Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout072-510-009m Ll APPLICANT Dave Clark $5-03-04-03 ADDRESS 5211 Oxo Bangor Highway, Oroville, CA 95965 OWNER Sana., PROJECT DESC,RnTSON Tentative Parcel iMap to divide 26 +- 5 acres each and 1 parcel. at 11 acres + acres into parcels at LOCATION at the northeast cornea oL Oxo Bangor Highway az1c1 Carnett Lek c a imately A 000 Leet From the intersecti0n o; Qro Bangor Itigh�va r a N ' pp'rox- R0 a.d�.a,zt e ? and A]inexs ! aztcl� ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS) 7 2 -15 - 0 9 ZONING _ �� ....,._, . GEN. PLAN PROJECT CONSISTLNT? DATE; APPLICATION RECEIVED � � � - 85 » -- Barnhart-BrO�vn &Assoc l� . - . 0 , Boy. 3,576 DATE PUBLICATION NOT,:.CF; WRITTEN Oroville CA 959 5 PUBLISHED PLACE NEWSPAPER NOTICE(S) PUBLISHED 0. C. P G. B. DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED DATE MAIL"OUT NOTICES WRITTEN MAILED DAVE PliANNING DIRECTOR tS RT?ORT PREPAE2i,D ENVIRONMENTAL_ DETERMINATION_ CATEGORICAL E:�'EMpTION � DATE PILED AND DATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION ..� DACE ADOPTED MITIGATED NEIGATIVE DECLARATION -DAVE ADOPTED ..-_. �. ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE, CERTIE",IED SUB- COMMITTEE MEETING DAIS C ENCY' HEAV:tNG DATE ADVISORY A Az— ADVIsopr AGENCY ACTION BOAS? ACTION _`W`�." --• GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT OR PARCEL MAP OR SUBDIVISION Items 1-4 to be completed by applicants ilp 1. Applicant Namee�j f1to Y C ice!—`• �y�� Co• 1�YatnFtr y 2• Project Description rov` • o ,tri � t • f' �.�� s 3. Assessor's Parcel Numbers rov ' _ ..cj�, 4 • Proposed Use The following items are to be completed by the Planning Department; Current ::ening , i4i d Conservation Agreelo6g1t . j1l General Plan Designation A-- — A;;,75 (� Applicable Conditional Criteria; . Not Applicable Agricultural -Residential YES NO J. -Agricultural, Compatibility 2. Water & Seiner Capacity 3: Adequate Pie Facilities X 4. Road CApacity & Maintenance � -- S. Access to Commercial & Schools Orchard & Pield Crops' > 1. Predom+ntatlt 5-10 Ac. Parcel size 2. Vicinity'Of Urban Boundaries --` ---- 3. Agri.c. viability not impaired '-- Staff Determination: Project does h does not _ substantially coh£orm to the General Plan. Comments; -------------- .. Cif% .N :`L. 31� �,�y ,� . �.� ��.�. �F•G.,c;.rrS/-��r staff Signature ` -� .. Dare 4, AS t AS '111E APPLIC,kyT POP. `LTZ RRQUESTE'D LAND b11tjsJON, AitE +Ji' [HE ABOVE STAFF ' DETERRINATION REGApDING n1t CONFokrMCE WITH n E GSNF.`RA1 X A21 AWAR+ DA telt �1r�,�r"MART,., 12oMr �sS iRn; 1"ant %; . , r+ � Vii» a • . n or has approved the above described project and has made thenfollowirst le sl �g ndeterrnlnatians regarding the above described project; j: The project will, � will not, have a significant effect on the environment Z An Environmental Impact Report Was Prepared for this project to the provisions of CEQA. - p j pursuant v > EQA, A Negative ats C< of Declarati provvison was prepared for this project pursuant to the ' The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of Project approval mayexamine at be Bute. CnIInty l'1sz1tttiiTt �T �trtinr�nt rC 3. Mitigation measures "�� were of the project. } __were not, made a Cohdition of the approval q A statement of Overriding Considerations this project., was, was not, adopted ft Date Received for Filing 5/.31/85 it y Signat re _ 8tOPhen A. 8troeter Snnler C�l.at►trt� to ,. J Revised 7anuary T9� NOTICE OFDETERA..INAT1ON APPENDIX tl TO.- Office of Planning and Research FROM: 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Planning epcti tment Sacramento 7 Cuu DCA 958.14: Cei ter .nt i .; or CrovY C, 95 85� X County Clerk Cclnty of Butte JUN 4 '1985 SLWEiCT; Fill"'Of Notice of Determination in compliance w tif���tQ� of the Public Resources Code.o�°K' (iy �1. JACENTh Depulr-+ ect itis `— 85-03-04-03ell' �CTlfi t11'C Parc41 Map N�tnit State Clearing Ouse Nurn er (If submitted to Clearinghouse) CoittaG uF ' 'erson Telephone Number Pobl. c works, ,Tblzn. Molidowia PFOjectMian �, �1t �hr� \h 534-4266 cor,ncr of ()V0 B,i.ngor tltv�` li (;oritott l,zno ,z , a�10(1' Crom intersocti.on Of Oro -Bangor and t•ti:zvy (;Orllit/'1'o"ano, approx. 41 i i o�, 1; ro ect Description p , �.. Tontat�rc liat•cc7 p to cli.tricle at 5 acres each andi, parcel at 11 +/ acres. y ��zexc s into � p;� �°cFe'Is This is to advisethat BUttu COMIL na... _....._ or has approved the above described project and has made thenfollowirst le sl �g ndeterrnlnatians regarding the above described project; j: The project will, � will not, have a significant effect on the environment Z An Environmental Impact Report Was Prepared for this project to the provisions of CEQA. - p j pursuant v > EQA, A Negative ats C< of Declarati provvison was prepared for this project pursuant to the ' The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of Project approval mayexamine at be Bute. CnIInty l'1sz1tttiiTt �T �trtinr�nt rC 3. Mitigation measures "�� were of the project. } __were not, made a Cohdition of the approval q A statement of Overriding Considerations this project., was, was not, adopted ft Date Received for Filing 5/.31/85 it y Signat re _ 8tOPhen A. 8troeter Snnler C�l.at►trt� to ,. J Revised 7anuary T9� Mitigation . Measures AP 72-15-09 1. Place a note on the final map stating: "1t is reconmendod that, mobile homes on these parcels be tied down, braced or l►J.aeud on a foundation so as to resist lateral forces", Incorporate standard erosion control. ►neasures and co►tW t`ttt-t lUn techniques to minimize erosion potential. Cia. �rk•l'kM) f' roc{rt �;'r C�i+].1 Gt1"' At• t,✓ n cy ROPOrt Ctrl r 'r1� Y� 1bfM k"'c1r"i � 1l pp �y y fur AJ 4i�� a.l h'�r� k.�� J pr � � 5... � � 7 .CN u.,. � �'1 "".;„r Y 11 tt 1u .t ttyy ay rik�r f.9S5 C,xc{ { JI 'l P,ci t;G t rl C17."9 kC" 2 f v.,_.. :'tk i�C?�, '�' `�tO G'h aril Ond r"r Fl lgo + t rr ` ,y y{� I � IC. k I a,r ia�fir�kr~ t �wr ,acic�r ;I. �klrrs c 'firrmr�it�k �y r'sr� M�rrt'� ,A ;�j�+�.,,ys �y� E^y 7 rrA !! p� r- '(,� W (� Y r r,� 4�k 4`'�1"r '. ('�•1'' I1�: ".k k(.'., 5. 'rt.tr°f �;; '�t'w r• i°gk rC*. } tlr* ' C,I �'�� 11 '� Tho '1.+n,li� cl Ue-;..! r.� rr t,. r ,f . c.�. I'� 3. �y iw'r x �. C-� ri 4.;t 1” C",,i f: h l %:' exr o'a 'j r5 F�tJk kt Ck1.�.Gtrwe"1l^; P:�tai GlE'YtIR L 7 .�hp,r"0 rC- no, r.(iEttlGEi` lty!` p1s:nt for th Ott^ r atm ttcr k c �a r: cac: tlOt cor{f I i c""t wi th C'rsunty zr r't rrc,7 ric:,t# adopted or, r 1 X ttre rid: F l:hkr i'ct County 4 t i, 4a!C'3L,. CpC` lr'1i„ 'la"�'?P ��� �t t�r�al Plan roc, t 'r",�. r� r:Jr'" .omnr�,kr w{Pt's tu�t;.lt"i'�"�r tl �.:'1� � t � tii1"l w " ti.C7� k'111rri1iw"hrt�, c%pprC"r'v,,-Al With tk~o Fol iC`illiriix rt tCA orl the +jric"tj htbl�.r f�t at2rtCj: tall" 3C D"ABB"tY4YiRrr-..?rrCfCd Ekfoir rikt G � 1°t�STrr f f. rY � tt'w r4tk' 1' 1'rKtl.trtrl,rt(' Cl"t �r, �Ct r"Cr .� r. _ 1 4 rm '� {«P bf 1 } r r r� rar i tjr �7 E% - ���w lr'r1ck.„tr'•'oo atft r.. r� t`r rt :[ t rr,� t:�'t� �k ktr� t;- �rfr r.;.ontutr uct k oke► � r twr rrrx rr.i r�fi, r�r�•r.��.�tti•c.�r�rt k��l�"Il�rrt`��rr��;Mkf���uvr� �,�r'tri t�fm�c3Rw„ Barnhart -Brown & Associate P.O. Box 1.576 Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr, Evans, At your request on April 16, 1985 I conducted an archaeological survey of approximately 26 acres of land owned by 'Dave Clark, A.F.N. 72-15-09. The property is located adjacent t 'the east side of Oroville-Bangor Highway and the north olde of Cornett ?pane, one mile east of Wyandotte in Butte Counter. The property covers a portion of the E2 of Section 310 T. 19 N., R. $ E., Bangor Quadrangle, 7.5' series. The proposed project is to divide the land into four parcels. Prior to conducting the field inspection I consulted the archaeological site record files maintained by the California Archaeological Inventory, Northeast Information. Center to determine if any previously recorded cultural resources were located within, or adjacent toi the project boundaries. No previously recorded cultural resources were located within, or adjacent to, the project site. The property is characterized by a gentle east to west slope and is covered by open grassland in the western portion and by ar, ol-orchard in the eastern portion. One house, two trailers$ . shed a barn and an ephemeral pond are currently located: can the property. The-foous of the survey was a visual inspection of the ground surface for materials or features indicative of prehistoric of early historic activity'. The survey was conducted by walking linear transects with a 15 meter interval spacing over the entire property area, Ground visibility was very good. No materials or features indicative of prehistoric. or early historic activity were observed during my inspection of the property. It is recommended, that archaeological clearance be granted for the proposed project area. - incere4 -{Ours, L J ills s P Manning OtIjid Co. Plan�tn9 ' rchaeology Consultant AV, R '�rovtl�� Gclitnr�►�� t 1 Nim 51 Ow. 'A Darnhart 67 ap A Californiatej Corpotatian 1961 d PobIPSOo S/reel PO Box 15''6 Oiovil/e, CA 95965 C/I//L ENG/NEE-RS 916183 4-15 11 Lir✓O SUR I/EYORS April J, 1985 Alan G. Brawn GE 24578 Richard. Barnhart LS 4702 Thomas Odekirk LS 3991 NancyVonderhaor CE 37359 Ronald L. Graves LS 4085 Thomas Finlayson LS '2900 Butte County Planning Dept: #3u##d 7 County Center Drive p"nanhiv C�DOyM Oroville, CA, 95965 Atcention! Dave t-lironimus �rpvilla r Cit;#arnTq Rel Tentative Parcel, Ma.p for I#, Clerk AP ft 72-15-09 C4 # 85-03-04-03 Poar 1rtr. Ftironimus Enclosed is a copy of the Geolo istI request of 1•tarch 11, x985. Also per Your Report as per your iq April 3s 1955, I�ae 1tiish to offer the f011owingc1�i'i igation Measures: 19851 Place a note on the Final Map stating; "It is recommended that mobile homes t Parcels be tied clown, braces or placeouhese foundation so a$ to d at a resist lateral forces.,' patio Incor orate standard erosion control construction techniques to minimize erosion�poand tenti al . for a.xctija. nr 1og3ca.l. survey has been requested and slaottltl i orthconi ing , We Will incorporate any additional and should b if necessary, .ons Please notify us i -r- you need additional information. Very truly yours, BARMIM-1, 201? . 490CIA` ES iMichael. Lva.ns Land Development �:Oord.inator AOL ® R E CT 11l E L.,J' PHILIP A. LYDON CoMuhing Geologist APIA 0 8 '1985 ------------ 2948 San Verbena Way, Chico, California 9,5926 -9277 April 4 1985.Dwe CO. Planning COMMA. ccnrr�. HAZARD A7' THE C /1t 1 _ X POTENTIAL SEISMIC %'485 NEAR CLEVErJD HILL SOUTHEAST OF LARK PROPERTY, ©rovillA, C:aliiprnlq OROVI LLE CONCLUSIOVS The active Cleveland Hill unknown fault and an unnamed fault of activity level lie nearby and the Paynes Peak lineament s and west of the site, future act, a less-likel �vitY is nearbyY source of f,'ault was to the east. No ev_I . ; found on the Clark ce of a th* Princi Property. Ground si.+ing, Pal seismic hazard on the gated by building Property, can be g conventional dwell an s miti_ lateral forces. Mitigation also g resistant to tYirig doh o • man include bracing, j �. otherwise treating mobile homes so resist lateral forces. as to I?4TRODUCTI ON The Clark .Propert 26 acres locat Y (AP -15p9 # 72 ) consists ed next to oro Bangor highwa of about east of its intersection with Y, half a mXle in the central Miners Ranch Road. Part of E1 2 S It is third of the ec• 31 T15N, R,5i. Property %s in olive orchard One- estnrn _ `the northern and Portions are in grassland. An environmental assessment O map by ctaff a t he tentative parcel he County Planning t C6 Of that Depart Ment led to the Potential s i eism�,c hazard the p2:O�erty jilies exists, because activity' an area of high potential Y• Earthquake faults associated with t.. for seismic Shear Zone are known to exist in he Foothill the itimed,iate area and �✓` ir,i 4 S I. aT e I� ,.i r I'r fi'1 AOL ® R E CT 11l E L.,J' PHILIP A. LYDON CoMuhing Geologist APIA 0 8 '1985 ------------ 2948 San Verbena Way, Chico, California 9,5926 -9277 April 4 1985.Dwe CO. Planning COMMA. ccnrr�. HAZARD A7' THE C /1t 1 _ X POTENTIAL SEISMIC %'485 NEAR CLEVErJD HILL SOUTHEAST OF LARK PROPERTY, ©rovillA, C:aliiprnlq OROVI LLE CONCLUSIOVS The active Cleveland Hill unknown fault and an unnamed fault of activity level lie nearby and the Paynes Peak lineament s and west of the site, future act, a less-likel �vitY is nearbyY source of f,'ault was to the east. No ev_I . ; found on the Clark ce of a th* Princi Property. Ground si.+ing, Pal seismic hazard on the gated by building Property, can be g conventional dwell an s miti_ lateral forces. Mitigation also g resistant to tYirig doh o • man include bracing, j �. otherwise treating mobile homes so resist lateral forces. as to I?4TRODUCTI ON The Clark .Propert 26 acres locat Y (AP -15p9 # 72 ) consists ed next to oro Bangor highwa of about east of its intersection with Y, half a mXle in the central Miners Ranch Road. Part of E1 2 S It is third of the ec• 31 T15N, R,5i. Property %s in olive orchard One- estnrn _ `the northern and Portions are in grassland. An environmental assessment O map by ctaff a t he tentative parcel he County Planning t C6 Of that Depart Ment led to the Potential s i eism�,c hazard the p2:O�erty jilies exists, because activity' an area of high potential Y• Earthquake faults associated with t.. for seismic Shear Zone are known to exist in he Foothill the itimed,iate area and Lydon page two. April 4, 198.5 d' h ficot"M potentially exifit on the �, oroville� project site r Planning (letter from Dept. to Mr. P D.L.. ,C1ark, Mar.. 11, 19,85}. They requ4ted a geo- logi4:al report;,, and :Barnharb Bro a , " r wn '4 -Associates Of Oro%rille re- tained me, to prep'?tre it L examined x ♦ twx i. u ei'r ti r.S ted on March 30, 1985.. GRAPHY S The property lies on the west flank "of a south"trending ridge. Slopes range from 7 to 18, and probably average about 9;, According to mapping by the U.S. Soil -Vegetation Survey (Smith et al. 1976) , soil on 'the property belongs, to the Aoburn series. Auburn soils t ' ypically are 10 to'28 inches deep, are Colored shades or orange and brown, and consist of silt loam: Permeability tends to be moderate, the: soil is well drained', and erosion hazard is sli. ht g The above description fits soil on the project site, except that minor portions of it appear to have enough clay to warrant classing it as a clay Loam. Rocks are exposed parangly on the site, and in a shallow ditch along the north side of Rutherford Lane just north of the Property. Kock consists of ligrt- to medium --green ( tail to brown _ when weathered) metavolcanic rock that is weakly to moderately Jointed and foliated. A joint is a fracture in which very small movement has occurred at right angles to the plane of fracture; its origin is not i:elated to earthquakes. Foliation consists of p4Anar orientation of disk-- and rod -shaped mineralU that grew during metamorphism. The enclosed Parcel parcel map sh;:y`:,rs the 1orations per4 s the generally measured on or near the pxo_ "y y r ll and orientations of these feature's' y ve a .northwest tri?.nd with inclinations that range from steep to vertical. Large fragments of milky vein quartz are distributed along a northerly trend east of the "shed" shown the parcel map. Pra gments of weakly-folaated, block--joint,d rock are common in soil throughout the property. About 2600 ft west of theroperty t is pthe 5wain Rays,ne linea - Monti and 1000 ft east is the Paynes Peak lineament (see enclosed map of part of the )3angor quadrangle). A lineament is a line or band y usuall seen on aerial photographs; that results from a�ignw a Lydon page thr� April 4, 1985 Dom,. anent of visible features, including v API? stream beds e9etation; tonal etc. It can be caused b pa'ttes features ' s y a varlet geologic �rtt�, x ( ch! as..�oins Y of :ncluding;'faults.,eralized veins, or changeo in rack California. Dept. of Water Resources in Ravine (1979 lix� $gra and Paynes Fcak Ia neaanents ) has described eament fault zones,,, {shown on encloses map) as d%scontinuous ' because the , intertwined Y' consist of "comple bands of formed during , steeply -dipping faults g Mesozoic or earlier time g -"ich were years a503. The Cleveland Hall fa �► [more than 70 Million on ` ul.t', zrhich s a , one of these ancient .vault zones reactivation of f the Swain Ravine linea*nent ' lies within or reactivation f ground Yeast Of Paul'- occurred 1750 ft tirest rupture associated with this Of the Property in 1j75, Also shown on the lineamr­�partialcc is visible on low_ P`�� of the Bangor quadrangle are as Level black -and -white aerial Photographs, alt ( 00activity unknown.,,) ) from map 11-1 of the Co None of these appears to have Gen- ef, bon the site have. much direct except for the fault that treads along zained -Lr7 beta g the un - property, to North Honcut Creek; this fault noes not Property, but lies just west of the Oro -Bangor ha. -,�r cross .n is '�> to 460 ft west of the +9 ay that in highway r Property. Rock in cots along the g �h7ws no evidence of shearing, Rock exposed on the site and in the ditch shows no evidence of faulting, north of it also ous. .fin the vicinit -ng, although exposures are not cont%r�u y o r' H111 in 19'75 breaking that occurred at Cilveland yrou2id the foll.ow�.ng evidence ofthe (Akers was observed a dstence o f a and Mc�uilken 3,975) fault (1) layer of plastic the surfaces � �� ' p-1ther in trenches or on you e (2) layer of breccia g ,.`laYa 6 to 10 ft wide,• [numerous broken fragments of roc+ ] adjacent to the goa o g , up to 5 ft ide• t 1 rock next to the gouge, atdron 1y fracturedi� and �Sstrong Y foliated+► 9 Phreatophyt,es breccia; (4) alignment of water -loving plants! on the surface springs; and (6) contrasts in v (�) aligned breaking : one; vegetation ion across the g ,� ground- Lydon Page fou April. 4, 1985 are on the « 1►"Tng project site and �-1� � are not ali ane .in the ditch north of it;t 1� �'� gne: and" none show fra TM gray or, 5reer, Ila hep v1q�� 'allfarl q gments of strongly-fol.iated rock.. Yey, soil or looeo Sou,. o�°�, grassy field!, shoals no evid�` „, hof the property, an zones, ars° microsc;ar'ps thatm:gii d+ce.of aligned vegetation, wet Catea fault., SEISMIC-HA?,ARD HISTORY , In August 1975, a magnitude 5-7 earthquake occurred with numerous fore- and aftershocks; , alonq ka...ermo, 6 mi west of the caark , its epicenter was locate near red discohtintlousl Property. Ground breaking 0 ... the Swain Y. over a , distance of about 7 mi within o r Ravine, lineament near about 2 maximum vertical u�is r inches and harizontal dis placement was structural clams place;;ent 1 inch damage 'Within a fe' miles o Farther 1�est, fallen plaster, broken windows f the epicenter included Off 'their foundatx ons toppled chimneys, houses s hifted and . , and settling of small -bridge foundations PP"oaches « _ The ..1975 earthquake triggered extensive stud governmental. organizations y by private and foothills, into the seismicity of the Sierran Conclusions, summarized b ogY Staff (1979) Y Division q are that a f Mines and Geol,. maximum cr>>dible a' tnagnitt1de of 6.5 should be earthquake having considered possible Foothills E•a.xlt 5` st anywhere in the Y em Department of Water 79) concluded that t Resour;.es 11979, p. he potential for future eartl'guakes and ground` rupture in t;he 0-roville area ,s greatest Ravine lineament, north and south of that a1.on(`, the 7 I in Toppozada and Morrison Part broken in 1975« nitudes of (1982.) c4nc:iuded that t ''art';lquakes �� through 1981 he timing aril ma 1975 Pram t�75 t kupture zone is g suggest that the that stress beinsj progressively has not nei;essaril relieved of stress y been relieved outside that zone The oinly Positiae evidence of Paynes peak lineamet7t is a potential fault posed in Roc in the south of the Rock Honcut Creek, about 3 mi Property; a mile farther south gas bubbles formed in a , two parallel lines of 1975 ea Pond in the lineament tbne after the main earthquake pond 1i.nes k erP trendy and lasted for each 25 ft ions, had a N20OW a `oath (Rapp et 41; 1975) « they might or Lydon Pa fiv L?ufF© Co. Rlalfn►nc April 4, 1985 (Jrovil mightnot.. have been caused by fault. movement :in the lineament zone.: The general lack of evidence of geolog , i call y•young faulting in the Paynes Peak 1it�eament is considered by Dept. ofF Water yRPsources as, reason for assumi that ` ?` i, .• , g ,gutl*e fauht acti t is not as a s , likely" there a§` iri"in. tav n'b li FolXowin. the "1975 earthquake" a' Consulting Boa oar. f'or Earth- quake Analysis recommended (Dept, Water Resources 1979) that the maximum credible earthquake ("reanalysis earthquake'#) in the lle area should be capable of magnitude 6.5, and peak hori- zontal ground acceleration of 0.6 g. SUM IARY OF EVIDENCE CONCERNING SEISMIC HAZARD The Cleveland Hill fault, which moved in 1975, is l/3 mi west of he Clark property. No direct evidence of fault activity was found on the Property, Seeps Y p on or near the Project: area probably represent water flow through joints. The Paynes Leak Lineament to the east is considered not as likely a source of future fault activity as is the Cleveland Hill fault or the Swain Ravine linea- ment. A !!fault, activity unknown" shown by the General Plan appears to lie west of the Oro -Bangor highway, itself 25 to 460 ft west of the property. A future earthquake in the region similar to or stronger than that of 1975 should be considered likely, al- though the time and spc?Cific location of i s occurrence cannot be predicted. Soil on the Property is well drained and has a high... enough clay content that liquefaction during an earthquake should not occur. MI TI GATI ONS Evidence from examining the site and the seismic history of the region indicate that grotuid shaking is the principal seismic hazard. Construction of wood -frame dwellings resistant to lateral forces, as outlined in the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, should provide reasonable mitigation of the potential hazard. If :mobile homes are to be placed on the site, another poss- ible mitt gation would be to require that they be tied down, braced, ar Otherwise treated so as to resist lateral forces from earth_ _00:; Lydon page six April 4, 19135 Poco co, pja"npnq COMM APR quakes, Steinbrugge et al. (1980). have constructed a cox%tyll-kriftrntA ~ .s 9 • r e Prcentlatng earthquake intEnsity with average monetary loss"�i R curve x P of ualYrtep o£ mubxle home) , rhen' t n w he mobile homes ars tiot# eatx'thquake, resistant.] �# a k ,t r Geraer4 i� Pla y. u Y i b i 4 "+k f Y•J L 4.P1k7J11• .4,1�4NiFJ+`'i?}r Il p•y 'r''Ai., SA. !3tt concludes that. P C S��• t G 3ntens3;t•,�otrt�x shoal ..be`Ia, {< ^FyJ��Y„��,.y5 ,,• �ta,'+�a^� �J' 2 moist o gest .. °p?t'.'fuure..earthqud]ses r earn Butte"COul'i$,`*, , .this is# w e b `• �3nq general agreement wa;th the expectation of a magnitude 6.5 earthquake. The projected loss I among non-resistant mobile homes from such an earthquake would average 12 percent, according to the curve of Steinbru loss from injury �9e et a1.; J ry in mobile homes is similar to that expereinced in wood -frame dwellings. REFERENCES Atkins, R.J., and McQulkn M.J. of the Oroville earthquakes Calif. Div. Mines agic ndel investigation Special Rept. 124, P. 45-52. logy Dept. of water Resources, 2979, The earthquake investigat ons: rallf, August pt. 1, 197 Bull. 203-780 669 p. Division of Mines and Geology Staff, 1979, Technical review of the Calif. Div> Mines and seismic safety of the Auburn damsi Geology Special Pub. 54, 1`7 p, ,Rapp, J.So, et al., 1975, O'bservations o Oroville area, California: Calif. Div. Mines andaks Geologyhe Special Rept. 1.24, p. 53-59. Smith, B.F., et aa., 1976, Soil -vegetation map and tables, Bangor 7.5 -min. quadrangle (50 B-2) , 13iztte Count Forest Service, Pacifid Southwest Forest andCRange Experiment Station, 11 p. plus "nap, scale 1:31,680_, SteidamugeI K V4, et at., 19.0, Mobile homes and eart ua e g Calif. Seism�,c Safety Commission, damage in Ca�.x ornias C SSC 79-07 29 ��, Toppozada, T.R., / lake levels at Orov 11e, Ca 1 ,forn3a s G 982 , Earthquakes an q - d vol. 35, 11 '+� °i lle,, u'. f Jr. , California Geology, M p. a 118. Lydon page sev April.. 4, .1985 � gPiannin ' API? 9198 y 9�iYivillQ a.. TIP 'r Philip A. Lydon." Calif. Registered Geologist # 144 Enclosed: geology and soils map (on parcel map) Bangor quadrangle) , topographic map ( part of showing faults and lineaments explanation sheet for fault and lineament map 5 • . r'"• -OM1 lts :.. f�'".•w R 4 , n A ,yy ,.t�y� a �r .�� ;�,'aY � `a�av •. �} i. a j i� .M ��i�r^.t'�'ktd� Atly et ��'•.�L F�irf - r:F "7( a�r9`M }L k6���4t`r ,! :� if i t '� �, ••� � �w�. �..s..•..�.. p� `• ilia �7: di 'A,. a � �. r' $• ,yy 5',r�P;1, l4\ r'ir� `y/ t r+� ., •(' fK Y' � i ° i � k (+#. d" •`' YY�y )� �i.'+ fde`"�i t3 � Y 7• 8 ": r ` yt ,'. R . wk ��^ ti, ��� �kA �� i `.174 r � .� , ' ;}'t ��i` 1 ; "��� Y �c�1�1 lii�'c�"'.. ��t � � u -1� j''�'•�°. �",�,,� Ns �i�� hzrA�•`� ;�� •t � +�t� � A ,i �'" • ��, `!. (�,�* 53` < �� �, ,�t��Y.i " t� 'i�F".s J!a�t,'i � �d 1' . v'f�f Y %�+�tti� �.t. � 1� n = F �nikhat � I i F `� t !}h�r} a(n �r ,•t' y � � � z t,7ti �? r ?" s � � " * m ,.: , +fib* Y r 1 r� s 7 �4 •' ,} �°���dyi prod i P`p% �" �,:e, �\rr. � CA•. '� }� sfi'" ',if* "f.`X�Y,".•P E .e'}'rY� 7^f�' `�:71 a �W �"�' ' :w ��`=• `6� �x + y"��d3r. " " � 7s,7t.*lt�a4:» '� rs., ����}� a ',Yk b a! ;,�s !t �� ,�� � � Ff ,.-��Y `� � • r � k �Gy�'t�'�^�4� rn �Y� .���+ f3 -.� • �F•t. ■ t.. �' i .� � hi "' . f�'�e {{tqqr�� r � ,u. d J,, c+ , a S�+i� '' Xwe ." , �e s - � . � •. IF � � � � `goo I k , •. a `\ ' , O. ; �.. a �� II .•,ter,,,..toX184 ,f s ; No j Y �,� ►�. i..�1 `_ a .. r� v ' t Approximate outline of Clark property - w Topography, from USES Bangor 7.5 --min. quadrangle. Compiled by P.A.Lydon, April 1985 41.1 , °'ilia, `�'� 406', MAP. OF FAULTs AND LINEAMENTS;, NEAR :THE CLARK PROPERTY � � .� � t ,�'. b r IF F, � �. s �•. J EXPI�iJA�'I ON '' 1 � �%�.r • „ . i . �'{ 1 Min r From Department of Waver Resources (1979) lineament ground break,, 1975 earthquake . , , ... ... Cleveland. Hill fault From black and white air photos •-" Lineament ' ;.. ,, rcam map II -1, County General Plan �.. A U ..,w.�.;4�. L', fault, activity unknown Approximate outline of Clark property - w Topography, from USES Bangor 7.5 --min. quadrangle. Compiled by P.A.Lydon, April 1985 41.1 , °'ilia, `�'� 406', Al>Pl:Nil r X I, COUNT"y OF BU1.rl ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLrs7' voRlj (to e complete y ;Lora Agency) T BACKGROUND 1,0 , i! 35-03-04_03. 1. Name 01' propanont DaveAt # 72-J5-09 2. address of 1,a rk Proponent sand 52___x'1 .Oro-Ba�o� Iii }iiva representative (if Ippli.cable) Or... 0v�.11e, a_C�16 g576� 5.w s Project description -"--�---�----�-.R.�� - �?�trve h1AN1)ATOM' VINDl:N(;.S s a , Does the Project • ti°li»5 hlnYi3l; , ualit» I il ct h�avc the huts=ntia.]. t ) a P the c,nvr ron the to dofit'ade the NO the habitat al` a %,ish substantially fi,�n or tvildl i I'e to of tvildlit'e -species, rcauc e Sustaininglevel,I pul.ation to drop helotyself— rt animal caamuni, throaten to eliminate a plant ar range >, reduce the number or eliminate iaim�or tar endangered I restrict t),e �r t nt examples01or an, ai• California li:istOIT or prehistahe Major Periods; b. "Oes the project . . l ►cit have ilio poten'wial to ac)lieve w. yll environnjental, ct its to the detriment of s ort�tea�an bend' environment is g tils n (A,cll short . term mpac�nantthe,, hricf period Of time laavla leclon _'n a relatively circiure into the future') ,g term impacts will 4, I tlac.s the Iit•o j act have impacts Which n.r,, , y limited) but ctamu impacts i can-idrrable?vi��j�, nd project may impact an two e1' I where the impact t oil cath a'coura:e p mai r seprateY resoaarccts small, balt av}tere the eI'f4et of is relativel.,, .impacts tail the onvira t}ae total of nn►eIII is , `h cal those d si gni 1'i tt.1 Does fiat .. Will cau�;Tsbstdralti<i1ave t'tavirctr�n►Gsnt=►1 ci't'es is tvlairia adverse bcj:inRs, a.�ithea, direct'l1 erre effects on humaia, lll, rte i.ndirec°tlY? ll "rk.itl+ll�ti'tION cret bei ectotpIcrtcYd try' the• f cas.i nt,ency basis cif` thla initial c* .t >"aluat Tutt: I'ind the• P110taUS(ld pac�i�'et COULD . etn tlaet c°nt iroIImeilt NOT hives a si r ,traci ,a NPGA�rtt`t: Ixli(;t.AtCflTltlN tva.11tlb ic`ant r"i'fcc:t find that talthouph tttc Yra� patpai•ed. Clint clffevt oil the ell rare Ill eCfeer in this I ,t there ptv�1J�ct Gould have a sig;itii'i� the at�tcacho►l sheeteha�ve been addod tet rile ttnn�cxbc� a si�niiicnnt cause ilac� ttlTiGAVON 11�151.lt2l,el described c� a ilt.('LARA'l'Ioj1j a;III ho 111%,parvd. t, n IvTi(;n'rl•Vis iI1VC: I`►rad the propas,.d ta`1'e.fr�c•t I�InI hacc� ,1 si,n ' the Vnvi rc)nmern t , 'I" ata I:NV1 R(INI�tI4I1TAl. I't*tl�Atr'1` lil:it"caORT t r elui i'on tax'1'['I:. ap�.':1 �" t, ifi.err►nt eCt`ect ctti 9g,. t`rt t OF lifirl,pPLANNING 11'» ri�.mus.- As s l��lvid I1iro aCiato P aili�er hcvfcive ci by IV, ENVIRONMENTAL _IMPRCTS xp anations Ot a "yes' and "maybe" answers on attached sheet(s)) are required EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant,; YES a —Unstable earth conditions MAYBE No or in changes in geologic substructures? b Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? -" e Increase in wind or water erosion of :soils, either on or off-site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Loss of prime agricultural) soils outside designated urban �---- =�--- areas oductive ? h. Exposure of people or property to hazards Such y gcolo xc `--- � ��. as earthquakes, landslides, Slides, ground failure or similar hazards? ud- 2; AIR. Will the proposal result in substantia.; a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b: The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? — _ _K c. Alteration of air movement mo�.sture, or temperature, or any change in X climate, locally or regionally? 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either - marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage g patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c, Need for off-site surface drainage improve. ments, including vegetation removal channel ization or culvert ' installatioly? d• Alterations to the course or flow of flood xc. waters? e. Change in the amount of surface 'water in any. water body? f. Discharge into surface waters, or in anv alteration. of surface water quality, including but ,not limited to temperature, di.ssolvcd oxygen or turbidity? g, Alteration of the direction or rate of flow Of ground waters? I . Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 1Exposure of people or . property to water related hazards such as flooding? J 4i PLANT LIFE. YEES MAS; Nth Will the proposal result in subst•�antial a nian`ge in the diversity of species, or nu of any species of plants mbar shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic b. Reduction of the numbers of an. �? or endangered species of plants?unic{ue, rare C. Introduction of new species of Plants into an area, or in a barrier to the ment of existinrr normal replenish - d. Reduction in acreagecofsany agricultural crop? 5 • ANIMAL LIFE. ZVi11 the 5< �• proposal result in substantial a• C aang`e�in the diversity of species, or numbers o f any species of animals (birds, lana aniyrla.7 s including reptiles, fish and shell fish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers of any uni ue or endangered species of animals? rano c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the gr Or movement of airimals? migr{anion d. ,Deterioration to existing fish or 'wildlife habitat? 6, NOISE, will the Proposal, , a. Increases in existing in substantial, b:. Exposure of g noise levels? � people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND GLARE, slgnl a: nt ght Will P opasal produce 8. LAND USE. Will the osal result in a u s" tial alteratannoof ther Present • land use of an area? planned 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. su tanta.al; Will the proposal result ill a. Increase in the rate ofuse of any Y natural b. Depletion of an resources? y non renewable natural .311 10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the --- a. q s , proposal involve: explosion Or the release of hazard- ous substances (including, but oil, pe"ticidesriot limited to, , chemicals not radiation event of an accident or upset conditions?fin the b. Possible interference Svith an emergency res onse p plan or emergency evacuation plan? 11. POPULATION. Will the strz uta an densit, proposal. alter the location, POPulation? Y or growth rate of the human li:. HgUSING, a�proposal affect g g housing�or creato demand oradditionalhousin? I 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will th X1;5 MAYBk NO re 1 .suet rn:: a• Generation e proposal of substantia]. movement? additional vehicle b• Effects on demand for existing parking facilities, or c,Subs r tantial new parking? impact systems? p on existing transportation -- d. Significant alterations to of circulation goods? or movement p£escn patterns `--- people and/or e. Alterations to waterborne, rail f. or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazard' to motor vehicles, —_.- or es,lists pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC SERVICE "--- 15. 16: 17 18. S• 1Y111 the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need governmental services for new or altered a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. 11aintenancye of public facili 19' RECREATION u he W. the proposal QRS NO quality or quantity result in an am • Pact Opportunities? Y of existing recreatorra�, '0' aULTURAL RESURCES ^`Wi 11 t eft -- -ii oposal result C� of or the destruction ° an the historic archaeolo alteration b, prehistoric or Will the pro Proposal 3zca1 site? or aestheticP 1 res �taIn adverse phys4cRj historic building - c• Does uldingz structuehistoric or a th,� Proposal have or object? physical change 'which Potential to cause ethnic cultural affect unique d; will the values? or sacred Pr es* Iv restrict uses within the ex - area? religious area? p°tent,al VDISCUSS'" OF imPact ENVIRONMENTAL Sce attached, EVALUAIIQN AP 72-15-09' k 1� T A 5�4.tSaTi7he1�(.��..gChIV T �Cll�lhl„�..hl� � 72- 1 5-crr, �� ,w,f1L. �VALl,1AT7C)h! l.b i c a e, 3b : Develop tiient a� twu nal an vewGzy and roadS Will �. earl toddisr�;p�:i ren d • ,i hcimesites �-triri ssaci te�i and overcgveri n In n stormwati:r runoff ae Aoi l which Will; rest'k .t, x n.L���r)mc1t,1t, compaction erasion: pr."'L rit al incre� ;i if, cyd1el+9 Any increas,d stormwate» rano h N01 " li,h Honrut Ct-ee j, Y which i. �� of � r f he sub jOct w located runoff osi or, enter Property. rorty„ bue tc thi si e �of sthero-l34angor Hi ghw,av 'From rc,tr7gFF shcriticl not be gigue to th parcels,tnY nci~e;.r,r~ i n 10. The easterly portion of the Orchards (par(Zel s 1, ;gip w. - proper�-Y i S current t.h�i Orchard area will. r"ed�rr»erJti the acreage DeePment a�F b, Y In t� it it ldxnp sites in ,lh` All rs� �u�te the �•tgri.c;i,r7.turai' crop, Into County i s l c�cated �ti thin n a Moderate Earth Intensity Zone �°x :t l:. `ihe subject l i mile ea o•F the ectaterl. Proper ty is l tic 7tedApproximately� iahw� Special Study Zone as . y bai._indsry � � f the Cl eva Th* entire detormi�ned purl--, `.w land Hills Fault area i s wi, thxrr the Foothill r )t to the Al. gui st;-Pri of fault traces are 1 i Eal..erC7nt� tole. Safety dement bf the r.rtteth s arr+ctK It is t ti find 'Faults and dr�tai 7 ed seismic i nv sti County the pol i cY of: the Seismic Genet 'l an to require Atppropri jt:e loc��t;ior►s oaf: �:neiaon activ���a�t t for al pub li,c and private project,, in While, this property ea i. f located within the Drovx 11 e-�G�yandatte I rr•i gats �n District erect a�F i n�F l i,tent;P, individual wol,lt +t�r domestic have an effect on t�4�Jx17' Water. he applicant prr�pcises tt� 7 t h i s i,t5o s ctbi li. �tY to �� si.i�h �- project oaaul d �►t�t provide services. �kd see xte��i l.c�. Sdk Resident deer are l i �::al located within Winter DO., i�lordnthist�re�saar"est. the pi a j(ct cite is not l'F N `�trrning movements aF tr�F f itcces an incwese in. trig ha7tarr„„Is t;ci mrstr sing the y Pedestrians.~"open Jill create and loW tra�ff;ic�icciiin[:the clerierial.l vehicles, bicyclists or significant, this i nCi"'ee ewx It bor of not C pec t rµtad miiveriit~�ni; ki e lie Though not sit�ni P�i.r.��nt, this incremental incl-(i s�i n demand `forprt"ect Will r�epri. yen+, ciri ,c See It on i, Is tblir, ,i~rvies in rural �rea 'the uub.ir ct tsensi tivi ty aria„ propertyi s l ncatOd wi t hi ri perµ F+`firmed i n order to d ccairirnetidec that cin arch h aw krae► i to. e>r, et on tflo property, nix ne an s g ecil i ti.rzal. ~survey be prapt=rtYa ��ind if y nifimant arr havo'l ogic,al mi t:a yLkti on measKyirr~s. so, to dr"vei o �,,qq y�yy xx'�ryry +y. �-!, �-+ } k Y yy y� `, y p appropriate I t; 1"IY'tNDA I I R-Y 1� ANDD NGS (..11'= SI C5 Nl,r� TlwAN C ll*c, `f'lii.s project coitl.d �F�fct the gii,lit ,� '�'` f water 'n luecr-th Harir»ut .b_ Creed: dtto to erosion potential ,ind stor~mwator runo.f,f, , Alm(-) 0+ cancor'n is the potential for ar uhaeOl arJi cal sites on the ptrrape; rt-y and the property's PrOXimity to known active e-arthgitake •fault±!, COM Items a.f and �dy end ; ih, and Item 20ao April igant Dave Clark Assessor 72-15-69 Log * 85-03 P810-gul�gj Type of. pro ject: Tentative Parcel Orio*� Description: DiVidinmalp. Parcols Of 5 acres each andg 0 aPProxi"Iately 26 r,�cros int I-Ocation: At ne parcel Of 0 the northeast corner of Cornett Lane, appto�,,ilnately 4000 feet -Banqoj�- 11ighway and DrO (J'-O-L�angOr Its Cornettan(j I -at-sectiotl o,r or,ovil le area. 11'�-Ierm Ranch R(.-jad/r—joth.al noulevard, ter.F'rOPOSOCI Density Of DovolopMent. Amount of 5 acres per C,,4ejlinL '(VerViOuS Surfacing* [,Ili nimj 3 unit. 6. Occess and Nearest Public Road Orovillo-B.... 7- Method OT. , r Highway. F'roPorte frlnts on 0 - Sour SVI04a00 Disposal: Individual septic myt-tems. 9- r-ro�,t CO Of Water Supplyt Individual Wolls, 'M'ty Of Power Lines'. TO 10potential for further ILAr*,,d divisions and dovol ng -I :artpropel-tY4 under Oxiztii nq zonng. r rfiierl'.: None, t Gwvcmm�3�,rYlirig Terr-ain Eb. t wGoneril Topographic CharaCter". R-ollin(I 810PUZ: 0 to I$%. c. Elevations 700 to 800 feet. Ual�)Ove sea levpl,. 'lliting Fiactol-s, St 20per slope ;is 1.1 c Highway. 2. Sails a" Types and drained Auburn SL)jj Seri(?, With Modorato Perftloab, ' I ity, b. Limiting Faa'tors; Goner,�klly shallow Haz-,--Ardt of the L.arjd at' Ztjrjet ljode Dills t` Cult Spoc�i a1 y Zone VIII, 6. app1-o"-1'm',tIt0lY 1/4 mile West. Study Zonts Joca°Lc-.j r1rotion potential: High. - Land sl i de POtehtialt Latq, dh Fi re [laz aryl 4 Hi gh, e• rZ.XpanziYu 1180it Potential: 4% ljydro�agy a Surface Watort portion of the pro C)WID siphon traverses the tv,q—.hwestorly pond located an tyo dri�Ainagp mW a�Ie and Croel";� locatL site Which i �3 a -LO K"lit,th Hbritut property. am")svt DrO-8am9or Highway from C-10 b. Ground Wates~ -- Aquifers of QnknOwn ClLk,-Ah-�i-Ly* C. Drainego rhar actor i sti, as d ra" to the VoAthwotAtt-tj North Hancut r_ree[,,, d. rinrP-tial Rainfall (normal); eft Limiting ell$. rst 8 to 30 in,hQsrQxizting Setback, from swales, OWID 0phon, and 5- Visual/Scenic nualityg Good. 6, Acoi_kstia Qt,,(ality4 Good 7. Air Quality; Goodtia. R 1 P g i- gsl 1 - E n Y ix- q 0. vmn t -,- 0- Vegetationt Lower Sonoran Life Zone, Olive orchards and grasslands. 9. Wildlife Habitats Small birds and animals commc,�,,, foothills. Residential deer on site likely. to the Sicli,ra designated Winter DeerNerdareas. ArOa not within k - E Q x 1 C L -I 0 f n 0 Q t -,. 10. Archaeological and HiNor inal resources in the arRat High archaeological sonnitivity area. 11' Butte County General Plan designations residential, Agrltultvral 12- Eori sting Zoninq.- AR -MH -S. M Ex"Sting Land Use on-site.. Olive orchard and two rosidumcp and related outbuildings, 14. Surrounding mj,ea: a. Land Uses: Residential 0s0% at residential dentitiL ,19 scattered orchards and orchard remnants and open land. Chicken ranch to the east. b- Zoning*, AR -MH -3, C. Bon' plan des"MatiOnst Writultoral d' Pal''cel Size" 2- to 200 -acre parcels l more o 1001 the smaller parcels being located to the north andr West. Population: Snatterod along Oro -Ban Hiq Ay, spart the foothills to the east, ,hwL IS. Character of Site and Area; Rural residential are,, 10 Nearest Urban Area: Orovillo. 17, Relevant Spharoq ox Influence: Orovillo, OWID. IS. Improvements Standards Urban Areas No, 191 Fire PrOtOctian Sorvicp_s a. Nearest County (State) Wire Stations b. Water Availability K011y Ridge Station, 20, Schools in Aroat fire tankers only. Uroy'lle Momentary School District and Orovillo Union Hiqh School District.