Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout80-26A SOUTH CHICO AREA GPA (4)r I YES:, MY'BE No 1.3; tixdris orta'ti6n/Circulat.iun piropbs-Aj. result n '. Genrat3o►n o#' sltb tantiiil additional Vehicular movemeta ? � •1 r b. Signj.f dant ref'fect°s ori existi n, g. �par�r,ng ;" faciliaIes,; or.d'emsnd for ew►r vark zzg? �Substantial impact upon 'exis"tln-g,, , transportation 'systems?41 d. lSignificait alterat "ons to present "`> �p„ patterns of circulation or movomemt of people and/or goods'? Alterations to, ,waterborne, rail or air traffic?" f,-1ncroase 'in traffic hazards to itibtor veh�.cles bac clisCs or r Y pedestrians? ti 14. Public Services, Will the proposal have n an effect upon, or result in a . substanO,♦wl' need' for_-nerf or, altered governmental \! services in an of ` �' Lhafollowing' arc's " ` a. Fire protectiotl7 . 4 , s q b',` Police pr'otedtoti7 =� w c. Sohot 187 di Parks or other recreational p' facil;1 ta.do, ? r eMA ` "taciIities , incntetiattcroads?ublic, f: Othor governmoi tal, services? 1z5: Ene-C k dill the proposal result P p in-. f r� e.. Ilse of substa tial n" amounts of fuer.. ,- or b : ,Substaitt,ial, increase in detif'arid upon a' existaitg sources of etieirgy, or ` require the dovolopmettt of ncty spumy e`s of ehot8y7 s� f i4ill e Lo osa.7i. t' N"in " a neOdiebt flew or sub - - ,i 0+41itial alteratt6n�stettlt a to tfol.lorvitt he ). Appendix F page 5 of g Vtg MAYBE NQ jr,�natural gas? b Cori"�xi.cations 'systems? c� , Yil , Sewer .twill trunk ginebe extended, {' ° �x'prravdig' capacity to .serve new • �. ��' de�relapmeht) 't ,3 _ - ,, "' +r 1 e: Storm water dra, iWge?' .; 17.,-,, Human,i1ealth. Will the proposal result- in: a. creation-of any 'health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding' inenta'1 health) ? b: Exposure of people to 'Potential 'h Health hazards?r Wili��the proposal, result n any sj iicantiinpa.cts associated with solid waste disvosal at litter s! control? � 19. Aesth'eti'c Ji: tJil.! the proposal result a'n tTe y public obstr�tCtian of an 4, i designated or recognized scenic 'vista will ` the, open to ttie public , or result in the creation iof an �; aroposal, e sthetically offe nsive site open to w {r publicview? . 2q: Recr'eation:' Aft thin proposal result P p E , in ttn impact upon the quality or quantity of existing p{ub`lic recrea- tion, fadill. ties? f`� Ateh.aolo` ical�l i.storic l: Will 'the' - �• , , proposal res�Tu tIri a�n aCtexation of ro s a g gtt3 ft" ari t archeological or ,. "� ' 8torica1>> site, structura object or buiiaing? - _ 'i 41 , 4<_ 22: Nfanc�ato y Find3 n �s of 8, - - fica ice. e the potential Does the projact potential tolegr`ade tY a quality of: the, enVitonment, subs"tArkt3 aXl ►recltice , tlhe habItAt 'bf a fishi -or wildlife,`, cr- spc,cieg � cause a flp11. ar wh] dli.fY� , population to dtop belotd mer°x i pate of 4 , Y S S MAYB9 NO sustaining levels, threaten to .r eliminate a plantor animal Iota- �. murnity, reduce the number or" restrict the rangeof a, rare or .,,endangered •` U' plants or ranima�l, or eliminate important . ., exatnples of .the major periods o �Cali�foi�nl:a hi`story'�:or preliaa�tor�r�;.� _._ c b.,' aDoes the project have the potential to 'achievi short term benefits to r ' the doltritnei►t of publicly adopted': 3 goals?longk e' environm rma ental ` C% c. Does the ptoj,ect have itnpacta Aich are individually, limited, but cumulatively 'considetable? (a project may impact, on two or more separate resources where the' 'impact on each resource is relatively small; but where theeffectf, the total of 1 those zinpa.^ts :on the enviroreinrnt is s ign r'. icait: 1 .. ` roj'ect have environmental d. Does the p effects Sahich will cause substantial adverse effects, on human bei"n s, ei h;� r d rtctly or indirectly? , .�� Z.1 t s J _ Y i l u .4 Appondi. t F page 1 o O 79,09-18-6. 111, M'"CUtSION OF lEtWVIRONKENTAL EVALUA'T'ION F; ; This prop, sal is a -General Plan �'�mendment and Rezanc�'' of, about �r 1.600 acres in, the south Chico area. 5.!he pv o j edt area ig " south - a liz along ArovUle Chico Highwayandwest of� Butte Greek. "p " ''NYorrow 7,ane, east of` Bruce Lane north of the southern' proper of r0 o'sal �,'.:... �o phases ars, involved 3,n vbA p ' '1 . General Plan Ater ijte> t (Lal Use l lenient) Froin low, do residential., orchard and field crape, industrial to t�orcharei and field "crops, agricultural reside.,dtial 4 comnnercia1 and public as „shown on the attached i iF" Ir i ".1 Sou , Dl:SGUSS1:0kT or, L`NVTRQIeCENTAL EVAtU;41:Ll0N' (continued) r 5)' Road capacities for The Midway, Qtoville-Ohico°Highway, Avenue, The `Speedway,,,,, 1"Iorrow Lane and other roads. r; Entler (A master., circulation plan for the area is recommended ncl�ding recommendations regarding; the Entler ,Abex%ttie closure. -,3) 'Deinan.4 for public services and utility' baa lities.= Aro existing services and facilities sufficient for the �hart�» term2 what is 'the long-term picture needed to service the ;r p proposed land uses Lind dozisi,ties?' a 7) Noise exposure ftoin traa.ns uEing the Southern Pacific Railroad, in the vicinity of the projoct area. z l3)' Soil capability for sewage disposal g)' Water availability in the overall area as a factor r'y rejated to alloo!able densities. ,1.0) Possible archaeological sites in the southeast Porti on Butte grrrek. (The 320 acres com- of the reLone area near ' prising South ate"Acres received' archaeological clearance in ;JUIN , .119 ?8 . � I , The General: Plan Amendment and Rezoning proposal has the following f cumulative impacts which are potentially signific8xit: 1) tinges in geologic substructures by reel hAtion of tailing area (la) 2) The compaction arid: overcoveti.ng of. therweoi:l. by rosultant projects in areas with development potential subsequezit V G to rozohng (lb) ,ihe conversion of 61rAss l:, 11 and xll soils from agricultural land uses, namely commercial, ,industrial use's to alternate and rosid.ential. The effects of alternatives to the k1-90 oiling on agricultural land. (lg, 4-d) 4) The, exposure of people or property to geologic ;hazards inoludiijg oub8id.enco, expansive sols and earthquakes. (lhi � 5,) '1ho localized decrease in aririarit air quality. (ta) ' ' 5 q1e, effects on dvaihagodl in the area and the possible need Gb,e) £or off-site silrfOO drainage i.niptovbments. possible effectsOn '8urface water Shd surface water quality. (✓f) The effects on grouridW9t0t sizppl 00, ai1a egi'ouridWatzr u quality ' at uitibiato develtlpMent of the are'a' (3h� App it ix V - Page Sa o ,u..aa'.naW.t yww Yiry.:k YJwa4r:Or aN�' .. .... �,. ... �..w�..._....u,�litlb.�w.d�+WLI�.WMWMdN'-i4"'"9'"iti'.'.`"-'kW,Tu,�u'.'ci`i f,Fieuu, ,Pi• • ?9-09-18-01 DISOUS81ON OP.-EITVIRONMENTAG 'EVALU,A,'SfON (continued) ` 1 8) She exposure of people or praperty to potential flood ng ,Or, lln=dation from surface Waterways, in the project area inc3,uding possibly those waterways with Levees. 9of re or don sural the ijbasibleyreducta.on�of x&ing antsdua ari or endangered plant spe"c3 es.;` ��Fa b)'- : -110) ,A�, inc:rementaJ' retraction of wildlife ha'bitHt. 0d); r} ;4 11) 'The exposure of people to noise from trains: utilizing the. Southern Pacific RaM�road at noise, levels up to about } 79 de.,ibela� (dR). References• y sass dement of GCtetal Plan sand Olken TPM nat al stud , 78-»1 �08--02. Cab> 12) The ;introduction of new._ soilt 6s of light and possible glare into the area,. 13) alteration of the General. Plan Land l 86 leap designations ,The i preoently designated for- low. density residential dareas ?Adustvia! usea'. C8a) , - j 14) pbss�tile canf];c Ls between indust vial cammerc�.a1 , ... a rioultural and residential uses Al -a" y o GeneralePl an 'at f opal to the Cit of Ch~ c General an bnd' ;. p p relation of thi'p prof J`ect - Discuss the re growth po1joies. to lands under the Williamson t Within the subj ��t,area: on 15) Industrial or commercial 'lyes that would iI v61'vA v e use a require of hazardous substahces or rislt of exnJ.o(�Q) a vse pe nit in the �-I and 5-2 zones. w 'able inducement to limited population g��.WbIi 16) The 'poso�, ,in p Pp „ created by the rezone as s eb�f�.c zones area lied cts Without specific toning at prooent. Also of e areas on 1 oaation, distribution and den'oity of populat' On 3+ i u rezone area. (11) 7) Haut thio project Would aff est `the housing demand a n `the Ohico area. .(12.) .r lg) The increased tragi'±ic f rabi reou�:tant prof etas in the the di-rculatiot and trai'fie urea and the effects on r06ab; tlafoty. �iseuss the red ati-on of this Project to the need 'Sxactar. (l,a; c, d,&f) ", far an ov, expaso on I#i gl way 99 nQ r Peterson AppondiX P page $b of 9 l 79--09-18--01 bISCU8S7:09 OF EN hRONmTAL EVAVIATION (continued) 3 -q:),;-The increased demand for public servzc,es and the 4 a capb'*],ity of the various aencie to serve the rezoh. ) area at full development. �JL� a --f 2Q) The increased use of fuel and energjt in �f an area with conentz°aced and dispersed devdlopmeht (� �) ; 21} The effects on utility companies and their capabilit, to, cervico the rezone area at full development. (Note: In the of California Water Service`Companp'I x `case , lana if any for What are their+ present and futureP " aerva.ng portions of the rezone area?) rA effect on the Ci�y of Chico Sanitary Sever System+ j throug,�i future annexationsar;d service �onuectiobs that could oucux in the rezone ate a.,,Vote:, A I bpo'sed sanitary seer system Lias been prox�o,c'fox?snutA Creek w * Estates, :Southgate Industrial Parr +a�1tt riParbJ ,�S"fieas., (16d) 23) The need fox stormwater drainage s;�6'1616ms tC PJ76 ,.de permanent drainage. solutions in pr�x`ti0n, ;o:e e; rezone Y ►r` area, p tt:Ldu��rl.y those areas WitwL OIL,� �3 � r � ?:�, poor a I 4y �/ natural c 1�c�.Otang l frcm �a natural. drainage course (3,60) P-4)> The exposure of people to potential 'huJ� t1,,R r z c P-4) a until. the l~'��t.�rs� :.�z� Tractor, > 2ncluciing aircraft hazards ( airstripasal�ili}es'�fo�crseWaneidis�os�lwouldsteedotorre 5oi1 c eivve p:y ,. - nt l Realth for ihdavidual. r clearance froi.. bvitonft a e,, projects.'to avoid Vuater qt'Jity conflicts; particu]. - 11 whopo wells acre used as a. source of Mater., (17aib) .: gr4, , a the visual Appearance of the rezone area 2� )i'he chane �.n � . P particularly thoso areae proposed for C--2; A -R and A--20 (bet,,ween '.the Speedway and Entler Avenue) zoning. (1�7 y 26) the effects on ubl I c recreational facilities of Lh P e rezone• (20) I 27) The poZjsibility of, affecting archaeological or historical re5:ics and sites» '(2l) (Motet Archaeological surveys : tibuld be requested for su'bseuquent prbjecbO in potentiAlly � ` sensitiVL, areas such as along e. natural Wate'CWay, mainly Butte 01,06'k and Ooblanche Oreck: Appcnd,L;e page 86 of III 79-09-3-8-01 s . f DISCUSSION OVENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued) I The sS^oposal has the potential' to, adversely affect arohtioologicaL and/or historical resources and rare or endangered plant species. (22a) ~ IT'. The,potentially significant effects on a cumulative b4szs are 'chose with a "maybe" response on the environmental checklist ' which .a:re e�tpla ed in the preceding secti , !'hose items _ marked '"no ,c. ii should bebriefly discussed; ''�;hooe items are considered to be of lessee:' significance than r ase marked Atk�" A 11maybe" response., Alt rnat3.ves to theproposed zoning districts and General Plan;' Land Use designations would be considered in specific areas as part of the, environmental impact report (EIR)°recommended f,or. this; project. One area• that will likely be modified is the area At 'the east end of 'The. Speedway designated fox, a land Luse. desi'Sna-;, tioa of rural residential and A -R zonings At the tiles this proposal was drawn up,, rural residential was a new category being considered for adoptioh 'The new category which corresponds to rural ".residential. is agricultural residvata al. Another area wh*ch will roquire careful consideration of possible { altornatives is the area presently zoned M-2 to the southeast of i the Southgate Industrial Park which is presently designated for c6W density, residential use and is proposed to ,remain in that ,Finally, -bhe area proposed for A-20 zoning between The Speedway and:pntler Avenue (to the southerly property Dunes for parcels fro�_Iing 8ntler Avenue) would be an area to consider smallbr parcel sizes, possibly A-5 or even SR -I,. Beneficial and .Adverse effects of small parcel sizes should be evaluated Very thoroughly,, as there 'may be public pressures to modify the proposal in tk fashion. The = should be .th +rough enough to Ouver this pust4,ibil ty without further modification Alternative; Ali the overall project area Would `,need to 1}e considered'•,, he above-mentioned areas are mentioned to ka1Ast �a s" the author(s) of the recommended environmont&l impact report (EItR) In gormulating a:LVernatives: (See footnotes page Se. ) � Anoth6r pertinent factor that waxrants� further :study and discussion is the economic -impact of the project relating tart revenues to costs of services in the rezone area. tVhis factor is alluded to =rtes population growth and public services (#16 atd�,#15, in.- the above list.). -Che discussion of economic factors 1.8optional to some degree, but it would be useful infoxt4tioi � for the Planning Ooission and board of Supervisors as they end others consider this project. • Partial List 6f References for the - eneral,, Plan Amendment and Rezone South Chico G Chi ec rQuadrangle, California -Butte County, 7.>5 Minute Sories i U. S. y (fupographic), Geological Survey ff :; B�itte County General Plan including the new Larid Use Elerflent LandUseMap of Gb <~ p 8C-2 r co Area 6B '� P�anin Department` Prosect Files 80=26A,, , 9-99 Bnviroxigmnta? Review Department Project File, Log 79-C9`-18�'Gl , c, City or C iCo General Plan (Map and "i'ext) �F Butte County 'Comprehengive Zoning Ordinance Air Photos 1-1.28, 2_186; 2-188 from Butte County Publ* c 4Jorks ]dept. Soil Survey of the Chico Area, U. Si. `Dept. of Agriculture,, 1929 An, Urbdh Strategy for Oalifornia, Februaryy 1978 Ea�tironmental Impact Reports - Greentree Estates Subdiva cion, rte) Withdrawal: of Midway brcSard from C.L.C.A. Agreemett',. Souk;ligate:' Adtds Butte Creek Edtates Units 2-5; Butte Creek Estate Units '6 & 7tYie S ink Corp.; Chico Area ftbmsportat; 'on Study;, p - Caltrans Traffic Counts Butte County Public Works Dept. 11979) Prolos d Sanitary Sewer' System tri the South Chico Area,'McCaan Assoc., 49 or 9) , Initxivaryial 5 19?9 dy Closure of Entlor Avenue to through ar•tial list) �� COrltdCtB (t1 Blvd.; Oroville, CA 95965'NO . :Matte County_Farm: Bus.eau; • 558 Feather River �. Presarve;ricultizrai Lane; Rt. Boat 52-]?, Chico, CA 95926 Bill Turpi Butte County LA'>±'O`o -- n. (about County Service..fArea I"ormatoxi .or proposed sans.tery sewor system) ve Snil Butte Country Planning Dept. Bettye I3larEarleelson,Steve Streeter Butte Count Envsroxunerital Review Dept. f, Bu C,nunt Enviraxunental Health 17ept- lvz7c Vai7hart; Tors Reid Bu - ohn Mendonsa, Bill Cheff ; Stuart L e1:� Butte County Publs.c, Works Dept,, But to.County yirs Dept.µ Bob Paulus, Hector Reed { t , SOUTH CHICO GENERAL PLAN .ANPI�REZONE 'PROPOSAL " e� • 'r M APPENDIX E i, t' ? 40variety of land uses cover the subject area. The pt petty ak; east of Highway 99E currently oontains a took -crushing planta `? a pI&Mt farm aper&ted by the ii.S. government,, several.sangle Qy. family homes ,sa radio station(with transmitting tower), a ., fi church; and a luwberi 'yard. ' r The property to the west of Highway ,99E contains orchards,' field crops, single-family, supdivi.sion, other single-family homes on larger parcels, little league field, tWq sheet mi:tal. shops, -and a cojltractor's building. �+ Topography'in the" area shows a relatively" flat/l dI vAth slope approximately 1% generally from the northeaata to the sat�thwest:" Soils Vary from poor to very good. Generally, th easter a ; ortion ig san Vina Loam and tailings. The western pot- p. , . a' tion contains Fina loamt Nord loamy san ���V Ina xoom,,;anl tailings. ! f ' 34. Y The surrounding ro erties of the eastern ortioo, Contain } � . grazing Land {giPhe east and to the north. The western" x1 portion, is surrounded by industrial to the east and north � and residential and to the south and wast. soils, sji'ecxes, historical, � 11:p To o a soya and scenic satsier3. `as of the surround. area are similar to' the sub'ect ro ert ' � � P P :1 t6rmation subtitted by Steve Sm� th, $u� e Coi ncy Planning ' 4 i .. .•. + w + •♦ N<4'M m.#<WC41+.'YVlsrr..'P'lPliWv's'1+tMwkwq!'l�WJi,SM9� tETERMINATION (o be compXeted ty""tile Lead A4encyj AIM r, �On tine laasis of thisinitial eV aluati6n. � f , 1 I find),�the proposed project COULD NOT 'have:,,a significant effe3 '��v`Y1•. tY�e environment's and a NEGATIVE DECWiPd ON �t r zrx a.s ,r�6oe)mm .,n ed. R [ I find that althcugh the proposed project couid have a. significant effect on the 'einvlronirient, here, will not be, a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures describe d on an attached sheet have been added to the roie Ct. A NEGATIVE DECY.ARAfiIhT ,x IS RECOMMENDED, I find the proposedprojectMAY have: a: sicjnificant . effect on the environment, and an,ENVIRONMENTAL IhIPA «, AtPOAT is re uire,i . , ber �, 1979 r Aul)� , 'os' LR NI-jEi! PAL REVtOW DEPARTt:F1VT Rev:c fed by: 'Earl. D'i .Nelson EnvirOmental Re`'view Diceator fw� 'fit �r of p �ndix page. P"� r ­4 Departa ndum '�� , ' ❑ �i' :, a . to pro t ials,cx ` x n Y r Stu =Ed�,11 John rttiansa Bill CY�e��) > f .,, t ��+t 'X4`7r1, / lT U f .1 itu.or cTs CSos ias`ty' ma s f0, co�trit improvements! South C ico ,ReZC3ne pro eot /3"0/,0 ''i would appreciate havingya lih':r at�ack�' g�,tass ,fay �he�� 4 r w n a;otlnt 'b co. unty 'funds ta' lila he required for road ancraa.rtage , a iur��vgMentg' in the attac}aea pbect as to;.-l.easa address, oily tie 4r,`04 inside the -hash marks--approximately l,loo sores o .tl+�velopabl$ti, 11,0id need, estimates for three- different cieve�o 00t al exnata.�seh� 1 J 7 �t Alteg:ria ave' ]. the area wotild be zoned AA-20 and :Likely 6: iain 4e it= now ;xi stb tilt: le or no residential developihemt would �goeU; ; and P' .x:;0'0 ',;,10'0 acres would remain in agriou'Ltural prn uction. ry., w g,, Altearnat.ve 2: the area �rould 'be zoned A�5� Assumo the Done i;ixctaoki �' r of .220 neW dwe]lilag = t - of 1.;100 aeras of lands one;d u. z` .`a Elva acres. ;;,` ;M A te'rnative 3: as8l ile the ConstruCti6t :of 1,100 newt t�well'a.tp gone' Fri ci.u. per acre: ;rea13`zs that 'goes i.mAtes of this sort ;axe ekti~eiel;� d3f cu] t to 0 mei"ked but ho thd**r'OU cat provide--m,e vith a W6t a 'b llpark range«" 4 r , ase es iiriate� .,b ` ii ay;,; %18%80M i�l�ase appreciate tYie return of those 4 I wouli� phone if, ' you have any 'glxest ons, Thani;`� yb'd f or �ut�r assistanae� attaehed sheets -fox map and estimate ,y o ' :.. .. _ ; -::"r _--.n.y3.5 tt 'nn..vrelet FlH'S*1-Yd."JMMPThAI+dhM°n`iq!titi;!4.5TdVAJi1SHA'ii?61fGMo-i`tt4`1a?1{�i i�G`{�f'!� I' ZNTROV;EME NT COa�'S FOR ROADS' "D AND DRAINiAGE A .fevnative :1,: A-20, No N " psidenti.al ,Cox►etruction ,i lrai�age Pacilitievs ` Alternative 2: A-5 Zone, 28O New Dwelling Units Rc5aas' I DtainaO Paciliti.es : ` 1 i1I 51 Alternative -3: SR -1 Zone, One-D'We11ing'�'Uilit'' Per - Adie '1«10p dew Dvrel7.inga 1 1 Roads: gain � ag,e Faailiti6t : 17 p � c; 'i 1 r ,1 , fA r-t.�'"`+..�+`�'•��: ••Z `'� :��. ' r "._' .r., ��� 4 • ! ,ta'• 4K • . a.•..1:i, :L •, h, r tt � � a - y •i._."•L� +ti 4r`r �•tr � yi3,a i i I ti..• y'1'i,t'ry� T, r T1s+. y o f � aC�;'► r r J"•��rt ..��"''.. e1•, � °i L „h•!h g •:L A r Jct.. re•1 t . 1 `r`• 2K A'- !�' ` pS\ dr\'" r _.. rt' � ` s �%''''r �k""j � �T 4 y{`a'•d'.... _, \Ir` ( d.ca Y!!;t .... • �•�"i�w+�f "'j �a.' d i ,tea its +�•-j..�. f �� ,y '+w,«'uw tg� + i= r •1y4� t w a Ca 1. �• fi �v r y[�{ �. .,,iwti 1 r� t ,f ~��} a �i,' a t?►. ••/• a «..i !�, ,�� +"1,\ / i Si ?iGir IA V.\ {� A'. RlY�' 6 `F��"�•� �� c} 'T ` 3, a —+..•: \• �.,t•. aI, +l1 .x}i.i:+ �irrTLt„ ''t':.w.�e."^• �' �..r •+ . •tt , a1t� . it • v�'3lrjrr.,. '•g .vvn .r•,+,:ti t,Lrj�� i,� 4 `,i •'4"}�, i .li !•.!t r•..rn ,' ti r : t r '•„ a.'A+`!''"'„r tt.�w � s "{t • �• � _. vi• ��., : ,,'�.. ; s' ,'r•`rif.? "atY ��4 ♦ �' _ � g 9�•. a-�t.'t .y. -�' ,:4' to g p .' i g , •�.....>.••,r,�� a r, : $+ `��'`�rL s�,r,. , w j,i��a'��w, 7 a;, r``�'t`.,', +a.'r a:"'�,_' � '.. '""•—�,ca•—.-.. Y'.�.,t+� y�r�.�^•T` +ay.��..,•„� ,Ir+'7•• �'�~.,.3...�„!�!1,�-w. f 's,•.y,^��.,;i r, rttCC 7r.��' �* t t +�...�� i St ?ii.4�tt 'Rrnr�`�'y�� �,��it:. .St i k , u �^ '�O � � � � sr �. �•r :.Li vr'^�`�, t,rr.`a✓ i� .it'. � bfi, 'l,�,'�,."4 jar R ty�..t .. '- `. �"`-.ia�+.�''i c y �. �'" ti! � i J: •.'.�.s�—. �'"'�'r...,r,� `' !� 'i � 'a�ta'�`4.�f,/�I`i�•.'C�Z k .ire+ 1,I7 'r•iv �,!�k�•r;' 4 tit +,`� ttt�it•. �r'.a—I `i. ytlty .r i + t l rrl_ ♦ t1 �.��_ : - ..+ �{o�+• ` t w.r a fS•'�•' ... •_•,ti d�t.`it J:'i '. .a " iiy`t•�., +` t aid �. :.°r�••=;r ..s ":ta.:`,y JC+��:+. ^+� � a' „- iitr.�a"'-.4..r» .-. !•t irrl-"'^��tC+_'1. h ,-.. r �r,�. •ate__ 4{�(� x � t/a. •I d 1 y., +. �•.. .4 r e! Lr,•. {.. �+.�" h\.. L�l "; 1..♦ `n�M1 r ♦ ` it y,+` ,,,t irM.� �` td"" , . �~ y. ` '�L . 4 .., u ^ /�. ; }•1t L Mi :«C }�3air► a _x i+It`. :t Ar y'ri ,j,��,^., L 1��t, ,kl �t?,�,,,,y!:!��I�7��•,. • 6 al. , +uy4C J.r�r..�.w.',•'{ �: `!• L t I1\`-Iie �r f !i h 1 •{ it • �,f• -'Jk e•, •,,.. 3 �^T .•w� j rwc, is x J 1 :1`,_ :� ti..*r r t• f iJ•4 �,"�•rf ayY'. , 4,1. jr; "i.,G,Gw ,� i °.. tN,.,.Y i..j •irT.rg iy^!{`�'� _ aI' 1 r,rwK' •a) / H! , - i •.. i t tt w ti-a•" 61A fI S•iw • t 1j • .- t 1�•4 yy,,���.��e�.t , r a r ,+ >, JsL,, [ S•J' iti r rf .. � �tt �gi1 } ..r � ��� .' b:. a Li a,i 4 i,rrjl 7 v a u [I t•aY^ r + tdu. `+_- ! /+.' 1,. i y,�1 �. :+.u.1 ti4h tom' r^ + ,n'iry, z.`'i SKr'« •tnt i ti. . `^«i i L4ttd / !•. ;2� f"hs..L� Ma.•rw.. i S irr t rt t.Ir,�t�''-•-tt .t•f •' i ` t,t ii, � 1 ! r.J r • _ r'� v :' a '�: �ilt""a""i .. ... ' �' : � i 1 ` w'•" o . 1 fir• . tA � a .+. , I •'! r Y t !�' r t R+ � .i4 li ,(�. 4..+ if i\ 9+ 11 •uh ti, �1'•w.r $,1/ � � i•rni.. „�/++v3' i.. V y t.. ,.. �"� •+,'a.rli.'.fuy r^I' i r + ai ,r rr i ♦ u ,l I �. idr I ••p.,. � S[ wrr1� f •ye,.r L ' gY .Rs. ,.i:� r. ." :t.t � jn ��Y � L�'u! _..`Ca L . ''r11 _a,, t ti •a.,'' `'�v�:� �C��..,! r „til'y-a•••-'+•`jl,, Y'. I,5 (`il •'• i ,.f trt Si gwi: Fil,: `r ' `\�•..�:3`\ ( .+�•,..�•+ i 4ty wy ,4.�r V .. I J.4. .,. t '". Y.1"i.! rw I pati lJ r tr }1 ,` . !`r! rrl r •� ,•.�� r.a 'ir a - a r• tr .». L a. ��, sw�V�f.+ i�:ll'Y1i1,i `t `♦ �. t ! !'2. �ti t'Mti T�ik !i .• ,. ���N ('1 y +^ x �: v�a"r'�� ,:4. al r t• a � 1 �l a •_.. r•++'+ ,iv , li •"• ii ._.J� , .i i•, � !0 C'.! "r,L' �°�r'�; ", �� L1.Y �.!`l , 1, r+'uY f wi�C ii c `, ulr, Ir 1 t11 `r � rr✓�ti ua,, •;"a �y* ,+w f ;, �!} tl �- t 4 L wt•SC } 4i•°..«'� `' tui h 1 t S� �iS t `� y»:,,f I••L.i« r J,r •f.+wr.i 4 Y ti l y Y r J • 9tiN l�i:J'�ll:�`jyl-y ��t.`+i ~ilr .14 tZyrj i„ r'b€ r�.vrrr{tel �r'� it ..r+p' w _ 3+.•t; j.:,�f"'r r•'►..rw�.•. I•a: b.�°g•Lry ,w. ii t,r, w t•! 5 trial n J G ! t ,, t.,.tti i `«2 t� �.� vi •... ♦ai•„ -'�` �.�+ r ti �`'e +� �""+i ti W' ay ♦ � et gI„Lf2J a {� tal L `✓ � •.I. •' + H. � •� tit i« � r` '^�+�•.. ,1 1t i',�., � `°Cs 1 'i . ♦ .� � ' t 1+ +•••••.�.1y r i s •' '..f! a«. .•. vY'a ♦ .v'#'1' �f;�•5�+'� `'\Fu .t`!L3t tai y-,i4Ut .- `�`V t:`'^'1V •`ii. ):�-t',t,t,i y't ,moi^-+�..�4 `•.,.t'.Ir.•L `y';'•I.�+...,w :_`a:'• • -'` l i a - j 3T ti4 i " ".`. y. a�`�;+Gr•+n p t r .2 J a u Jlnt `••i �f r 2 4 r•,;. + `j •r 1 r,`. •ia , `.it;" }yt C 1 1 .1:1 3 !,t` i`I ri Cti a. l,�trrl l •,t t. \ a,.t "r of iJ r «:'N,Y l 4.�1 t P�I,j d g ""il t rC •••• �/• r ,..�,` r" i ,j,rr,,,r,. `� +�' 1r tv:...ti• r ati c ,` �!Itit` t`li! 44 VrniY1"IPr r# .%r'.i i iS tg,�': i V I li'i ..� 4 �S y4•'"..�4 �3`. +' +�; ` ?w• i `.l, !ic+.� '.+ �.r' f !' 1 /.iv'.i �+ 1 � QV t• 4 t F, aT '.:iJti . r L a_4. � Ory �' ..L.+« i t .i + •4•+i'lt 1�,_ i 1° �' { \ ! 1 ,Jc4 `, Y�a^AI •s. * • l �• /i.�_.0 ' i•'t a ri +� f "+�.al `, i, a. a41 w i 4 i 4 ! - l+ a " ` " � u �, ! !' t � 1 : 9 ,.'♦Ca ��.,.,,r A g. f t i S ia. •� > . 1 41 �•.t +j 1 'r'�l -'M iJ ••. a`i �' aa4.. "mss..,.,^ • - to tart°..` •.• ,! h• +..L w t w.i. I. w .,.t..•.�. , v ' iT � ..•� =•�!�, i1 ,r eti ONO ue� t Y •i}t ` t a J.a e.a w,.�•a•,a .. :t �li' d L/{"ir 'ilt" L'• !'��:I1:{ �.i yy�.'+ prG h t GheP� �-- p - p;kbl�c ._r..•,,i,,.�--i-- �_.,<—..a..;�i...t�j r_ � x n c�u�'i' iii •, � ti MtLt� x:0 ik h S i)Floes .D 1`` 4.14 1 C,, r ;A,t—!/, �,t�:t� �,a►t11';cUt•in >_ . ee .' M r 4i. a ,i., Yt. of . !'Hr f u •4 Va4 Nr„aa •:4 ii 4.l �iy,. - -- ., `( cz, ez k�o _EM _T L INCOME 9- 26,61M. F :7" it A 3- $2!�. a, 9'�._ 00: -$W�34 3.34" 1,14 65' MPLL ?%ii., Ref, t$4 1 a -N' INCOME j EFT 22 cwt/Al 20. 24 I '540M - `-$3T.39, d/ 13�34� $W�7 $50,51, IncomA, 27 T/ TOT WT RELATIOuskV, BETWHIT Y1ELD_-CW A-,, AL COSTS, -AND COSTS/C AT $25�,t3d/Cl4T-,SELf-If4G,.I�RICE�7' Ta k, N� S 20: cwt/k $ t529.251- i,, $549�449_ 1; Total, $ - (:osts,-:.p4&8.Z7 $481-39 5T3 - 5-67 -90'' $27-.08- $2 $24.06 $tZ.90' 'Tenj�t,-'Landbwner-_Basft,�- PwIMEMENT INCOME FROff VARYING YIELDS @1 $25-OO/CWT -SELLING, PRICEL (rowdecf.off), 18 - ,.--2U 2Z Yield --wt/A- 16 Ints- Cash Cos�ts;,,� Defy.,, C C -to s s, n come-, �$40C Incorm/A., 48 $15- d- questions-regar Jjig irtsu i. fam advisor if youL have. this.procucti beav! prc&MtIZ�-U Buft bg cost ,;,tudy--r or dry `1977- Off1m. Farm. AdVUD OjAo�— 1979� ;.Bdtte, C=16� tenst om� P-1tarce- wC& -hfs, �A r97 Amen6pente :the­ does- no t f 197'r J - S6 Fa Asscciate? WF in ai* ofitg- 17701'vfrd;E� 61- wfc-0iti" hoza& oxeki�* M Faft, iftnagemen xegarEng pozicy . -Mry� bo, ti;r: H% thiver-catr of, Wif arnit 01-11 2 ?_4 T6 l $549 9� 1t&R7'819 30-34, $5229!2& Cas _ r _0 Nt �C000era ive� i orm 'c ion- ut ing ty �P__ f a Berkeug" azff 94790' 0 unfliersf -Aff, oi T Dikyisf� cat fon if Atme. and- fww6rkono,-- cbowati4t. Wensi ork-In Agria r.611 ge of*AAqrfcMur*e Uniyemit$- of 01, f �mi'a e f Aor 76, DOPe M e _atg�gtjj, States= 0ppartm nr� lure, 41 SAS TS Op,:DRT BEAN COST STUDV// �JU t this study, i s l�fised an a 1,100 ache-�fi el d crop n erati.an-: ; +h; 50 acres of ,, d , ,.keans ° Other cr°aps u ^©dn on AhO ,r0ch TO include dire or, 'more, of the fo1l,ii0g; ,,;Oraini a1.fa�lfai�hay. grain sbrghum� 1egar est ., cors, safflower, etc Much 'of the cqui;ement,�;'s u"sed on thp,,, tire' acreage ometlme during` the ye'aA » "t �a, foir teasons. of s �mp�ih 'ty, w used�� o landlord-tenani $OdAtibk "pith T5- �6 -Alisfonofn�thh chip.» Lh ti study. the tenant deliver, ti�ticri"to ,tie1��� � h 6 warehouse, butte' 1bo dl, ri ,pays"hi's own warehouan t�o`t s. �{ � = ray %a»gym 9 2. allocat ng h egU,ipipent cost per acre the foilMh§ ci�lt Ilati:ibhs ° (a) 11Origirtal C6s't of�le�dipteh•t is tho �estima�ted�lieW cost eninclude'•, sales: tog (b) `�'�Cost'per Atte" is tine ndw cost div„1=tled by tie 10u er” of ,. ii Ml �� }ire the equipment Wfi11 be�ised btt. (c Depreciation is �azod the per { , °Cost''' divided by 'the eXppdCV d life of the equfipmen$; � ,,(�d) ''; h gest'' oh rib t+Y V N "den"t i s f i yured ;oh ohe'=h`al f'; of the new cost per, acre "�nul ti p l ied` by »9»� ' Miscellaneous e>tM enses are estimated to be about 6�'oi~�th0 It h`1 cultuM hahvest costs. They include.. such costs at preparing raadway�*_ageneral Weld v r Ottol, officei;ti.bookkeeping, +wte�^est ori ope,.,,, �'moheyf e`tC,i fl �1J, �abpr costs are based on a $5.00 hourly "'rime for ski"Iled , li and X3..75 ouriy, t ;,y hate:for unskilled (irrigator). Included are cash Wages* compensatiart ih' rw " ancef racial security and other benefits that the employer might p'a f equipment 6D ooatj ng costs are listed under fuel and repair. , Included is tl�ell '.� oost of Uel, hia ►�tenante .replacement parts , tires-,� etc._ Tractor charges, hour. area `130-150 HP t �,d 1 $1?' O0, '120f wheel diese'! $5.25 i9nd SLS° t+iliL?e1 d ese A This andather informat�ias par. a y 'tarn fronts r acinry 0os,ts and pert�.,.�itihce, 198'' (ad�ustedj -by A:'�g. 6eed,� IiniVers: r I "Ex e" U.C. bavi8, + a raa;gpm2nt_.��wh,at. the gro —or':s decis�lion making it worth a" figuhed a 6, of the market` Value 6f•the chop» 7, ProdUicti�r' aperations Wi 11" Vary from year "to ,yell^ 'and some cn`stsii the ;dame ,`for fall' gr`oWerS. Ynsecti' A de herby ci de and fertilizer w�11' also be different some Year and With som8 gr�iers, 6 One AhdivIdUi "ftwer� 'costs May represent the cost of""any.rldry beam;' » r � Yltnt E r Should `set°ve as a useful g ide in reuieWirig the typical costs ,. prq uction� OroWers afire erieourag'ed to make use of �tho .0 1umnk "Grower casts ,'".to •perr�it a cornparison of the ottt in this study With their owh'» nfrt�m Butte and-�1enn"Coun,ties participatedih furishih9 infa��matiae #�o y'domp,i�iig�''the basic"infpviiation in'this ttUdys Soni ihfornatton was obtai�ndd� r'otn. agi^i cu,l tut s�pply� l`housds � Appreci ati do it �exprdsse'd to the for t ai r -md hep. i iy r r 0�i ff UsualOieprex s . M ' r�.to . .Ik'.'1 d] b�t✓'kSh .� 9i�1�?1 l.Q$ 4 f �Q f'eS ), ; AQI��-tip '1�R�r'� L�haotQr 130 NC' , .Diese1' ; 77500 1°100 '$ 7d.45 0 20�5r^, i`1"�td1r `' 320' LIP Wh''►73zes�1 .� , '.� . t, 33;04, 0 � rJ ds a. r 1, 30.0b r' t'11606 100 HP .Wh IN 6go" W PY�14�t 41:H`6iYdr�11110 2»way 27,,000 "' 8 X000 1100 ;. X880. ' 24 �` ° 9 09 ;; 15y . ¢i e''1' �1 *Sp: "tobtt�. or" fel' �ul���; 32) ''�6t000. 0'100 �, '" 't;a 22 ru, "E u1PMENt Alla BU 1:dINO' LXBY 880 , (,880 05 15 1'4.5 15 iy r r 0�i ff UsualOieprex s 1 ' r�.to . .Ik'.'1 d] b�t✓'kSh .� 9i�1�?1 l.Q$ 4 f �Q f'eS ), ; AQI��-tip '1�R�r'� L�haotQr 130 NC' , .Diese1' ; 77500 1°100 '$ 7d.45 0 20�5r^, i`1"�td1r `' 320' LIP Wh''►73zes�1 .� , '.� . t, 33;04, 0 � 1 100 1, 30.0b t'11606 100 HP .Wh IN 6go" W PY�14�t 41:H`6iYdr�11110 2»way 27,,000 "' 8 X000 1100 ;. X880. ' 24 �` ° 9 09 ;; 15y . ¢i e''1' �1 *Sp: "tobtt�. or" fel' �ul���; 32) ''�6t000. 0'100 �, '" 't;a 22 Chi j"el l j h'6a4y duty, 16`` * Disco stGbbe,,12') y 6y20n 9,300 880 , (,880 05 15 1'4.5 15 �Y .47 " {�70 , 1, r5 �qe , Oi•sc, s cff'se21 f � �, �, ; � 13 jO00 1100 1<1 � 82 15 ' bisc� tandem;"'21 �, r 300 9,300 880 1100 1.0 57. 1'5 r,' x.45 10 .70 ly Bed g°fit©ol 6�ror1� ` .s 3,700 3,040 8804w 1100 20 �> Zr�?3 20+ 14 1.th.r► �r y 3 ottotn used ch`;�+l oaf `b 1 200 ► 1' 100 1, Oy ' lb k �s 90 aalli►;.0 cultifVatdr 6 row �1;at�t it "6 �rbi 5 500 q 000 i00 080 6,4t1 1 4 56 0 .50 +46 t`° 20 S'addletahks (Z Sets 3,000 5,540 :880 880 O,dy 10 " 5.26 X34 � ; .63 ulti+ra��r.,S1ed ihd a u' ment C :Z. 4 ', p -' 6". ra 5,040 250 .10 20.00 '�2 00,, i� {��Owtte��6roty _ 6,OG0 5;4001100 250 {, 20.00 1 C r' 20 .23 od1Used��� tir, uck0Gsed,',,2 ton 7,#001100 6.73;,) t �ku ' "' P pf'ckuOs;t t+6.�(2)s 91300 7,400 1100 1100 8, 46 673. ,used s mans A00L�' u' ��� '1; 400 12!00 880 1100 1.59 157 11:18 . �3� � hpp t�io1�S v� mow, sui.ld 30',o4b 2,500 1100 887 2727 30' 2.84 2 0 ,91 ala r ;. : rir ' 1`0 hurs;.%pumps�500 gal. TA'�.' 322,300 32 X57 3�9 l *Listdd aft iothtbw,y'ond may be used by soma 606►6to^t but ribt iticlude'd 1 total s y k Ar . I- , .:........... Il �, J *r PO I t t` �"111 ac)4 Or©villo-Cffic0; HWY Chico y UA Ij tf,it I ncl Deed ,are cQpiee of .new, guide!!,, nes estab� �,a�ed' �iy the �ervir,d for de ns 'prime t.~ ., ��� �a�a��vn4tinn l t, � T, is informat�.o�n is devitod 4 ro, a tht �.r n t'.o"""' agria'oltur �. 0 depsxtmen� l.aaid survey program, still in rlrogress: theso guy delirias Gr avaluatin& pro feet's in ;Iiutl�e Ct► r t�*•- .:' £�inaerely L v ` gym (j py/yy �+il°YiX`01�II18Y,lii$1"�. fteY�.eS�' �"�ecial.i;st \' r` k {YRES i lkt Eiaa 7 (I y.AH('• I rte' 1. „� F, \ Q • V.l �l� 1 _4,.1 'I {,r ��i1 �Fy1' �� ,+ J ,a N-41 lj�VWWI* rr�l9�rrt 559 EAST LINDO. AVENUE PHONE 1916) 343-5818 ' WON ;wig CHICO., CALIFORNIA 95926" lam' � •!"� , tJ ° Midway Orchards Route 3, 1363c' 130 k �hicoo Cal: 95026 .; Dear Mr'. Cottingham: On•,March 27th, 3980, I made horticusl>! t. ural �z ",AierC�va ations' 1 on the;, Midway .Orchards - prbperty located on the 91dway, sc ilt]h It was' .quite evident: "from my inspection that 'the Midway Orchard su Efei s from ;many serious problems Oak root fngu us; bacteria cankerE• and stunted and %�pak trees, particUl6kiy o1 the southern section ox--.?the orchard. I would like ',to address' each of these serious p,,vQblemt� "., �` andgide you my' expert c,pinion as to the outlook and future r of the orchard OAYC ROOT FUNGUS (A?-14I.LLARTA )ROOT ROT) This , un ua is sides reach thr f / g p " ough��t the i�;,y,^�thern; Sacra rrsent�a valleyi xn some area's �.t cruses extensive tree losses. (("Affected trees are u,sualy- in groups. And the trouble i4 ay e�:tend t�, enlarging areas and kill more 'trees each yearK,, Oak root,, fungus is. favored by high soil moist.,�e rv1 anc�' cal survive on old wood disease below the ground gar A. Many yea s,,` Dr. 33113: Moller; an expert in this field, has informed tis" that the diseased ;roots can be found as deep as 50 feet, aiid is more frequently seen where `lbak trees ]lave grown along water courses, etc. The symptoms are classic in the Midway :Orchard. The < tree's .';becu�ne weakened and cat be killed • at any time. To find this evidence of funrjus and activity in the ground, it can be located by cutting off the outer bark with a hatchet 'j6r strong knife. A cream- dcilored or white mycelial fans between thebark 2ndthe dod not on the outside t,,f the bark. The results a fithio west rc 5 u3 h has a strung ffidshroo>rn--like ove the grouodor r]c >. The' ba. exterivic abnd usually appears not-nal. Although, there may be a slight amount of gumming. f, „ <s • r 5': a`F j 559 EAST LINDO AVENUE a i .. ... ,PHONE (916) 343.5818 CHICO, CALIFORNIA 95926 1Y i'. Black sha--#tring-like structures may be: „found on the bi. 4ide r of�large, diseased roots, and after fall or spring rains ere. be a honey--colored mushroom around .. the base"' alesdmay of_ ... -... Sly c l. Cl),4'RROL: In an olit jx, established orchard; when .;this disease"is first discovered, the only control method tht.t seemi;' to be .satisfactory is to tern`Ve' all the diseased trbepi: 0and�sq"hen 'healthy adjacent tre66" a%ound the diseased trees to prevent 'the disease ;f.rj >m,-; '` then dig up and; destroy all the roots of both the hey thy' trees and the diseased tree ,, la;g er than one an a half in�ches an diameter. Then; le>~ that 63'ea dry out for one or two years. Deep cultivation and fumigation With appropriate chem,ici,1 latee in September ,or early,er ile l is still • 'aerateOthebsoilhone toetwoimontbs before plantihand q. ATrdsigtent root stock such as Mar_,,,a (Phonetic), 26-24,_ offers some resistenceI however, it is abtrious.in the Midway Orchards this , ,.. Would not be aood choice since it g is evident that the Mariana 26-24 is not ressten't to oak root fungus in this sOil., Also, it would be foolish to remove the dead trees and healthy trees surrounding_' the dead trees, because when this orchard Was "replanted failure to >remove all.of t'he,or"cha`rd and the roots uiderheath'the ground have scattered theoak' root;;;yfuhgus over the entire area. The forecast for the Midway Orchards with reference to oak rtbt fungus is a serious one.: lt.is doubtful that it can be controlled, its spread shopa.d ` be rapid. It is my opinict, it" Wr, iild be impractical to replant with any tolerant,Species, such{ is: Rngl°ish Walnut or` black Walhuto _., because of ilingus and soil types; adterial also known ad sap. aisehot Oummosisi or, tour This disease mangy-daused, in fact,;,Dr. C;ilfly (phonetic), at the University of California; who has mai{e, a study of this disease for over 30 some gears, has not been able to ptits j � • ;cause. However, the disease Often is mote severeOntto.ds grown in sandy soils rather than heavy soils; and, the vigorous tret�s are less 1 ibgrowing p y 9UdcelhdiViftai tarnatherdatecof l.s. thetMidwayalc dtel� he soi�� is irtNtCksNF%IivN9tfiN A-xE,.:YLltk'isYfrviWK5e.9?Na�M'A%t^f41LaF�4/."4 � -•'•:". .::_: ...._.. ':...... • ., .. ..... .. .. ..... .....:. _: .. ,..;. .. ...,. 1.� ®MA� 559 EAST, UNDO AVENUE PHONE (416) 343.5810. CHI1:0, CALIFORNIA 95 j,?i, � ry particularly the 'orchard, i so, shal.]:ow, particularl on .,the South, side of- is dvident'that the trees 'affected by the Uacterial„canker have had the roots enteinto:the poorer soils which lie only, y in to 20 inezies bel0'Wthe ground surface. the. infection iia usually severe on troos from one to six to eight years of ago. This disease is seldom serious in a mondss is highl serious ' prunes; and moot other stone fruits,. Because of the nature of the ,soil at the Mievay -being shadow', cobbly axed 'sandy, `.. and unable to Bold either nutrients or moistuie, the trees x ` Have been weakened and are susceptib:ie to motif diseases. It should be al.'so noted that the only trees that ��bsexved with bacteria,” canker were on the south side of th'e, property,. So that you can aGogniae 'the symptoms of this disease; the`bark and outer �!ap wood becomes a dark, reddish-brown With occasional small: points of similarly discolorod biakk 1 tissue just beyond the canker margin. Outward symptoms ;'include co ioi's prUction of amber-colored gum (nd sunken areas of limbs and Er inks . The canker may girO.- a the of `eluted tre " k and cause, death. Cankers are most active and expandt`primariy' dt ing the dormant period and the amount of actini'ty will vaa-y` from year to year. CONTROL: Control of Bacterial. Canker a.n almond has' ,,. not been thoroughly investigated. Although the disease is ' not well, understood, resear6h on other prunus species indicates that measures which encourag6 good plant growth also tend to protect from bacterial canker. Incidence and severity of bacterial canker has often been reduced by ixse of,preplalt is and/or post-plant fumigation: tspecially in sandy soils, With reference "o the Midwiy Orchard, it is obvious that the soil on the southern part of the orchard is not prime in nature and this is tYie reason that the majority of stunted and small trrees>, the disease-r-iddeh trees and the trees that have i been attacked by insects are in this particular urea. • 5 " Replanting froth this disease requires the rembVal'.,`E the tree, chiseling the ground, fumigate ,-,,n and replanting` , of the tree: And, with all, these precautions there still it#- * i YZ r `.4d3N11R14d'612WY149a13L'i4aVkN?fkW.aali6uf9VFMY�tCS!'?!,:r'ii^ iw++r-:v.' •• •. . "..; MW^.-.n, .,•.yr.. •• .nF.. .,, �,. ,.,x r».... .-.,. ... "�`. w ..wM'n�WW(V'k+ -'wW.1R'M1! ., r , } ,ham 401 LIN�^f�, EWE .Y PHG�"� 1(91) 343-5818 CH0,rk3,, VA�IFORNIA 95926- I, no 'rotect oti from the canker on P yct�ng tre ss i •k�a ��d u:`tnight plant ;agalan. It• would be my opinion than �r��;iz�int ng the txeea I „ in; this area ,would be' an effort in futil l,. q h (f SUMMARY tilt is mx opinion kj J A.,ar IR•> be..ause ooh � �1k9s � 1 � dise466 , " 7 yc,r� . typc�s,� � th (oak soot i ur,�ke) . and marginal aoii is I Ai,�, , ��4, i, badter.ial canker; It'ho`, fu ute of the Midwa ;cl►� ' ��" i� limi•C6id 1` 10 Ron Harnstls ;f } �� n C , db j° Irl x _ j • III • ,, 4/ Iii.; w i i :s1. i Carsa',zr+ s..- _., 'k�^ .„w. ._Yskk'-` .sxrw t':r.-.at.rro> erx-s: _'-' '..s •wr Y • viti J tuft tb,'VafM t A -H AL10508 OfOki 6f Callf0ftIll cobpobllve Exterisiorl 070 bel %Yo— "will al Sciences LEAPUT Division of Agricultue ' O1..1 NI 1 OP' CALWORNIA 2231'OTY 00VItO JUN# 10-70 EXHIOlt 13 * - a 8,W-' L lCbt,15 TO PROi)UC( ALMWOS Under Nontillage Using soiid,,Sat Sprinklers i/ Autte Caunsy Yields 2,000 pounds of in -shell nuts. Labor, rates including fringe benefits 0, 60 per hour. + Hoeurs Cash 'and labor_cost er acre pr "el 6 Materials 01�eration acrer,,_ Labor re airs Kind and quantity Cost Tat l - Dollars Cultural costal° Prune 840 31..20 3,420 ,Pile` brush 3.0 11.70 Ito Yb uck- kAl� !h '(contract) 0.3 '' 1d40 1.Q0 2.4Q firtl,%ia 2.x 3� ;lb. N/tr. + ,$I/ac. 40.��' j 4Oc00 Spray 3x 1.0 4.60 8.90' Various 0. 80ti00. 93..50 Sprinkle for frost pro- �1 tection IN .06d25 ne25 ��.. „amp spray 29, OA.2:` 5 2.30 Various .weed ki116ra..: 10.00 7.5.05 Nov ft 1d5 6.90 7,25la.i5 , irriata 4 g R (gprinkl.era) 4.0 ;'} 15.60 Powax to pump 24 ac. in. 24.00 39.60 Plaine 5x 2.S- 11.50 10, O Propane 20.00 i1.10 Clean befd,"e harvest Od3 1,20 .20 V 1.40 4 Brea 2 hives @ $12 24d00 2400 inteirbA 0-A operating : csagital. . 16.'O0 16:00 ; TOTAL. CULTURAL COSTS STJO 29.95. � 2-144-00 331,05 Hlarveat Cde Move windf611a 1.0 3.90 3.00, - Knock ?.0 13480 11.10 24..90 pole 4.0 i5+60 15d6A Rake 0452.30 SweHli 1.0 3','90 3:00 6.90 Pickup 1.0 4.60 LOO OQ 11.60 bac i to huller i.0 3490 3.00 6.9b ..-Hu1 1.5 4 . �i�J 7 0.00 60 TOT�4i, HARVEST, .. T, CCaTS 52660 37.10 59..70 ,Cash Overhead Mi®c4, office, accounting, etc. Taxes orchard ,G a ui gent 8 TOTAL CA51i OVERHEAD _,- 110.'45 TOTAL.:CASH COST w 139.70 X110.45 .67.05 3240224 531:20 � Management 5% of_2,.000,lbs::@.45C 45.00' • . Annual cosh In%est�ent i?er acre Daprectntion Interest,2&:.,, , Laind $1,50.0. $135400 W�aes 2,000 $57 d 15 90.00 Irrigation sybtem 350 23.23 s5.75 125 4426 5.65 Cultural equipmtht 403 36.$5 18415 hartotalvest equipment ,783_. $155'00'-9 $252.8Q _ 43y,►80 'i TOTAL.. COST .PER :AL&E _. 1014 d Of)'�•1 Cost', dt pound �@ 2y000 1b. Vip1d d 51 Source: Maith, Genii e'4d A140 Alfnond Production Costs, WiVetaUy of California Agri" "`" cultural Exteneian Mimeo, Orov111e! April 1972. AGIRICUMTRAL EXTHNSION UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA I)AW, CAMPORNIA 0616 REPLY TO, DbPt of Plant Pathology April 30 0 Mt. gill Ft,jttingham. Rt. 3j *Bok 130 ci chuo ouliforlda 950-26 Dear Mr. c0 ttifigham. I& in aUtt6ariting' wha�t,,.. I a aw al; yotir Durham 41.1tond orchard on, Apri"" the symotomb Offodtifig numerous trees were,typical of bacterial canker-, caua6d by the bacteriiiO Pseudomonas syringes. This year ade;ps to be ons n we hav' `—n fot. this disease in the worst that a age rq-,gmt year -j - Ind just last wejoaquin-""ateiey viboing extensive ek I spent two days in the northern San damage in young d1mondd And peadhego caused by the same organism. Q The Ajadgse goej-.by several common 'names, depending ou the 6ymotomo, axpr;ased- 1), otehkar and gUmmosis symptoms thaiaeteriatically, effect 80-af 6 d limbowith limbs d6liapaing in spring anal. exhibiting a prof -,s of 2) Soutsan little SUM symptomii are what was commonly seeni;iin, your orchard, Very gUMMiingj discoloration and necrosis of scaffold limb�s and a strong odor of "sour sap6it: these two Ao�eftntloned symptom types invariably affect 2-10 .,,year old "trees. 'Nurbety trees and first year pla'A'- tin"Sa are not af f6cted, The rootstock a" ad tissue below ground is Usually healchy, so a profusion of audkets commonly emerge in Xhte �sptihg. The third symptom attributed, to Ps. sarin �ad is known As 3) blast. This type uswilly,,;affdct.s Lrle6 of all ages, and is c . hartictekited by killing of yotifir-J-1)ssomd and,leaveq, in spring but not, cankering of limba. Otcasiboally more then', ona type 'of 63ymptofiil is "an on the Same tree;; r0,6 The causal bdctibriA can be found on Many different PiAnts, lllcludin� weeds.j r-nd aitbough it is, sds,�.6cted that thoy enter the tree primarily through 166f Eicilks, 'the reasons that the disease occurs iA sobte years but not others is' still not cleAt. It always 16 worse 'n loo,,apots in 6rchatAs$ sandy soii8j ' rae I and shallow abils, and frequently can be avOided by caiqfUl soil p epathtiort Ouch da-backhoding and fumigation prior to planting ensures that the ttaos` het eigood start. Unfortunately, how that 0A.C.P, is n6,,,tdn9dr logali., there 16 nothing else that, cannlbd done after planting. Sprays ate 61`17 dubious mide, A Bedautd of the history of oak root fungus (A'.ffii1latia mlk�,�qea) in this 0\ otchLardi your choice of plum rootstock is still probably robably advLldblu, even though we kn6o, thiV, trees on Lovell peach rdbL are ,Note t6l6tant of &,'�dteri4l cankcr.,� tov4jil is highly susceptible to 'Oak kbbt fungus. Hqpefuliyj we will not 60-9 buth an ihdidehdd of the disdaae for a long. time, which may encourage you to keplatt the Vacant ArOto hgAifi. t hope thAt these, comments are helpful; iet, wd know ('through the butte County 6WO.O.) if. I dah be of hitther adsiatt inddi the sdil qa�qp,,164-for nomatbdo h0d been forwarded to the tktdhbidn hdmatbidgidt at Davis W036 Dili oldoh in or due course. William J, Holler rtkt' Plant PAL11616ki" HINA 1W 1Aj C64piavvt 1Tz W A46 HoMt kW40Ajcs, 0, cb-pb"MW 0 A0161600 chil uhlotWy 61 611116toW to Er 1, syr 01 April ,14, 19,80�� 1� '4Z, „ Dr?i ,Aibdrt 3. Becic Eco=Analysts P. 0:: Box 1187 Chico, CA 95926 J near hr. Becks The soils portion of the EIR for Midway. Orchards ' ` { Was Nritten with no predisposed notion,,bias, or .� intent to prove- it point, 1 have reviewed the re- port and find no reason for change. -" Tf •the, orchard soil was surveyed in thy; same, mariner as outline in the report, similar ififoftation to that in the re ort should be .gathered.. Sincerely, john M. Hart i1 r I � ,. w Q- 3 TATE OF—dXWORNIA—NESOURCES AGNA r, ` EDMUNO',0.'BROWN JR.0. Oore►not � 1t, DEP�\',itl'MENT OF .Plt � ,r tZ> ("A 9701 NIMIUS ROAD, SUIT! hoz 'FIANCNO CORM Vk CALIFORNIA 43.570 (916) 355,-7430 ., !Enviralarien4gl. � ,�"'ra �$. 1. r 10AY may. a.6 : i580 buf b 'c on f U:. V t.,. T7r. Earl 'D. Nelson `~ r� Butte County Environmental Review Dept. } 1:8-x' County Center Drive drfivil ;e l CA 95965 Dear rir. Nelson: The ,Department of ,Fish and (deme has reviewed the EIR. for Proposed i2ezone end General Plan Naendi>ent, ofl�Coun±. Land South of Chico and'has the followi-Ag recommendations: 1. Adoption of the protposed rezone as it will have Less impact on, wildlife than al.Cternative zohi ,,dg permitting smaller )?arcels. 2. Include consideratimi 'tPf measures t-o encourage the preservatr fi oi71 Valle y oalc groves and riparian Habitat within the `p'-4— - ot` area. Ilhahk y u for the opportunit, E8 reiew this project. v \� y Sineerelyy 1J 1, _ Robert W. Las's. Regional .Manager` , 1( i, i 1 Jute 11, 1980 l0: ti mite Go.1'lonning Co0i Earl Ne15on, Oirectior , w_ (� <,EhVlednmehtal Review D ' Z,elitornlAI C>roVllid i t �rarit. Jerr D. Smith, Coun Y ty,Oirc4tor & Farm Advftor Subject`. ERO Log 09-09-la-01 Alternative, 1 appears to stop encroachment of urban developlr;ents into e;ccel- fent agricultural land. %n contr4st, Alternatives 2 and 3~mean a lass of x 95 and 1500, acres of land ,resp eci•ivety' In addition to the h y sicai .loss of ►and with Alternotives p � -. - 2 and.3, further urban encroachmont'impacts the ad3acent agricultural areas in a typical domino fashion--something tha'C must be std a if an"r• icul tu" pp , ee is to continue in the Chico--ourham area. On 11 shallow ago 1'f, '�the.1 Vitra fine sandy loam has a Strrie index of 100, not 45. hese,- �. .� h p -,fine sandy loam exists (Stone 4.,) but is not shown in +� has _ figure 5, page .15: (There could besome shallow phase Viha loam, storie sail cion Ed ar slough near tMorrow Lane; but It is not shown in the figurd�) � p 9 - 9 g i, On a e 51y under the hpPdin "poss-ofgA AgriculturalThis�maken refer», ,. ehca to Environmental Impact report La No. - oncluded O6d1vh that 110 acres of diseased soil rendered the land economically non-viable for agricultural production." Such a statement is inaccuratc:14 The major i� disease problem its the old alto- orchar removed prior, to the current plant, i'ng Was apparently oak root fungus '(Armillaria melld)..�`�his is a common disease problem in the Chico Durham area that al mon, growers cope with icon- r �'• Y stantly Oak iVdt fungus in the soil does not eliminate land from agrcul- tural �'. production. Field andl row crops Canems"-grown as can athronds on Marianna h ` ot p1, m rostock andwalhuts. Attached is a reference "Resistance or SUscepti- drtA!h _lants to Armillaria Root Rot," University of california w' ' b visiUifo g tura! Sciences, August 1979, Leaflet 2591. "rhe same ref teehce is again made on page 72 ` �1Da:rf �nG i I�MM;�ii���{°y.�a�..f('i�%LT�%i1�i�a.^S,` kt.:"wr�w4'i9•wYvW?.n1u+tUkIG'�.railh"AN,..awu,.gia w.-s:..,..... ._ ... ..:._. .. . . ... ... ..,,. - slay :. acTt► c� vRY.�aAEo.c�Y �. .s� r I3istr4�t '2 Clearinghouse I�svironm�tal Ravlaw 0400 Q/O ,Department, of" thrra '0l0 4 CalitEoia' State t�niversty JUN 1�� ; ehidq Ctnly �9 $919w� -j'une =19 y, 198b , `p butte County ETmental Review Depaajt�men o. 4 w 18-F County Chi f Drive' provi;lle Cali. nia 95965 We would �Zike td offer the fol.lowin oliae�cvation son C$ • . the proposed. Rezone 'and General ,Plan .AitprV nen of County - Land South of Chic:a DitiD,, Log r r > Section 3.:11 Archaeology o This , section„ ,mentions; presence of. one site 4in the project area and the clas�� �;,: ` . fidation of the area as one having a modbratio degree caf probability of find ng sates of archaeo] ogl.cal significance. u ' , It,spe6i'f1es that should artifacts be uncavered during clava To merit, a ;qualifi:ed,. consulting archaeologist should p" 'A be consulted 3.mmethately. �� ! it should be noted tt-,ha't there are in fact'`two pZevi'ou81y recorded sites in the pro3ect area (as' noted el.•sewhc�re � the e ort) And, that one , of these :in `partibular-" consti.tutele p a major archaeological resource of utmost significance warranting the highest degree of protection;. , Moredver j the proximity 'of the project area to BWzte Creek, would ja did to that, : t should be classified as an sigh sensitivity ��n:: ��ernas of archaeological potential; as drehhdoI64idal: ates often associate with, stream courses. thoroughly and G Thus i the entire prblect arca should .be systematidall,`y surveyed, all cultural reso E J' found eval.iiated for si.gniEicance ` and appropriate mitigation W ` measures t6im ilated and taken into account in any .further -i planning clecisions� 5P1ould it be judged that mitigation . of potential 4deerse bftddts<<i0 the indicated course of action rather than avoidance and protection, which should be the first priority, ,the 'recommended titi.gatiph measui ba , should be i:mplemdhted ppr��-ior.:to the initiation o� any disturbant�e: Ca113aig dor theervices of a "qua�iified arch4dblogist after material: has been encountered during development doea not provide for the adequate preservation of rescsurce present and would result in unnecessary cohiplications with raepecti,to tr3�.e completion of the prejeot: 0 r Ct' Q „ DCIETT� FOR CALIFORNIA ARCHAEOLOGY o , 4ii, ge :a 4 (A action 2 v „� , F rio The' need dor a ra mate a p x to`4 t ie. i ni 3. a►t o pig p ;' ' =developzv"Oot cannot_ be stressed enough. 4 ” ' Foteht a_1 adverse '�CrnpaGta Sections 4 11 2.31 and 4..31.,, , �:' and Atigation .Md&s xreb : Archaeold, (� ✓1 J.. _ V to these sac•i.ions ins degrees of risk to ,two sites �be$nq. :, me:�tioned as Wid',hin the pro�ec•t ake ' are noted.' +' a resence of other sites IibWever, the possibility of ,th p is not clearly indicated... Th'i passibkllity exists beoause ; bf. the prb�t,imity of the project area t'o ,a stream course, r`r with. which sites ih this region are often associated. p a . to have been s��ystematiall�r� Since, the area a peafrs n survayed irb the;�p est, it hould.be. consdere,d a highly A sensitive area subject,to'potentially great losses should° praper steps not be ta]ten to identify , prese`rve and �.. protect resources present., With 'regard tai the mitiga'ti'on measures 'proposed, the first-,, Priority should be,to preserve and protect exioting sites i� Ekbavati'on intact by easement :dedication or other ans. should be Gorlsiderecl a less desirable an aless ef£ec+ve measure for mitigating adverse. effects, redi;icinij but not ;" :I, eliminating lass of ti4niiicanr material. Any excavations I 47 or: satpf14ig unde'rtakbng should be aocording to a compre- �Y y ts�.�� hens:. -�� research design that will makimize research rc�sul C, " the s ive indicated as a 'tnitigatf-3n measure shoulr be y i, requ�.red� as a basis dor tlle evaluation of signi".�icance ai.` all materials present and for the tecommendation of other " , u 1� appropriate m t� gat3 on measures . It sh6ad cover the �l ` °. entire" project area, end npt be confined, to "sensi'tLve lui.ldiAg sit as All portions of the project axes Will be affected by increased h'ixinan activity A tht)rotigh artd cyst-bidatic' survey stiould_be conducted immediately afro ' s its results and recommendatians bada&,on them be Ohsldered � in any ftkthdt planning decisions ��ectibn nti�l changes 6. irreversible Environme' u4cidt this section '3 t 'should be noted, that mitigation ' iteasires short of total protection applied to arahaea'�- `, «' logical reotrces reduce bt5t too not. eliittinate loss of; .. ,s ,,.'_ .. .�,-1,.. <....,7,. n: _. .. •l �'. ,... .,r. ;x;n.n n r°n.: anarrw o GY%© ±A�ICi�' � AOR CALIFORN RCH'i�'��i.(� S ... blot I •.l - ' 4 O 'aJ(i 7 ;' f iI kI� ' 11 1. ��!' � s.q�xiE�catat materaal 'arid' �?.normion. " I,r tthat the irra jedt area, %e n �. xh c��immdxY �> we, xecoit�mendJ (, t orot r�hi�►,; sura=eyes 1bY <c u�a'�,i' �'�& axah r ,.a all dlt:7.6uie.' teoourae t►ate�ials; Idene�'d�e�t��x�u�tedl t� r, Or, a c�nifti;'carice, that apprdpieiAb ti at�o�x er�u�es'` ` r kie devl�eioped j Arid' Anal-ly i' that tile, ftaiest p6�sib�.e be 3.aranti� ea,' " civ ' measure, of, `pro taction £rom �'oee t;acczaed�e o " resb rces,. ; Thes' aresr unigtt�}, nogi-repj � ��b�.�' re�oui�ce� chin h+��te" mei.ngiully ; tt out?re�rstandit ,off 4 that contra p, on cif - th z.e rn 4.on . P,n loss will ki'e 'the hiu►►�ri<. oacu t:.�. g �` „ �.( , '6 h3's f4jk6tb Xb to ' a L)j"j.idt COotdin&tor �o „ `r , + r L 8� �� c o If .•t, i }' G• :a o `w tN b v j as , ..... _. a: �r� '.,.nn e,.:...ta�,urw,ru�nep.Lw "y ,•�"w.-..e,..ar.n.r»xrn ur^n.�-•.wa-tC a.-+-`+Y...,.—+,b.-..J •..•,i- 1W xLLu�.±t"J'f�` IFRNM,iquv'rNa+,1j+�y+f""V±" � __Hi _.y+�I k ,.. 119i Lust Undo Avenue „ . Chico$ CA. .•95926 Juror Pa 1980 n �ylmnmmn#pl �avlow Dopf. Par!. Nelson, Etivirornnentdi Review bireo$?Q)" JUN 23 1990„ r lav County Center Drive Tom, OroviO'b"CA > 9596a� � Dins counIy y o n n - i?ear !•rY. Nelson, 7 would �i�ar tb lend my voice in,.`suPport„off A�2©' gonirig('foo °thss1rt: eat "of the Midway And navth of tete 4rovillis-Chico roa& If , �he lath under hsiderat3 on in this ihstanae t�tere intraotable, poor, ooil for sj ag'A'CiAtVre- "I there would be little issue. Howsler, it is hind that ' n 4,O)Ad be very fruitNl for 3riture agri�ltural developmen`h: if �iyl1�;''�ca lest tcs: smell sub -d � vid 3ng,, it will tie gone forever, for pry eotibO pit - The. 'Planning Commission has properly reoo!nn, We A-2Ct �om3ngy ;end proposal: deserves support from 911 wh.o nave the ublia iota 66t. :. at, �es V' I11 I.ShEi,ca• : . r J T"�i Siftcetely yours, J pq Carl. Rein , r i V Il ... 4 i s I ..... _. a: �r� '.,.nn e,.:...ta�,urw,ru�nep.Lw "y ,•�"w.-..e,..ar.n.r»xrn ur^n.�-•.wa-tC a.-+-`+Y...,.—+,b.-..J •..•,i- 1W xLLu�.±t"J'f�` IFRNM,iquv'rNa+,1j+�y+f""V±" � __Hi _.y+�I k I 'I Abdo of lalifrntin'' GdVMRNOR'S OFFICE .. is .' 0FFICE oar PLANNING AND RISEAR�'M, p �� pYir0 ntl11}hl Rovtow q pt. ` 1400 TENTH STRMR1 fes_ VACRAMENTO 951344 rrii EMMUND G. BROWN JR.covikNow DUN CctJnty 4une 36-- 1980,. M1 Coir. Earl 6. Nelson o Butte CO- y Rnvironmental Revi.era nt 018�-F County` Center Drive Oroville, CA,..,95965 ;. SUBr7ECT- .d SCH# 80051314 , PROPOSED REZONE AND GENEAAL Pi,AN Ab1 1VDMEN Or COUNTY 1JAND �OotmH 1Op. CHICO Dear. ,I!ir. 'Nelson ,.. r t . ?'he1,Statd'Water Resources Control Board has cootainated the review °of ` the above mentioned environmental document with the Hy,�iogeoldq"d/ 'weotechni.oal Section of the State Board and the Calitorna Regional_. 4` + 'Suter Qua 1.,.t Control Board Central Valle Re` ion. 1 the` pard r^commends that the final ATA discuss the dumulative impacts::: M� of septic tanks/leachfields for sewage disposal; oh groundwater quality. ThGYe may be a health hazard since the domestic watdt suppiyy, in tYe proposed rezone area will be from shallow individual wells. -Tho of Calil]nge0t) steteso -i.-.hat: any 'so"und ; attenuat�orient nc�ud�nnssound�wallsion r g , w b he r sp of the `nsibili}:y :deVeloricivi the Department would also be ,�.nterested in the logatian of an sound walls that thekd of fiaintenaice 'rob1bMs between thefreewayfendeiand s6Undawal`ls. p y ' The Departmeri, also suggests that this project be evaluated in terms ti of the States Urban Strategy con'Ceini,ng the location of new develop- mdht (A copy of "An U. eban Strategy for Ca:liforhldll is enclosed). fihe project also appears to be in conflict with the Subdivision bias Act which Balls for "the preservation of open -'space land..,, necessary not only for the maintenance Of the economy of -the state, but also idt the aSsutance of the continued ava viability of land fir the ; production of food and fi.be.r .. " (Section 65561 Q. � You si�ould attempt tores-61Ve this conflict before any further acts on is thkdn reldrdin, this 'projiidt. if you would like to discuss the concerns and roc6tt6ndations ih the above menti'oneci comments, `dontact " the J'tatC f)�oin the agdicnes whose names and addresses appear•' on the 1 domment�,; '•j l9� •<WIY.i.. zvC ,a,r,nut.enrFi btd+lr•inli51W.d4.'+rv9o4 Mfmwk'+r^.y„sq..• •. ..:. ,. ... +..w,..: v+y.W'rrwvM>NP(+ikw Ti'Ma'•'Rw ,,,. y -- . _ J _ __ `5/afa of Call�fornip ,, The Reeourcet Agency To t 1« %lkrJar%e5 W. Burns IrN p c, Pro acts Coardi,nathr Dcroi The it�:sources Agehc Tn -Reply Reter R080t rces rig, 'lith Floor To {, 420 Kia 2. Bucte County '104 County Centex Drive Oroville, Calif rniO. 05065 from . s 001 WAtik RiSAVRCi3COyiROL BOARD' 3}} Syh rfi REVIEW OF NOTICE Op rNTE1Vx: BGH 80051.314 K; ;w . } r DI�SEN �r DRAFT L'iA: PROPOSED RE'LONE AND GENERAL PLAN AM15►r T OF COUNTY LAND "SOUTH � OP CHICO 1z, We have coordihAted the review of the subject envii�nmental document with the gydroge,, ogic7Ceotechni.cal Section of the State Board��and the 'Califtirnig <� Regional 'Wates Quality Control Board, Cenwdl Valley Reg�onsi 11ecomniendat3 Ahal -BnVironmerntal IMpact 1:6 --port Exit shoU.ld address t"e. r6j1ow �i'i+�3! �' P� ) ' hR COQttrleht5' ; 1. The final 'Elft should discuss, the cumulativeAwi cts of. septir-:tankS. leachfields fox sewage disposal on shall ow groundwater,quality. Nit �tes not filtered out into leachfields dill concentrate at the sutfnc� of urtconfined groundwater aquifers. Since the domestic water supply in f ;� `the proposed rezone ea will be from shallow individual wells, the pot,en- tial nitrate problem Shbuld be considered. + 2. .The„final )rtR should Motethy,. sand filter material used ,for sewage; treat” anent must cantaih,a minimum of 10 percent fines smaller than`0,25 mm for' di 1►athogen re.tnoval. kT Mould appreciate receiving a copy of the sinal EIR: If you have any dog" tions; Blease call Dr. Vredericl Lercari at 916/322-3583. Barry M. ,�`huell.er, , Chief Legal ati&%''TdchnicaI Nrviceti Division cc: Mr, Tony Landis C0.11f0thia Regiohd 1V4ter Quality Control toatd, d0fitral valley Ragiml 801 5 S`tr'ae t SttcrMmaiitof Chl.ifdrni.i 95816 �.r S+afa of California (' Rusinoss and Transportptio» d9ency Me" o r a in d u im �? Hr. Ient -Smith Date: June 120, y9�o:' Deputy Division Chief, DOTP Depari'mQnt A•-95 Coordinator 03--But•-99 • South Chico Rez fl SCH 00051514 Pro'in s DrWeMMEW OF TiiAtr15PORTATiO1V. • District 03 District 03 has reviewed the draft EiR for the proposed 116 id" v of 31and south of Chico and ad jaaent -bo Route 99 Caltrans is conr.6.-nea when a noise• -sensitive type '(5 fde4e?:,pment is' pr��posed r.oa,r a S1,ate highway Any desired sound at�?�.ei_%UOation-f Including so'.rn,d: wa11�6, will be I the responsibility of the 'develax3ere If a decisida is reo;exxed to utilize sound walls ,of a*") %iaad, t►�te ,4 llepartmerit' of Transportation would be interested in review3,ng, the y* roposed location of;` the sound wall and in discussing the `.posse..., ' a.liy of , ,placing it in a manner that eliminates the creed for'the eae,istn ree�rayfence in order to avoid an awkttard maintenance , prtibl.eiA biAbweenthe -freeway fence ' and the sound mall. :ae Would '64courage the developer to establish ct!11ept coiitadt with the Department of Transportation to discuss sound attenuation facil-- ieies whether they are proposed to bO on State right 'of way or not. There' 'woi.Ad be an adverse impact on. Highway 95 if alternates 1, or '2 t;rere implemented,, but alternate 3 Would have the most severe impact on Highway 99. The mitigation. measures enut6ratec'L' for ; r al Ot cite 3 appear adegq vj e to handle tho increased traffic. on age' 6a, left -tush pockets at the intersection of HightJay 99 and Estates .brive and, at the entrance to Southgate Industrial Park are proposed. At the present time, 'l..eft_turn ch' e 1 itation g fists at, these locations. 1'his pexagraph also sugggests the ossi'Vili of two or more .left -turn ookets from Highway j p ty' _ P � �T 99 onto a front;a(ge road. St is dikficult to determine what access fadil .- ities mig. j be 'needed in this, area. 'Ohe need for additional. left- turn pockets siyoul.d be evaluated as development occurs: ��' The pre`eervatiori of agricUtural lands is one of the goals of the �. State i s Urban utrategy for locating new dovel.cpment. In ;Light of p other_;8"i.lar rezoning proposals in the Chico area, this project should be-evalt &tcd in terms of these goals. L�0 +T TROT�IDATdRI; District D ,rector of Ttansportation „ Chid,f Env-i.rontnen dl Branch P Nod Co. `Ywnniny,Cono"// c t� pl JUL x> B(mb QF BUP R %I80R8' ,. i krnle CgUNTY 0#41 (ri% „ REFERMIt.(1 ICE S. tete July 1 ti `'i980' ,fit ' r• , ��� .. ' \Subjeak: Iil bll�b ge�iht3.oil �e �'d3.i�' �gl,. ore �es��le��3. ?a to n th , y dee beam referred;, you: i!leac� v atudY the matter. it �Fz° your 3nfbiciaat6n, f :, s �pleaele � alre tihe 96 l ting Y 1 'a ��, Ott �to.too xd bins, , Advida acti6n, t:akend +sign%Cb'I, and "otipezVieOit;Q: xe�ur'a tti� �i notiaa o i1e Clark of the Board-0 7; h 3 �y r � 1 , ��t,,. ,�...�.'.:. _. �. ,...,.�..c».:v..:i,. .M..mv::�, n'.. , .. :.:-• y. •. __, ,'... _......,fUUWf+4uu:4.kW+Y1nYiY5dW""N581�2LLRYdIkhU'fSi11�HiC41ri;=a.lpl';2 kn�"J,TAfE'�%SipC'V"v.'1;4�M*"r ^,�.4: .. t Dof4e Coi PlannlnO Comm ' Ta: tOTTE COUNTY SUPLMVTSOR6 JUL � 198 i,- Z1r�viho� Cnelfornli ;. '�'„�., v , g n p, tte Count© In th`e i�tQ,hest o£ preoartr�,tian a a ricultura land i y derai�gned, urge file approval of the ,proposed zoning a©p es.ented hy, i the un y 6 g � 6 d-Project Slte�� Gutta .Count Planntn Committee andshown in Figure 2� as �+i�ra 11 ” on aha. Envit avnental =patt Repott prepared by,the Butte County"E��vitonmental 11eview' Depar'Uhent, April--'1980. (Alternative 1). c. `' J�•,N• :� !�'d5l 16 .di� TnS f. r+ ' °�= .'L'" 5.11 lE i.) Otf� �7 �j?i"•C. 2 5p itzl ` Bu}}e'Co. planningGomm" JUL 1980 o o To $ BUTTE CMM, 671 -SUP SUPERVISORS IZ Ilinrnir t Snthb?fintcrcet of pteaervation of dariculturo'lend 1n Outtc County, weo th4 undardig i -�+.urge thn approval of the proposed xonin4icm pros nzad, bthe „ Botta County T'lanro ag Coamtttes and shmm in Figurc P 2 ax �y�Pxopoead 'xo e+�t BZte" /', r" on the Enviro mental lm ct Report raparad b tha P+d P p- +I y Butte ount 'Efi vitimmon"I � �'� I Review Departments ilp'll 1580.- {Alternative l } V � . :;L, &a eJ ' l , 1 'J 1 111 , C ' Ilhi�h+r4F J+w�il h +w��i Irf 1 f� „ l i pp `F r 1 + , W , THOMAS f EDGAR Attorney' ' et law `692 Inst "Seventh .Avenue � China, California 93926 (916) 345.6667 July 11, 1980 � Ms, BettYa Blair, county Planner •' ti 3 Butte County PlanningDepartment _ 7. County Center Drive, OtOVille, CAo 95,965 ) RBa 'Itnviionment4l Impdat Report for"Proposed Rezone and General Plan Amehftent of C ainty Sand South of Chi`oo1°� s, dated April, 1980 BRD Loci #79-09-lB"0 Dear Bettye, Please find enclosed a copy of a letter 1 have sent to f the Environmental Review Department; 1 ct me i you have ktihy questions brecomments re ardincontalette 9 g k` �'. ti Thank you very much for your consideration. \X , Very truly yours, Thomas E. td r Tkt ! k's o, enclos'ure r 1 91 r mil`,. '1'1 ONIAS "E, LDGAic ' Attorney at Law 682 Last S ventkf Avenue Chico, 0 ifo7pia 0$926 (916) at5 �6r k July 14, 1980 , 4 Mr.: f arl;iNelson, EnvirorunentAl i Review iirector , County Environmental Review Department 18 -IF County Center 'Drive 0roville CA 9165 ` RE.* "Environmental Impact Report for Proposed•.Rezone and General Plan Amendment of County Land South' of Chidb"', dated April, ;].98Q ., a '4 n `.,ERD "Log .#79-09-18-01 '' 1 Dear Mr. Nelson I have been retained by the ownersof the'land known as Midway prahards (Assessor's Parcel Number 40--02-116),,to assist them in resp6ndinq to The EIR which your office hag prepared° denariti1 c ` tter, I use ythe „ tooreferxto theoUt 2.5�squarehis mile studyasads described in The' EIR. Our, comments are as follows: I» 116m6genou8Project. The EIR treats the entire pto.edt as though it were 2.5 square miles of homogcnous,y prime agricultural. ; land. This treatment of the'area is migleading,-b6cause there are three distinct zones within the project:, described on �Xhibit 1: In addition, the land usage ulithin the project is described on ~� Exhibit 21, and on Exhibit' 2 (a) , which is a colored version 64 Exhibit 2'4These 2ones are described As followse �. Gone A is the portion 6T the projoct located west with th of the Midway. It is generally good aare aagricultural exception of the cemetary and the Skyway Avenue and Cessna Avenue: this zone is dominated by the 150"Adt6 Patrick Ranch, the owners of which are publicly record as. wanting the lard preserved for agriculture 2. Zone 'b is located, ,east of the Midway .aha West o£ ?' State �Il.ghtaay 99. It is distin::tl y different Zone A 101 lows A. There currently eXisb substantial &,punts o' utbanizataon within the zone# especially along Lntrler AV6nue, Spaedway Avenue and Chico-Oroville highway: 1 B: As shown below, the soil in this sono conta3ris sisbstantial amounts of gravelly; rocky soil. Even the good soils aria generally Less than 8 feet deep» s i !�lr• Eaxl Nelson, I;nv' onr ent4l )wylew DirOctox July 14, 1980 Page Two C. This zone.. contains jaegel areas With very high Infestation of oak 'root ' funI16 ' r `thereby milking orchards p -famil arcels and b sn►al1 hobo fs3.rms . mated by , small , ' Y • is domThe aSrea r is very r h,. .long Pruni. The area c im racticable over t �* e y p' `'rovers.ial concex'ning land tise planning �, S. gone C is the pe tion of tha project. located .east' of State Ilf,ghway 9. The eastern portic+n of Zane: C is dominated; by the U.S. `. Forest Service. Ch It Tree Impro,\dement Center. (which 1 .s approximately 200 acres),, And the western portion is dominated �� by such urban features as,'KPAIi the Neighborhood'Church and ' Payless Buildingt. to contsovF9rsy concerning` this- Zones^ is not , currents subjeSu ply, So',fe,v as we know, land fuse planning. r, •;, Y ° II. The. "Green I,iite10 Concept_ as it Relates to the 1;±A• qhs 'Bt�t'i a County Planning Departanpnt is actively working' to dei el.op y a Green Line around the wes.ern a;nd southe !n boundaries o Chi oQ `+ as a means of separating This agricultural lands from the commercial/residential land's.. However, thE► .EIR #Hakes absolutely ,. no reference to this propoged Green Line, nor da any',Way, c' es � it, in .. P discuss the impact which afi of the four a�•ternatives m�.c�l: have , on -future locations of The Green, Line-. In particular, l.h$l's t I R t th ignores the fart thae planning Departmont is apparently, proposing to bisect the ptoject with a Gredn ,Line4 IZ. 1500 Acres o�F, A ricultural .Land. The E7R,' at Page , makes reference to the '"� oss o nearly 1, 50o acres of: prime C3 : g ". 1 a ricultiral land Tha.!"� statement is inarcuratti b cause 1. .The EIR, at nage 7, ,'�indicatetl that there are only 1i185 acres a:�" "orchard and Field, +Crops" in the total project. Therefore, the claimed Loss of 1,500 acres of prime agricultural land seems excessive. We recuest clarification of this apparent discrepancy ­ 750` acres of agricultural la 2. About nd J''tepres need .located ih Zone �;: The at�ners hake ub lies g s 1;.5nd be zoned ''agricultural." , so there 6,s no y by the Patrick Aanch, ° re uested that thi expected loss of 11is 7:50 acres frtim� agriculture. 7, If the 75.0 -acre, lPatrick Han,�h is deducted Froin line {� 1,165 sures of "orchard and rield Crops'" in theproject, then the figure of 435 acres is established fox the amount of It land which might be lost frfromagriculture ..: rally hot prime 1111 of this land 3,s in 2ofne 13. 'The land is geneagrduj:tjjtaI. because of rock.i, gravelsa and soil disease, as desck" eq belot4i hewn on E�cfi`s 3 t 3 ► we have only Crr3tt able Lo 4. As s specifically identify approxbnately 4115 acres o ohard "Operations In the project; eitclud ng the Patrick hanch and ejcclildiYig th'o Chico ;.I Tree lniproVettrent Centel' Thwid tWo latter properties iaere e�:cludec� ' r l r2 r:. Mr. Earl Nels::� r Snv,rottmc;ntal neview Diri:�: or �7uly 14, 199 Page., Threetj, kiecause thl ey are not destined, for removal from agricultuzalr production{ The 405 acres wh'ich we have identified are exclusively Rv orchards ]r)cated in Sone; BE there are no field crops in Sone „ IV. The` Pre'sencs Of Vina-Loam Soil: The t1k, at page', 15, -Yr�in""-foam �of tihe;, e.°la 6 ms that aocounts'or moremor than 508 a1 L o � i L grithin the project area" . 'fihbis stittement /, 's misleading c �. and inaccurate fax the following reasons: ! Approximately y r�the lest soils witY�,an rL a o'e3 i� iso nott''destined t,�� be the p �ct arp locatedtstt �7ne �Cwha.c removed fxorn agricultural' proc�uc ion.'r Figure 5 of *iae RIRY:owa` the area `in Sone g, and h Soni C to be°almost �oi�as�%vbZ,y� "v�.`nz►-1dam'!,_With gmallislRnrs f ` of '.Aher types ;of loam included. This s `inacc irata, as s? own the fol. loci A. Please see 'Exh ;sit 4 (and 'V5thibit 4 :a) ,, which is a colored version of F.xhibit 4) which displays a, `rough' soils - « inap ,believed be k ;,. map for the pxcjec4 The soils is to reasonably � • is accurate, ,but i t,is not based upon intensive testing.` It 1 s based upon road okr t Yvati6ns and general knowledge of the area, B-. Pl,:ease see ]Exhibit 51 which di;_ lay8 a dei, ail s p y soils map arid, Boil disease ma of the Midw�a Orchard phcatocopy of an exhibit top revious ECR log i�'/B G. "Nina=Loam'.' is cine of the richest lbams in . ' _ But e County. Yt tends ta,be concentrated along the b6Atom landv and i of the Sacramento River. it is unusually rich iri nut�r. itits in •tekture tmd J organic material, is unu uully uniform �.:uhusuall.'y leaist 30 feet�y,• r3eep soil. Soil tiei�jh is usually at ; b. There are virtually no "vin&-lddrh" soil§ i h the project P.roa a ��ept possibly in Zone Ao because -the soil iso`, r of -gravels � bird Lnerally ahall, t.�' rocky' And has ,largenamounts cobbles included in it. b the roads cut into t Yip recei fi: subdivlbion on Entler Avenue and is shown by the soik at the Midway orchards, located along Mary-Bil`y Road. Even in tbo areas where loam is established on the surface is only a thin surfade'of loam overlying gravels ' and cobbles Soils bj,sease,. the project has substantially more ?% v` soil diseae`e than as acknawiledgc:d by the Elite although L}�e Eiit did ack�naialedge that pravzisus EYIt log #7�-05�1�-06 "cancl>ided`,„ that llo acres of diseased soil rendered Midway Orchards to be " eoci'ntmica111+ non viable in support of th°ia 1. Please see Sxlibit b (and Exhibit 6(a) 'which is �ti a colr►red version of Exhibi;G 6) which is a Fungus Map for the project. 'This .mag is 'believ9d �o be- reasniiably accurate] but , Mr: Ear Nelson, Enyironmental Review Director July 14, 1:930 r page Four it• is. not based upon intensive testing. `I' is based upon air photo analysis, roadway ubservaions, and general knowledcie cif. ' ,the alCea . r;= Y 2. please -see Exhibit 5, which` is., a Soil Disease ,l ap� t. for Midway Orchards.. It is a photocopy -0 lfan "exhibit: to `p�viozs w EIR 'Log}7 5-05-15-06 ' 3 please sec Exhibit 7, which is�a✓ pescrption:of v id -n ..,, s �' t'tchard ,has Lost mrees for MidwayOkchards. Since 1976, r y oak root fu. , « 'and to bactor'ia lost, app txama �.1 2,64 tree to 4.y.�., , , y can,�ker. . it g which is a letter from°William ` � 9. please+ see Exhibit ► Moeller of the U.C. Extension Service, dated August 22,11979: t {. 5. Please see Exhibit 9, which is a !atter dram �,. G. R. Post a£ the Agricultural A,lvisors,, Inc.', dated April 240 1'979. 6. Please "see Exhil' rd'r l0, which is'i"� letter from icon arnes .of Monarch Laboratciry, dated March . t7, 1900. Please see Exhibit '11, which.: is a letter from William Moeller of the'CJ.C.'Extension Service, dated April 3; 1960-._ B. Please see Exhibit 12, which -is a pamphlet entitled 'i,. ,millaraa Root Rod.' (Oak Root Fungus) ", piiblishod by the >In3versity of California, dated Pugst, 1970. .} �L VI Prime A rici:ltural Lands the El t mal=es repeated references,. to the loss. of prime agricultural lend. Ou.r response to this is i x�4 its .follows l: Selected portions of the protect may be pr. :agricultUral land', such as the Patrick Ranch in zone A. 11WOVer, T. an described in Parag� aph IV and in Paragraph J, lithe rocks i gravel.' w t. 3hl.le�w toils, soil diseat�e and previous urbanization c7.e'arly x'emca�re much of the project kram the category of prime agricultural y la'hd" . orchards, using 1 1 a i 2 1 t � 10 acres of land, hacl„� �.� : The Midtaay a gross income of $1,200:00 per acre in 19'i9 a year With unusual y gonad farm 'pri'cesorahards in.�tone�t.t iiowe'✓eet Exhibit his IS a q06d13j entitled 44` (i average. for the , k f'Sample Cosxs tr p.-OdUoe Almonds ire Butte COUhtYl' � pu��liehed by h: he Universa ty ciy Caliorn a, trevised O'une 1.979 advises : khat the v ` t.:veraga :proattctidn C416t for &IM0ncls is approximately $1; 014.(;:0 this small -„profit margin, resultinggfrom�s�e �04acr�al per, acre. a�” es a "N soils, requires that any ,-ilmond ranch must be to have any change of eaoi�omic Viability, unless that ranch is a hobby farm: W ( ,ti ,.V _ ... "` .',:-c. �S..E3T!""r?•.aM1bHYMM4++a� Envi .ronmantal Reviow Di Lor Earl .Nel ' s 9 p, July 140 10a0 Page live 1 3. Within Zoney, not. B the' ranches are �gen�rall econ�imica_lly Friable because the ranches are either too- email y be self-supporting or havre too many soil problemai VII. Wildlife, ,t The Eli, at page 19 : c'orrrectly��iaints (' out that "cont al practiceg. 'lin orchards such as spraying j ,mowitp tl aild�:r trapping +generalrlys�restrict wildlife use to tem porary`° res,ting . and feeding activities However, - 1. The report incorrectly�s.tates at ;page„` 19",y' Iiat mull deer' are common to the open fields. There ;have'; 4ndver�neer!- ,mule deer in the project area dur iig.modern times. 4 2. The rs,por`L , at page 1� indorrectly makl�a .:reference to wild .foltil -habitats in the..rice fief R < l�il.e fieY,c s ' have never ^kilted Wi thin the project area: The'efore� ;th'ere, are, no wildlife associated with the nonexistent rieaa Fields. �>>> .. and the ragdh fall The ellow billed cuckoo � ion y may e�cist-�,generally in the Durham area `vf �3tix����e,`County, but they . \;have es been observed in Midway orchards r; , �4. All o£ the field crops are located west of the Midway in done A. That zone is riot proposed for remaval,, from �� ' the agricu1A;Ura1 preserve, so that any wildlife which a�” I inhabitinc} than land will not ,be disturbed: u 6. 11he parcele located in Zone 13'and zone C have Already been substantially urbanized, so as to make them unsuitable for wildlife, except for the'U:S. rorer't Service Chico free Improvement Center; VIYI..''Adoustics a The 13111, at page 200 21 and °22 describes 14 the no3,be poen within the project; Our coM. ehts to this, 0 portion of the report are as follbws 1-. The only "high ,lacca" r6tu&av6,- which might have a significant effect upon residential hotiqih4 are the Midway and chi co-Oroville 'Highway, Buildingset back ioments and" redu red fending an easily mitigate any noso pllution'dning from these roadways. 2: The ttA suggests,that the Southern Paciific Railroad Mainline runs through the project, Lhe report then J►ravides��data boncerning'' the noise pot 11tion ��iult3 ng from that ..!�mainl nc!i /heLan8oud.h�r� Pacific Maiinline iso in fact, lbcatted, iaest of b�,riice - o ~� y �;utside the project ares. The o er outho.rn Pacific IN'i;lroad Line .`is�a local line vrhich runs throlxgh thb ' industrilll and commdkOial, sections of the project area, �i liowd er., the Sacramento Northern Fkai-,road does have a line whidI'*# runs hlongsiAd she=' Midway. Mr, MGMahi aa, �ho it Assistant Sliperiht€hdent ot Sacramento Northern �Zail.roadj Advises thUt 'thysnightslafteke6d30 p-m,aAnd occasionail.ysonyVti.days�',anc1 � ''fhursda � ' piFll!19�`6✓':.iiiLC.,M+-'ttiueb+,`...M?-4r—Jr M.v._...,..: Ite,.,. ...... m.. nww-+ar:..w.._a..,x..::u _.. _.. ,,-:...IK wY _.�.. .. y Mr. earl Nelson, environmental Review Director duly 14, 1980 Page: SS ix 4. However, the data on railroad noise;, pollui.ion1.�- -based excluaivoly on the, very noisy mainline activities which are �� t r ]ocaked outside. the 'project area. lX» Archaeolo : The SIR, at page 2A>; gaSr�agraph 3.'11,, describes a potentialj�hrchaeological site located 1,,600 feet �r7y west of 'the,,:Nlidwayfhiel'tite is located in dour Zone A, til ich ,' qs i ititetided to. Tema :fi' as.;:,agriCU1'L 'rel land. X. Economia }1n sas• The 1✓zTt discusses the e�unomic analysis probe tat. p),ges 7 through 12 and at p g 7`tbuc our commer,'I: are as follows! ��!! 41 f The reP17 �. 'brt, at pages 7 through 12 claims that approxihiately 1,185 skcres of farmland will be .lo'st under A�ltgtnatiVe -loss ihcome from '< 3 and" that this would cause a,. of,eouhty r6n4ing $633,975.130 to $1,330, 1r S. 00. 'these statements are iil sleading bec.ausd only approximate'1y 435 acres of tatmiand ;might be,� lo' t, 1 as sho�iii in Paragraph III, above. Assuming an,,,aVgrage grass , ted income of $1,that ,these 435 acres 2.110.00 per acreit i6 estima F� had a gross income in the amount of $522,000»0(! ---o�~ the, 1'979 grojling improper to iri lua- the annual roductlon I � year. �1e feed that it is 4 figure's rkom the Patrick Rancl in a statemOht of lost economic. ,�' -so About retaining,-thezr ' income,Wheh the Patricks have been adament a • r JAnd in agricultural production, - 2. At pane 77: the. EIA "presumes a gross a' i"i,c�htiira� �§ `x production of $1,400.60 per. acre for approximately V,100�Uees; c, this prov, deb any estimated agricixltural: ;k�roduction;,'or, $1i5:4Q,00Q.OQ» This -figure represents a;'substant:al ds'brepancy comparer� ,to the figure provided on page '12 of the EIRO where the maximum estiinatferl rl 6". productit( rh was $10x30,125.00.: 3. The HIR providAs a formula on tha bottom of page ' that seems to have flaws in it as follows � A. The $1)400600 pet act` f'cp,�o is used throughout the calculations. j" 0. The formula seems to be cl�vided subformuAas as follows: (aj �'txi4formula (a)• 16 t,?ie p6l,t16n of the - ]:( formula described as:; . ($1,400.00) X (2'.;0) x(2.7) f (b) Subformuln (b) as the, ponti of the £ortiul.a desdtibed ati . ($1,400.00) X (;t,0) X ('c) Subforinula (c) is the portion of "the formula deacribbd as:y .($$,000 0Q) X X'(,044. r _ 17- '.M r :h1r,Earl- Nell+ak Lii1}�3 kUYii1 nta1 Review,,, Direc r. July 14, 1980 Page Seven 11 C. Iiowever, we seribue1,� ljuep ion the juatifi0a'LiOl ' � for the theory that every year r eery-dollai of agricultural,; 'y -- roduction create, 2 0 X 2 7 �. � '! '' a :dc�l�laz^s of new;; x;etil es��atc. ,pvealttl_ oui.sn de the farm. We re pectfu ly rbquest, that the' ,_ Envy rt��iinental RevieweY'wrt,�«t ;debcicibe thd, theoretical. ' a, 'ustfcatiur,for, r c D l+ Furtherinore, with r spect to aubtormula t,a) �1 .25,' i' a ears; that .he &Ctor of , 25 't�4,t be insartecl to rave ae o � `til.. �F} " ,4 _'.. .. If ..', Q .. .._ the assets, orit ratio used to calculate ro pert „taxes. 0. p i y ` E. Th6 land in zonc'._;g .is simpiY not worth $8, 000;. (10 g. land ifi. It per iir m "value. is true 11 salesfat $8arket " ,;000.0.A' per acre forrirq r. farmlarida! elsewhere ii�� Butteo:ni:y, bui: as de'S ::rbed. above', this, , is not ,prime farmland - It is estimated that the average 'f&ir41 rnarlset''�value of the land'' in Zone >H, valued as faxiiland, is alio more than $5;e00.OG per acre. ' ' ( F 'Therefore, asbtming that there i. to a `4bheore'tical justification for t•he+SUbformyxla. (a) , `then if the correoted,,,figur®s described in this stction are. insertpa into the°main then the followalh ft;,rmula, one obtains 'resul't: �ubformula (a) . . ($lo2OO,OO) X (2,.0) X, (2.1) X '15) X G042)=; 68:04 Subformula (b)i. . ($l j2Od.00) X ;2.0) X (.01) = $29.00 S'ubformula (d) . 6($5#600,00) X.25) X (.042) - $51.50 ~ $68`.04 + $24.OU + $52.50 = $145,54 per acre. 'this figura of $145.54 ppx acre is substantially different from the amount -of $4X,00 ped.- acre shown on page 77 of thetR, ` y L' 4.. The nth providss an ecohoMio analyses, ori . pages 79 ' } theough,.83 which seems ikicohsibt_ht with the economic anal] 1p Which is found on page 75, as fol.lbwij A. When increased property tax revenue Was cal.cful'atod +, for the "groWth in ,real estate valut:s rdsulting from,, Agri pultural. production" (that is; SUbi ormula (h)on page 77 of thc. F`",'I:)' thu Oaldcoamid mol.tipiiex of 2: 0 X 2 : �' = ,�a � 4.1 ,Wo' ed haveseriously t 4. of i s d�wever, sw�sctotal.l.yd and hamitte& this factorhe 'multiplier, dhen calculating the increase count ► tax rcve:lue resulting from �I residential caristruction. There a+ppie'A s to be no �ustifida'ti n` � fo U;§I s that M-Ulta lier Ww th res ect to a tidultu.Lal proditcti�ih me mulct >lier for the " ro ert tai and tlerigrioi. usin the same � p % '.. g `hdW . _y`� :. �r zcvr:nue resin ting from the presQnae o£ nes rosy den4 Ian wage a iic►ter; s 3;D f pl'+ takt revehuo gt.horabod f by Agra).;, thrall,�prtjdudti6h"O Wasrdalcul ited� (sul3fo��ula (b)S oi) page 7 cif the t1k2) , the caldu;sationJ )f sdd a Mul-Uplior tactor X k,01) wi :02: 14bw6var, When the Oindreased sales Lax "` revenui generated by Wage earners' . 66me'+ Was cad cul,a' od „ LF W". EarJ el m, , ; Env3 roIbill'lItetl 1?evi'mw lli' "tor J AS'].y l , , 1180 Pride Bight pages '79 anal 81, then thef, calculations used a'multiplier�'factot`' of (.20) (?S (.01). a .(102.i TlleY6 appears to be no justifa.cation. ' for thi:� `y�cs epancy ,irr. the use o',.F the, multiplier cc�nyerriing `n, i 1 !i griculturAl income -04 su ressdehtial ,H:ncomo. �( ',The EIR; at page, i9cites t),'e production of 220 c7, new .households, yet calculate'§ thL market value of the property baseu .uron the pres,'umpton that the�la;d will remaiYi' lfacan't. Each, 5-acre. Iat with a completed home w �1] ' h�,re to be worth at lea0, 000.00 in order to be faddhomica,�ly justif'3ed,. "l ,r These 220 home sites will have a gross °value �bf ,$33 (000;000:00,, ! �� instead of the 22 000 000.00 Gi'ted on, a e�' 79 ::off the-EIR.' mo``'b $ , r , d_ a banker formi. its it a . care' that 6 Using stand a.,-' s ; " 4' r p�. tYie purchaser, of a $150,/JO'q.00', hone s2�ou7�c ; se cathing at leas- 00000.00 eas0,000.00 per year. It would, appear :haese .220 .h6mcds Would,' generate additional .annual wage earners i�icum�: in the amount o£- g z' 220 X $50 ' 000.00 = $110000, 000.00 per```ye ; assuming hey, ;are all now residt�nts in the county. r 1 . P y (iQ,� a . <s t mcg 7 . The EXR, a,t a e �, �� � ` ,yCe's• -`the: value o.f:_'t.h+� ,�? ohee-acre lots, with completed liofies o to b;3 $6 , 000.00. This. ?5 ` estimated value per lot appears to be toc \,1:o�r. Such houses viould iave to c in order, ` o be eronomica ly k have to cost a,t. Ieat ,.5, 00 It can be 86ea that my o)aaev,(�ations, as: des.cribdd,{ �l in thio Paragraph Y,, 3' they were •ihcorpar�ted into the report, would have a very substantial iaffect upor,.Jthe table shown ort 3 the bottom of page '81 in the'EIR. Y k''. pe that my c6hhdnts will bo seen as cbn6trubt:ive 'additions to the very long and thorough Rnt:a.roriment'al Impact Report 'rh3ch \, - - your department has prepared. I fu11y app reciate the problems Is;' F r associated Frith drafting such a report and't then waiti"!g for 6I of the interFfSted parties to-diseot it for fou. Shope ' "cnat we r, wa..►,7: be a�b1;. to continue sharing ideas and comments ',is this 1 pr c es 4ess r:6ntan:z ank you very, much for meeting With me and frac alto g - _ 'fh a y g e ' wicitten cor'attents. if it's your �1.Ioasurr��r]t�l'ookyforward to 'meeting with �rnu and: Your staff to F furt her discuss this lottorz 11� a Very truly yoUts ' i Thomas V. Edi, t' do t' i�rs, gF�ttya Glair; county p�.ant ok °'-Eoard of by "" "dors Niid,��y Orchrards , e IMF �.J - - i t' � t ■ sr' ? _ aiR 1 D m C ♦ 4c 4 * o art✓ �j r iQ��� c. 0000 f 00oc� c 0000 °QC 00000 oaooa ***** 00000 000 d 4@f * de*** ® ** �,3�ldi[w000 Ar ° 00oa000000 Q t ** -_� 00 00000 ° 00000 000000000 ° * Q Q00 00000000000 # * 30W?�� ° 0 a004Y QOr6(f 6� <**. * * 0G 0 0- I I)o 000000 _ n0 * 00 --0.000c4n A`0 i0000000 0 00000- ouooL000 00 0000000 - o ;0000004000 0000 0004.9900 0 * 00600000 0 r000 , 0000 * 0000000�y'e.� ty,T 000¢'0 00 0000000000000B000000000000 00° Ja@@@ @@@@@@@ 1 @@@@@@@ @@@ �7',4c' -,000 0000 0000 0 @@@@@@@ @ ': @@@. s 000 t='U @@@@`@ @ H@@ @@@@ s /o f z � 1 000 �u0 @@Qe@@ @@ @@@@ -d4 %r :-� cs , 00 00 @@@@@ T Y H @@@@@@@@@@@ @@@ @@@@@ C, is M 1-4 - @@@@( @@@@@@@ @@@@@ .A 00 000CI tZ / e i` CEl Q Q0 2raa# @@@@@@ @@ @@ $a •� ### # # a@@ ,' 1' Commercial and/or AvG : - 0 Q0 u Residential Developmex # #;#'# # z ! 0 Orchard. & FzeltlCror * y 000 000 # Pastare. 00.0 MM 0000 000 0 � 0 00Q "## 0000` @ Not Suitable for fl Q& 00 000 Agriculture 00000,00 - An000 `X # # 0000000 4 -00000000d * **�a0ooado ** 00 _. e _ y -- i a cu 1q a rid �i , v �' rid .>a' 3 44 to 41 A UI '.-1 O rl to 4J 4j Mri 4H 41 ra N NCO `�+J NU b) y.UN a. id rl H r !-I M p (d3 %— ro up x O o b .' i a a+ 0)rt„r y N p o p o .� �t r4 p ro Ul U) ro rd H1 -t q Oro, O 3. h M •.1 N O tn V1 m N Cy „� sO r-�1 b4 H �dl a U �l �:., O C} a .W F -1-F a y dp rY+ i , cn b. ,, x dA rY+ ft v� rd i '�'`•' 111 v1• v1� cn• v>• v>• vs• yr t� :rxn� •+." � � '-,. � :�, `., � � ' '. cn. t/i';t�• Vi• ui' t,i' vi' tri' , %. �;; - 4w• •, �ca1. "r•r , .�' �"'r.. � ���`� qi, ,Ip" tai'.•.. F s t t/?• L} �td y.1{�,�k•C44L�� qk 421 Q1 �"�� ry', � sw V} iJ> tth k 'Na (41 4'1 �1 4L t81�3J�g ; 5y.; .•t -Q `'; ; P,d �,k ai C' . F y . �..,._ • e}p qk q# � �4k 2ts• qk qk fh Vh �} �1 � 471i�U @J N3CrEi•�) t.' ,� H v. ,y,.^. ` 6+1t� o �{" ,�s qb. �k zfls� M13� kRf 1/.,•'V?• `r.L4•'o 0_.'�Pts +��-. nt� �Y" 'li:li3-tt�1 lfU 611 Crll F ;. r• qk qk �h ft A*fi`!a.`a iij 5Y eHh1iF n'P(Jf rCP' d1Cli) y1@} W 611 Q1 �rJ St "�. qb �. =M: r! • ti.. 4aa kyr al? "}:� � qk qk 421 GIl «1`c+ 91 Qt} dp • �, qp qb .+�rX *ik Ia, dh clli � V} 4b k qk '41+ �!i ld! l� � 6tJ { qk ?Y qk qRt qlt 4k qk l? qh #h:m �L @1141 l9} lL av _ 'i p �`. ?ih 4k qk qb tfk tib tw �k A 421''. 2sJ !y'1 @} Q} pp dh qN 1k �1 �a qm ,!h qkk qk ,x�' , .k •k ,� � qb dtz `qb Nk Mk t°v�1 . `� � ,.y; }: <4J N1 C9J @l 61 k 1� Ir, dk qk qh dP qk +ik qk 421 @� 'It * `, t _ +,r y 't' •�' �#�..h '�" t!k �k k @1 ► Q1 v c (W(V � �47J`1w�co �ati 4v. 4) Oi MJ hL OU M, - � � 4'J tpJ Q!J t�'1 dU 4J` 7' a)'cv p' mi J � IOU, C� Q!! QY' 61 fisc C91 tv Oil cd) 4"J w 421 } �y V J 4J' 4J � CEJ 431 ) WQ1 J 411 ¢`1 1 44 4'J W 411 4 . t?1 U t)wtil CSl1 I C°J CEJov 0i 0 t Qll C i t N1 4}fi Cb / b r SOILS MAP