Yield Wells 26 (250) (16a) Twenty=fire percent of all wells ekamined and 16 percent of corrected ��i'eld wel�.,� are inadequate for domestic use in this sub area. The 9 percent difference between all wells and coi ,fie t,*ed yield wells ntay he 1, ;accounted for by the corrected yield well v entage being skewed by emission of wells with no drawdown or pump test information In other word's, marginal or dry holes may not have been considered worth dtVelcpingQ �"xne.� and pump t�sts were not perfor PR41_ �,+' •"i ��*•'"'� .�'��'`. awry ."'�!"�` w'� �,iA'`''���.� ��,� I MFkrginal and dry wells account for 25 percent of a:i.l wells in FotdIst Ranch, which closely matches the 2s percent marginal we11 total. for I' all well.-;'In the cohasset sub area and is within the 23 percent figure derived for all wells drilled in volcanic rocks in Butte county. Marginal wells are clustered in two areas corresponding to development p patterns: near the loner portion of the sub area near the post office at the junction of Nopel. Avenue and Highway 32 and higher on the ridge near the j;xnction of Schott Road and Highway 32 Because the distribution of these �,ell.s corresponds to k'he' development pattern, it is p p unli%„ely that there is a relationship of marginal well clustering Lo physical features. SA 2 Hydrograph Analysis Based on seeasonal average water level fl.uctuatione, ground water levels in this sub:, area dropped an average of =15.3 feet during the vember 198E. This drop in average dater period of aAnuary 19,16 to No level ekceeds the Butte",s'vunty foothill region-wide average hater level degrease off.'. 1,o 9 feet. by 4.4 teem Water level, decreases based on seasonal fluctuations vary in ilitivdual wells from a ininum of 1..4 feet to 40.6 feet mat3,'aum Figures through:. are hydrographs of representative wells fol' the: Forest Ranch area. Shajj,ow, intermediate and deep Wells here 11FF i!,. hA z J z « a = v w CL o p 1986 1987 1988 t,4 p go, �r r e 2560 2540 2520 i-- L� 0 ►--� 2500 W J W 2486 2460 2444 z J z « a = v w CL o p 1986 1987 1988 t,4 p go, �r r e