Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
80-72 CHICO AREA GENERAL PLAN 2 OF 5
t yV,�t 4 .as t TAELE OF CONTENTS ' Section Page 1.0 Summary of Impacts and Introduction 1 1.1 Summary Impacts 1 1.2 General Introduction 3 240 Project Description 4 2.1 Location 4 2.2 Project Objectives 4 2.3 Technical and Economic Considerations of the Proposed Project 10 3.0 Description of Environmental Setting 10 3.1 Land Use 10 4.0 Environmental Impacts and. Mitigation Measures 14 4.1 Potential Adverse Significant Impacts and Mitigation Moas fres_ _ 14 4,2 Significant Adverse Impacts that Cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented 20 4,3 Adverse Impacts Not Likely to be Signifi- cant or HavIng Only Limited Significa.nce, that Cannot~ be Avoided i:'L* the Project is Implemented 20 I1.4 Cumulative impacts 26 4.5 Growth Inducement 27 510 The Relationship Between Short-Torm 11sos of 14an's Environment and the Maintcnanco and Enhancement of Long -Term Productivity 27 6.0 Any Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be :involved in the Proposed Project Should it be Implemented 27 71.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 27 810 Organizations) Agencies and Persons Consulted 25 00 Appendices 28 LIST OF TABLES Table pa e 1 Acreage a p Housing - Original Project Proposal 11 2 Acreage and Housing - Revised Project Proposal 12 3 Land Use Comparisons 13 4 Freeways and Expressways With Restricted Areas 16 5 Two Lane Roads With.-aut Access Control: 16 6 4-Lane Roads and Highways Without Access Control. 17 7 Traffic Counts on Major Project Roads 18 s Composite Emission Factors 22 9 Exhaust Emissions in 1980 23 10 Exhaust Emissions in 1985 23 11 Exhaust Emissions in 1990 24 12 Exhaust. Emissions in 1955 24 13 Exhaust Emissions in 2022 25 LIST OF F:GGURES Fi,' ure 1 Regional Location 5 2 Chico Area Land Use Map - Original. Project 6 3 Chico Area Land Use Map - Revised Project 7 4 dii co Airport Environs R zone 8 5 Proposed Industrial, DevoloPment South of. C?hico 9 1.`0 SUMMARY OF IV*''1kCTS AND INTRODUCTION i.1 SUNWAF Lit, IMPACTS The following summary briefly identifies environmem x•7_ impacts associated with the revised proposal to the Chico Area Land Use Plan. Mitigations to adverse impacts (where appropriate) are also listed. 'Consult appropriate sections in this document and the original EIR ;Cor discussion of issues not presented in the following summary, and/or more detailed analysis of those issues mentioned here. Adverse Impacts and Mitigation Measures, Land'Uso Potential land use conflicts will occur in areas where commercial., industrial, agricultural and residential activities exist in proximity to ons' another., NctointM �tstab ish ae i space,, corridors between two land uses; erect vegetative or fabricated, barriers that effectively black or reduco unwanted intrusions locate well -landscaped, light commercial activities in a transition zone between residential and heavy industrial or intensive commercial areas Land Use = The manufacture or use of hazardous products in .industrial ` operations �woul.d expose plant workers, Iand possibly residents, vegetation and wildlife in the vicinity of the plant to potentially harmful effects. N t* atian - Retinaie use permits for operations that utilize tzar ous materials; require buffer 'areas around 'the plant; locate those types of oeprations in reiriote, unpopulated areas of the County: in Ci -cu 6te�et areasafterntial full bui.ldoutoin wouldraffic l.i.kel.yvecre se die p decrease traffic conditions by a minimum of one level ofservice (LOS) for certain roads. In other undeveloped areas of the project site new roads would be required to service sites of future growth. Miti, •ation - Form street assessment districts r r road improvements require developer improvement docs from sponsors of subdivisions for construction of new toads or improvement, of now substandard ones; increase County and city mass transit service; build bycycle/motorbike lands, separated b, markings or space barriers from lanes for Larger vehicles, Increase residential densities in areas more proximate to central. Chico: Circulation Industrial buildout south. of Chico between Entler venue and Butte Creek, west of Hwy, 99, may seriously impair traffic safety and/or decrease the level of service on Hwy. 99 along.this section. Turning movements by commercial vehicles onto and from the high- way may become particularly hazardous, Mitigation -e Construct an overpass crossing Hwy, 99 at present "location of access roads; widen Hwy, 09 to allow for the construction of several hundred feet of Accelera- tion and deceleration lanes; restrict types of industrial development to those generating low volumes of traffic, Public Services- Urban development in sparsely populated, rugged foot i11 locations will pose potentially serious problems for the provision of adequate public services. Mitigation - Permit development of foothill areas only as necessary public facilities and services become available. Encourage developers to utilize vacant land wlt;lii.n: established urban spheres of _influence. S gnificant Adverse Impacts that Cannot Be Avoided if the Project. J S L111}2.LC111G1L1.Gu Agriculture - The lass of 600--800 acres of prime agricultural land 'wIRNi, n the project site. Adverse Zmnacts Not, Likely to Be Si. nif'icant or slaving Only Limited 1 n�.: lcance, t tat Cannot be Avo tOU if the Protect is Implemented Air utility - Polluting emissions from mobile (primarily ve icular and stationary sources Cumulative impacts (.Same as Section in Original tIR) Growth.. Inducement (Same as Section in Original tlk) } Alternatives to ProQosed Project (Refer to Section 7,0 lift this document 1.2 GENERAL I'NT.RODUCTION The Butte County Planning Commission has revised, the original proposal for the Revision of the Chico Area Land Use Plan, altering land use categories in the Butte County General Plan for various locations surrounding the City of Chico. The proposed revision to the original General Plan Amendment substantially modifies the amount of acreage in each land use category, consequently re- quiring the need for further analysis of potential en- vironmontal, impacts associated with the project. To accomplish the task, a supplement Environmental Impact Report to the original EIR for Various Locations Surround- ing Chico (ERD Leg # 80-Q3=05=07; SCR 80092314', Planning # 80-72), is being prepared. A considerable amount of land formerly classified as Orchard and Field Crops and Grazing and Open Land in the original proposal has been redesignated Low Density Residential, Modium Density Residential and industrial in the most recent revision. The modified project pro- posal now encompasses nearly 117 square miles (74,084 acres)'. Figure 2 displays the boundavies of the project site. Several Environmental Impact Reports have been previously prepared on edtlier General Plan revisions and rezones that focus on smaller geographical areas within the boundaries of the project site currently under Consider- ation. A list of these E1Rs is presented below, Northwest Chico Rezone (E111) Log It 77-04-22-08) North Chico Rezone (ERD Log 11 77-1:1-18401) Chico Airport Environs. Rezone (ERD Log It 70-04-24.01) North Esplanade Rezone (ERD Log # 78-03-06-03) 1-lighi�ay 32 test Rezone and General plan Revision (ERD Log ff 78-03-08-01) Proposed Rezone and General Plan Amendment of County Land South of Chico (ERD Log it 79-00-18-01) Butte County recently adopted a land use and rezone amendment for an area that encompasses slightly more than 6,.00Q acres surrounding the Chico Municipal Airport. A portion of that project is included in the present. revised proposal to the Chico Area Land Use Pian. For specific environmental information concerning the remainder of land within this project (depicted .in Figure 4 ), refer to the completed MR, Chico Airport Environs Rezone, BRD Log 9 79-04-24-01. 2. PROJECT ,DE8CRIPTIO1 2;1 Loca;tion The project site is composed of approximately 74,984 acres (117 square miles) of land surrounding the City of Chico. Peripheral boundaries of the 'project site range from two to five miles ;from central Chico, and, encompass land within the Chico urban area (:sec Figuxe 2)^ On a United State,, Geologic Survr Quad map the project site is located within Township 22N, Ranges III and include all or parts .of Sections 1 through 36, The eastetrn portions of the site -include lands within ToF�r� Toth' Z2;N Range 2E, and includ �s 411 or parts of Sectiovs i:6, 1.7 18, 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31 and 32. All or parts of Sections 2 � 3,o 4 90 10. and 11 of Township " lA r Ran 0' lE are also a pati of the project site. 2.2 Pro`ect nb°'_ectives. The Butte County F1annit'.rr ���?r�i*�r� cion. as proposea a revision to the General Plan aI7tclmcr-Lt fob the Chico !Area sand Uso Flan in order to achiev`L the. following objectives 1) Achieve land use ghat reflect development natterns in the project site; 2) Propnoto compatible sand usesina growing area or the County, while preserving productive agricultural Land, 3) Provide l±or orderly development c.omensurate with natural, fiscal and social resources; 4) Revise the General plan in accordance with State statutes govern ng formulation and imple— mention of local general plans, 5) Coordinate revision of the Butte County General Plan 1qth the City of Chico to 'promote i:tnpi.e- mentation of silgilar land use goals. w 4 _ .. ...LLQ a FIGURE REEGI ONIA L LOCATION t� L F 6 t.'N'itt 204 �vxitw�., ab'tat4 t,k,t w Crv1+.4 4.vtat« Prop000d LOO LOW takhl�t `f Kr.�..c 4v,Ca. v ��v,ilyttv.lYS� t 2.3 Technical and Economic Considerations of the Proposed p- o ecctt (Refer to Original EIR) 3,0 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONDIMAL SETTING The reader should refer to the original. EIR for this section, which remains largely unchanged in content, ex- cluding Subsection 3.9. Subsections 3.1 through 3.11 are subsumed under the Envirdnmental Setting in the original FIR. Subsection 3.9 in that EJR, Land, Use, has been revised and incl.uded in this document. 3.1(3.9) Land Use. The original proposed revision of the General Plan or the Chico area yielded a total 'holding capacity for housing of 61,200 dtiuel'ling t,sIits, Fried on a house'- hold average of 2.5 persc.,- pet occupied awelliftg unit, total, '•,uildout would result in a population of 153,1.00. Based on the most tocent proposals submitted by the County Planning COMMission, and planning Staff, the holding capacity for the Chico area after full bui.ldoul: jrould result potential population of 199;614 residing in_04,942 in a po dwellings (assume 6.0 a vacancy, rate) . MaXiIIIU 1 bu l.dout for each land usw category is depicted in 'Tables 1 and 2 , with the exception of Grazing and Open Land and: orchard aY d Y iei l Crops . Resi Ontial buildout for the batter two categories is based on a derived average of one D/U for e:�ery 20 acres. This, ratio more accurately reflects historical building patterns. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed land use desi.gnatioils in the original p�;u j �:c.t pxoposal. Pi ;urt" 3 pottrays the l.o- cations of 'the revised land use classifications W l0 ?�tta Use Acres % Pre7. Area y o CouDty D/Us1 Pap.2 A -R 14,426 9 1.4 14,426 33,90.1 14.9 s `�44, 6c8 104,970 LDR 11,397 . MIM 1,446 1.9 A.1 11,568 270105 HDR 1,0 2,6 1 4 1 's.,'12 28,933 OPC-GOL 39,351 52.5 .7 1,968 4,625 C 1, 6 Vz 2. 0.2 - T 3,269 4Atj4. 0.3 - - 1 2,595 v �.5 02 -- Total 74,980 +J � q0 84,942 199,614 1Vacarloy rare oauals .0 2Based on 2, 5 per8on -�r oceupiec1 D/ti r-. d, z r4 Way i kq 1, 1""I Ln pqU0 co tV ct CJS a M C4 o rP� 04 �wt�h !~ O PP's r` ep V 0 04 + + + W ts+ tU � N 4 a z t- C0 Ul F-1 N G7 r-. d, Lq kq 1, O Ln Tp co tV ct M Cf' "` 64 ep + + + tU N t- C0 Ul t+l N 0) N m co tl th rj 0. thu ro M %0 1 1 1 1 N 0 P, H th V) + + Ln u Pi d co 7J N fJl u Ln !!1 Ln �,D "D r-� thl Ch1 r�. 1 00. 1.n r• C+:t i i '1. DO. to Ln rn N rt N r..i. + .+. N + i W i... %0 to C d %D L W to 0) -,t N CO 0) 01 -It C14t^ r O UI d, M Lr) + 1 N H C) Lr) to Ln C? t- 00 t+ Ch1 ri Cl Ql r -•I CA to 1 1 I tq 0 'P4 :% to ct` .. 1- 00 ta? O C�1 f�1 01 ri t g�t�r 00 00 I.0 tom- �.o %0 H <t cr) Ln �t tYI C' 4 m irt ('111 u~ t'- to C,T co H -h C) I,, �L77' N Ln m h ol rt H h r -t t-1 rl t+1 tV I(7�1 ht ot5 C':7 C3 CS t"+ N 00 O %6 1.11 Ch] O �0 OD Ln N 1 1 I to a t oo al N 41, 4n 11 60 b!J to 60 C0 (:7 C7 to ri rrt v' 00 0 \0 N 1 ) I r I P � � uo ai cri ter r�i N to am+ G iD b d Gh 00 t r N cs 60 t- 0 0 r -t i bO " �-4 U , C. P, 1-a r-. M A 1, "` 64 r-1 1--1 tU �Q rj thu LNa a P, 4 th 0 u Pi 1 Cd u Ln thl rt N 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEAGURES Individual and cumulative impacts that are potentially adverse, and mitigations to those impacts, are discussed: below. General, Plan amendments are'not normally mitigable, except where use of the land can be Limited by enforcing restrictions in the zoning ordinances, or by modifying land use or density patterns. However, based on proposed, ° land use classifications, development tc maximum intensi- ties are assumed; potential impacts from these identifiecl� dNVelopments are subsequently evaluated.. 4.1 Potential Adverse Significant Impacts and Miti ation Measures Land Use. The revised project proposal would increase: areas designated for industrial use by nearly 500 acres. Much of thisincrease would ^ccur west of U.S. Fitly. 09,_ between Estates Drive and Entler Avenue. Areas located adjacent to, and south of' Skyway, east of fitly. 99, and south of U.S. Hwy. 32 along the Southern Pacific Tight - of -way would also be reclassified Industrial;. Commercial areas would be increased by only 0.11., in the revised proposal.. Substantial increases in residential develop- ment would occur in areas located east and south of Chicols p -resent urban fringe Impact 1. Potential conflicts exist in -areas where commercial; industrialp agricultural and residential, land uGes occur adjacent to one another. Mitigation: (1) Establish open spike corridors (eg., par Uefficatod l:and,) between comllierci; Vindustrial Operations and residences; (2) erect vc, , tive or f-ab4 ricated barriers that effectively block �Oduce unwanted intrusions; (3) locate well landscaped light commercial activities (09; , office space) in a transi tion zone be- tween ros�.dential and heavy commercial/industrial areas. Impact 2: The manufacture or use of hazardous products. inindustrial ope-rations would expose plant 7rorlcers, and possibly residents; vegetation and wildlife in the vicinity Of- the plant to potentially harmful effects. Mi. t:i g anon: (1) Atquirc use pormits for operations that u�xlxz" t zardous materials; (2) require buffer areas around the plant; (3) locate these types of operations in rewte, unpopolate;d areas of the County. 14 r Circulation. The major roads and highways in t. -i project area. that would be impacted by the xevise� project are shown in Table 7 . Tables 4 , S and'6 depict the different levels of service (LOS) for various traffic volumes and road conditions.* Based on the total number of dwelling units that could potentially be ccastructed tinder revised residential classifications, the current proposal would increase average daily traffic (ADT) by 225,,.'671.*t Impact 3 The following roads would likely suffer a mxnimt,'q decrease of one LOS: East Avenue, Skyway, Midway, and western portions of U. S. Hwy. 32. Other roads that currently support light volumes of traffic, but are winding and/or have substandard lane widths and narrow shoulders, are Bay/Gussick Ro,zd, Oak Way, Glenwood, Nord Avenue and Manzanita Avenue, These roads may not adequately convey substantial increases in traffic volumes commensurate with typical urban street ADT. In areas designated for substantial residential expansion east, of Chico (refer to Figure 3) unpaved access roads currently serve residents, and/or no roads exist. Mitigation: (l)Form street assessment districts for roadimprovements; (2) require developer improvement fees from sponsors of subdivisions for construction of new roads,, or improvement of existing ones; (3) increase county and city mass transit service; (4) build bicycle motorbike lanes, segregated by markings, or space barriers ,Crain lanes for larger vehicles; (5) increase residential densities in areas more proximate to central. Chico, impact 4` industrial buildout south of Chico between Entler ue and Butte Creek, west of ilwy. 99,may ;seriously impair` traffic safety and/or decrease the level of service on C11tTy. 99 along this section Turning movements by commercial vehicles onto acid from the highway may become Particularly hazardotls. Miti Ali n: (1) Construct an overpass crossing 14tvy. 99 at present location of access roads; widen 'Hwy* 09 to allow for the construction of several hundred ;feet o,l" Qceleration and deceleration lar..es, (3) restrict types of industrial develop- ment to those generating lniq volumes of traffic. Hourly ADT for Butte County roads and highway is calculated from the following assumptions' 85 of all recorded traffic volume occurs between 6'a.m• and. 8 p.m. 2.0% of that amount of tr;nffi.c occurs in the beak hours betwoon 7 a. m. and 8 am, and 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. Peak hour volumes are subtrx"eted from the total before estimating the average number of vehicles per hour, Ptak hour volumes arc typically 1"s times g:reatoi than average hourly volumes * Based on a traffic generation .factor of ll trips Por occupied dwelling unit. 15 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS* FREEWAYS .AND EXPRESSWAYS WITH RESTRICTED AREAS' ,TABLE 4 s Total Vehicles per hour Traffic Operating 4 Lanes _Flow _ _Speed- (both directions) A Free Flow <60 2,800 Stable Plow <55 4,00.0. C Stable Flow 50 4,500 D Approaching Unstable Flow 40 61480 E Uri8t4ole Flow 30-35 8,000 TAI: LE 5 TWO LAND' ROADS WITHOUT ACCESS CONTROL Traffic Operating Distance 2 Lanes- , Flow Speed 1,500 feet (both directions) A preo Flow X60 100 400 I3 Stable, Flory 50 80 600 C Stable Plow C 40 60 780 D' Approaching Unstable P16W 35 40 870 Unstable Flow 50 N.A. x,000 Based on information contained iri the 141 hiva�.�����CApatit Manual, a'ar Rosoare 1965, published by the Highway Y B Threshold for LOS BC and D modifiod dor rolling terrain and narrow shoulder conditions in hutte County, .: l 6 IPA TABLE 6 r LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS* 4 -LANE ROADS AND HIGHWAYS WITHOUT ACCESS CONTROL (Both Directions) TABLE Traffic Operating Total Vehicles F164V Speed Per Hour A Free Flow :5:60 1,200 B Stable Flow �<s5 1,600 C Stable Flow 'C45 4,000 D AFpi;*oaching Unstable Flow` �_ 35 6,800 E Unstable Flare 30 8,000 F *tasea 1n the 1-1ighway Capacity hranual; oil information contained 19651 published by the Highway Research BbaTt 1� TABLE 7 TRAFFIC COUNTS ON MAJOR PROJECT ROADS Road Lanes Intersection ADT Bay Ave/Cussck 2 Bell AHT I?FIT Henshaw 2 990 61 92 GussYck - Nord Ave 1,560 y6 144 Nord Ave 2 530 34 51. Henshaw 320 20 30 East Avenue 2 Esplanad6 (E) 14,780 910 1,365 (IV) 10,380 630 959 Sacramento Ave 2 Hwy. 325 Oak Lawn ,350 2,490 32 9 153 494: 230. Oak Way 2 Glenwood 200 Glenwood 2 Sacramento Ave 790 12' 18 Bruce Roam, 2 Humboldt 49 74 Skyway 810 605 51-10 75 Skyway 4*, (Diversirn Canal) 11,160 37 687 56 Humbug Rd g 150 563. 1 031 ' 845 Humbug. p Skyway 1,, 960 EatonM 2 Co�la55et 3;100 121 191 182 286 (IV) 1,560 84 126 Lassen 2 Es Esplanade P ,660 287 430._'. (V) ) l ' ,710 100 163 Co'h.a.sset P"700 1.72; 258 River Rd 2 M Io : 2x320 1.43 215 Pir;0 Aire 1,360 84 126 i�1`buo�l 5F,., 2 33 Cohasset 2 Myrtle 4,470 �Ir'illzan� to 2 East 413 4,170 257 386 4-laftes for only 2 + miles 18 TRAFFIC COUNTS ON MAJOR PROJECT ROhDS (continued) Road Lanus Tnt.ei s'ettion ADT AHT PHT `air 2 21st Street 3;980 245 368 Midway 2 Hegan Lane 7,650 471 707 Oro-Chico Hwy, t 2 _ Midway 910 56 ; 84 East Drive 350 22 33 Humboldt 2 Bruce (E) (tti) 41p 760 25 47 � 38, 71 U.S. Hwy. 332 2 Nteridian nd 7,600 607 910 East Aire 9,300 647 970 IV. Lin.do 8; 700 607 910 WV 81}i five 9;700 6�7 1;000 Sacramento Ave 10,,300 700 1,050 U.S. Hwy. 99 Skyway (S) 13,700. 933 1,-400 . (N)22,600 1567 2,350 Route 32 (Sl u7; 000 1,867 20800 CN. 16,900 1;167 11750 Co �ts5et 13)500 933 ly400 East'Ave 9;,°000 `, 620` 930 Baton Ave 7,300 S00 750 10 p PUBLIC SERVICES - Impact Preservation of agricultural Land in the valloys of ButEe County will continue to direct demand for resi- dential development to the'"urban environs of Chino and foothill areas throughout the eastern and northern portions of the county. Davelopmen� in the foothills poses serious problems unique to a sparsely settled, rugged area. Fird and police protection, water availability, degradation of natural. surroundangs,_eroSion, rccess to medical facilities and adequate road facilities are common problems foothill residents must confront. Mitigations Permit development of foothill areas only as necessary public facilities and services become available. Encourage developers to utilize vacant land within established urban spheres of influenced (Refer to this section in the original. EIR for a Discussion of Other Adverse Impacts and. Mitigations to Those Impacts.) 4.2 s3 ficant Adverse Vim' acts that Caiinot be Avoided i1' ln,t I�r pct is ]mpa,ementt . I.,ovs of Agricultural hand. prom 5.00 to 600 acres o ��____ agricultural land rnrth of Chico, and apprnXiznately+25q acres south of Chico would be removed from production y revised project. Although this amount of acreage. -represents- only a small percent of land under cultivation in the Chico area, commercial agriculture is the primary industry in Butte County, Which Is dependent upon a fixect resource not easily Testorod after conversion to urban Its es 4.'3 AIR QU-kLITY - MOBILE sOURCn MIIt SI N xntroduot3.oft. The analysis of air quality impacts in this report a.s asod upon data derived from a i, ariety of 'local and state, government sources. Three principal emissions (rota mobile sources (vohicl,eS) were analyzed. Those include total'organic gases (TOG), carbon monoxide (CO) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) : Other mobile omissions, such as. sulfur dioxide W2) and lead (PB) are frequently' not available in standard emissions re ports, and have thoreforo been omitted from omthepres�niGulda- cussion. Vor the same reason, data onp tes halre not been included here. 20 i Methodolog). This analysis follows the methodology set forth in: Californ.a. Air Resources Board Report, "Procedures and. Basis for Estimating on Road Motor Vehicle Emissions" (1980) . The vehicle miles traveled (VMT) approach is used to determine total mobile source emissions which could re- suit from project implementation. )~actors involved in this � approach include total project -generated vehicle miles o traveled (ADVNiT) and a composite emission factor (CET) which is representative of the vehicular mix of the area. ate-' sults are in the form ,of average daily emissions for TOG; CO and NOx. Total vehicle miles traveled (AbVMT) is based upon the estimated number of average daily trips (ADT) generated for each land use category and average trip length (.'ATL) The estimate for the average trip length in the Chico urban area is 3.23 miles. The average number of daily trips per household amounts to 11, An estimated 23,969 dwelling uni's now e) within the project sites. Approximately 61,31S dwL i, �r.acg units exist in the County. Overall, population and housing gn .th estimates are depicted in Table 2 . if the projected high annual growth rate for Butte County(3.0 percent)* is applied to the project site, then 371343 dwelling units would be on the ground by 1995. This amounts to approximately 44 percent of the theoretical holding capacity** for the project area, under the proposed land use classifications: k Calculated by the California State Vinance Department. * The theoretical holding capacity for the project area, based on maximum allowable densities for HDR) MDR, LIA and Ay -,k residential categories, equals 22,370 dwelling units y Because °roads, sidewalks and other setbac]: requirements reduce acreage available for residential structures, the average number D%Us por acre will actually be less than theoretical. Maximumst 21 r. r'rojected vehicle emissions .for the Chico area are based �,n population and housing figures displayed in "'�tb1e r. T -or each dwelling unit, the ADT (11) multiplied by ATh X3..23) yields a WIT of 35.53 miles per residence per day. %� ,is VMT multiplied T,y the ;total number of well ngs in m tihe project s;te. (rinus the vacancy rate) yields overall VMT (ADWtT) The AIA -PIT £ori countywide residences would also amount to .35.53 miles per residence per day. The ADVMT, multiplied by individual CEE values shown in Table 2 determines the amount of emissions produced by residential development ina given year. TABLE 8 COMEOSITE EM1881ON FACTORS (Grgm8 Ma.1e) 8S 1990 1995 20.22* 198Q i9 -- TOG 4.74 2.84 2.19 1.99 0.37 CO 38.0 26.21 20.65 17.81 4.46 NOx 463 3,46,.:.. 2.79 2.69 1.18 SOURCla . California r',ir Resoufrces Board Al }7„ ug}t the Air Resources Board has ireohasabeenaderivedforCEF'the ver{x after 1,995, a guesstimate f�gt vrd.l 20'22, based on the average decline ' ;dor each factor during 4 ��fje isexibd 1580 through 1995. Bull buildout is expected by the .'l.ar 2022, 22 t ,t A 'total exhaust omissions for the project site and County are displayed in Tablas TABLE 9 EXHAUST EMI,SSIONSN IN 1980 (tons/day) CEF Project Area 1 County2 o County TOG 1.28 14.01 9.14, CO 10.28 112.33 9,15 NOX 1.16 12.7:1 9.13 ADINT 245x406 20681,638 9.15 1 Does not include transient vehiclesass:i A 2 µ ng through �aro' eCt area.ADVMT based on Air Pollution Control DistrItt calouldtions nclud4 ,g transient vehicles passing through Butte County, t 2.3 (tons/day) Pro1ect CCF' Area r County2 o county, ' ff TOG i 0.88 8.45 10.41 i CO 8.27 79.61 10.3 NOX " 1.12 10.76 10441 d ' ' ADVMT x 3630257 3, 499, 7,531U t . 38- ,4 Tn general, the steady decreae in total emissions through, 1990 reflects installation of improved emission control devices on vehicles. Thus, even though ADVMT for the Co-Unty and project residences has 'increased substantially by lg`d5, overall emissions are less than in 1940. County and projc.t emissions in 1995 show a sl%ght increase over those in IP90, though the totals are still be�oty'those for 19$0. Proje"t emissions, as a percent of tou;ttywide totals for TQC CO and NQx increase slightly thr)ugh 1995. This increase in project to County ratio is larZely explained by the higher growth rate for the project area, which would necessarily generate a greater ADVMT than the average for t}le County. Projected vehicle emissions for the year 2022 should be considered conjectural. development of alternativefuelsand 'engine plants for vehicles may reduce the CFF values, for that year far below those shown in Table 13 Nonethe- less, the large holding capacity in the project area, combined with a arowth rate above the County average, indicates that residents in the Chico area will experience greater concentrations of air pollution (from vehicle emissions) than in other sections of the County. The reversal, of a downward trend in vMhiclU emissions after 1905) through 2022, does not indicate a serious reduction in local air duality. Vehicle emis,;.ons (in tons per da will. likely remain belcu levels recorded in 1.980. Arherence to the air quality non -attainment plan developed for Butte County will :further reduce local air pollution in the Chico urban area. STATIONARY SOURCE'EMISSIONS The revised draft of the General Plan Arlendment for the Chico area would increase the amouwL of land devoted to industrial uses by approx mately SOA 4-ros This increase in industrial land inventory also holds the potential for substantially increasing stationary emissions from industrial sources. An indirect increase in uehiclo emissions may occur if the plants generate substantial truck trar-T v needed for transport ,7urpos0s, and employes largo, numbers or persons who must commute to work. wince all new industries in Butte County must meet NOW Source emission standards determined by the local Aix Pollution Control District a deterioration in local t hibient air con- ditions, would be�Itinimal. (Por a discussion of other impacts in this section) -refer to Section 4.3 lit the original BIR, Cumulatlyo Impacts (This Section. Remains the same as in the original Blit) 26 4 5 Growth Inducement (Refer to original BIR for 4 discussion of this section.) 5.0 THE RELATIONSHIP BET{VEEN LOCAL SHORT -'TERM USES OP MAN's 6.0 Prom 600 to 800 acres of agtic,tlt,ural land would be removed from1production, and converted to urban uses (primarily residential and Industrial)i The continued development of land for urban purposes near farm and grazing lands may result in further conversion of agricultural lands in the future. Urban development near or in 'riparian habitat in the project areas would further degrade these special, micro- envi.ronnicnts reduci4g plait and wildlife species, unless mazxagemen.t controls are implemented, urban storm runoff is an important factor here in the potential degradation of stream quality. _..-- Approximately 600.800 acres of agricultural lana would be? permanently lost to urban. Sand uses. Certain sections of riparian habitat along Tiig Chico Creek and Little Chico Creek would also suffer from urban encroachment The rural character of several. Outlying areas near Chico's urban perimeter would also acquire more urban attributes, with .land reserved for fewer agriculturally related activities. 7.0 ALTERNATI 13s _TO THE PROPOS13Il PIZOJECT 1.. No Project Al ternative . (Same as original 13JR) 2. Circulation 'Plan, AMasster Circulation 'Plan should be an. prepared for areas designatoil for substantial ],ncreases in industrial, and residential levelopment. Many areas that .now exist as open and grazing :Land, orchards or field crops, Would roquire dovel.opment of, complete internal circulation plans. Coordination with Caltrans would be necessary where oncroacbmont onto state high- ways is speciried, and/or wheresubstantial increases in traffic volumes would occur` These plans should be submitted to the County Planning Deportment before development is approved for areas south and east of Chico. 3, Urban Development Within the Shasta Union Drainage Assessment District (S.U,D.A.D. (Same as proposal in original ETR) 4, Inclusion of an Open S ace or Natural Resource Designation- . � P (Same as,original BIR) S. Rednctior of Cumulative,Impacts. The revision of the original. General Plan Amendment fox the rhicc area would increase the holda.ng capacities for population, and housing in t'e project area by more than 34 percent. To reduce overall cumulative impacts :From this revision, development holding capacity could be reduced by 15-20 percent, To-accompli8h this outcomes portions of areas proposed for Low Density Residential classifications, could be redesignated Agricultural -Residential or Grazing and, Open Land 8.0 ORGANIZATION8, AGENCIES, DOCUMENTS AND PERSONS CONSULTED (Sallie as those listed in original ETRE 0.0 APPENDICE5_ (Same as those included in. original EIRE 28 Land Use Acres b Pro " . Area�'D/Us Po 2 A-R (1 du/ac) 14,700 19.6 14,700 36,750 LDR (6 du/ac) 7,200 9:6 43,200 108,000 MDR (13 du/ac) 1,000 1.3 13,000 32,500 HDR (20 du/ac) 500 0 16, o00 40, 000 orc-Goy, (0.5 du/ac) 44,500 50.5 2,200 5,500 c 1,600 2.1; x 5,100 4;1 Z 2,100 2,8 � R Total r 75,000 100.0 89,100 1 222,750 r `rotas ; 1 Estimate dif-fors to accommodate change from original ift planning, because rrap area definition I%r is extended eas'torly t ` o r es�,d.ential Moment. . p densities accant l.�.s}aed b and Changes in p. t the adoption of the Iiqusin;g ° At 2.5 pb.rsons per dwelling; i 4 .s Land USO Acres Pro'. Area o Count 2 D/Us r 13.,600 ,°00 A-R (1 du/ac) 13,600 18..9 1.4 LDR (6 du/ac) 10,200 14.1 1.1 61,200 153,000 MDR (1.3 du/ac) 1,700 2_.4 0.1 22,100 55,300 HDR (20 du/ac) 1,200 1.7 0.1 24,000 .30,000 OFC-GOL3 (0.5 du/ac) 37,400 51.8 3.7 1,900 4,800 c 1,700 2.4 0.2 P 5,500 4.8 0.3 - 1 20800 3.0 0.2 - - Total 72,100 100.0 -- 1221800 307,100 TABLE 3 r r LAND USI- COMPARISONS B]?7'fVD}1T1 . ORIGINAL PROPOSAL POR CHICOAREA AND PEVI50D PROPOSAL i Land Use Ori inal Cateor rlleres 1 � ,Revision D/Us Igo Acres_ Chan e b/Us Po Acres D/Us Po AR 14 70 0 14, 700 36,750 15,600 13 C00 a 34,00f "1,100 -1;1:00 2,150 LDP 7 200 43,200 108,000 10,200 61L 200 153,000 +3,000 +18,000 + iefD�. 1., 000. 13, DOv 32)5,00 45, 000 3 1.,70'0 22;100 55,300 f'iDR 800 700 + 0,1,g0 *2,800 i6, 00'0 �0, 000 ]., 2.00 24,000 60,000 + 400 + 8,000 +20,000 OVC..00L 44,500 2.2010 '50._0 37,4G�1 1 900 4,800 7,1.00 00 1. 600 " M ` 170:0 ., a " 700 3,100 " + 100 iw L 400 .,1.00 .. ` Z 8 011 TO T AL 75,000-' 80:100 222; 750 - 2,100. 122,800 307, 3,00 33700 x +84 350 No to ' 1 Assttmo 25 Persons POr oectlP10d divexlin 2 g unit t0 Differences in totals due to inherent eutltul.a�tive: error ' eluc `i o scale ' ' ieris b mapping i:ecat�ni�{ue b vary a acid ,light �v CORRECTION AD.DMNDUM - ;SIR SUPPLEMENT Page 10, Paragraph 3.1 Land Use, change tot Based on the most recent proposals sttb.-Atted by the County Plannizig Commission and Planning stali, the holding capacity for the Chico area after Null buildout wouldresult in a potential population of 307,100 residing in 122,800 dwellings. Page 27, Paragraph, 5.0 Short -Term vs Long -Term, change to: From 1,300 to 1,600 acres of agricultural land would be removed from production, and converted to urban uses (p ,imari.l.y residential and industrial) by the,relocation of the groenline further west than origi;Tal.ly proposed. This is in addition to the agricultural land which will be converted to urban uses. page 27, Paragraph 6.07rreVersi;bl.e Environmental Changes, change to, b' Tn addition to the acreage already committed, approximately 1,300 to 1,600 acres of agricultural. iand would be permanently lost to urban :lands., �w rf 1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 2..0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 2 2.1 Location 2 2.2 Project Objsratives 2,5 Technical. and T:conotni.e Coiside;ratiors 7 of the P aposed Project 3.0 I)EsCeRI PTION OF ENVI RONMgNTAL SrTTINO (EXISTING CONDITIONS) 7 3.1 Topogta-phy 7 3.2 Ai rs'hed 7 �.3 Geolc y 10 3.4 Soils 14 3.S nydrology 3 6 VeS€ tation aad. Wildli e I'S 16 3.7 Acoustics 1.8 5"e Visual, 18 3.9 EaIld Use 23 3.110 Circulation 24 3.11. Publix Services 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A14D MITIGATION MEASURES 26 4.1 PoteAtia.l Adverse SiEnxficant Impacts 26 and hfiti gation Measures 4,2 Significant Adverse Impacts that Cannot 30 be. Avof,dod if the Project is Implemented 7 SEniEtcatt 4.3 Adverse Impacts Not r,kely�toyle cr 11aving only Limited S' gnifi an�Pe, h ,,annot be, Avoided it the Project i.s 39 imple•inentod 4 7 4.4 Cumulv.tive impacts 51 4.5 Grotiath xilducement 5.0 THE RELATIONSIIII' BET! EN LOCAL SRORT TERM IMS r S ENVIRONMI NT AND T112 MAINTENANCE AND OF MAN LNIIAN(Eh1L'Nr o LONG TE-glj PItODUCTIViTY 51 6,0 ANY SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL INVO1VE') IN T" CHANORS IMICII WOULD Bn PROP08t-D PROJECT SIC()UI,I) IT n. IMPLrA4ENT8D 52 1.0 ALMNATIVrS To Tjlra'PP.OPo;SE1) PROiLICT 52 8.0 ORGANIZATIONS; AGENCICS ANO Pr, t95 081; CONSULTV0 54 7 r �a LIST of TABLES Page. ] . Z. Total Project Acres - Existing anrro�aosed: Population and Building Estimates 19 for Project Area and County 3. Locations of Inadequate Drainage 20 4. Traffic Volumes for Selected Streets and Highways 27 S. b. Projected Increases in Traffic Volumes Level of Service Standards 32 34 for Freeways and Expressways with Restricted Access 7. Level of Service Standards for Two :Lane Roads without Access Control 35 8, bevel Of Service Standards for 4-Lane Rods and highways without Access 35 9. control . Composite Emission Factors 36 10. Exhaust timissions in 1980 44 11. Exhaust Emissions in 1985 45 12. Exhaust 11missions in 1990 45 13, Exhaust Emissions in 1995 46 14. 15. School Enrollments and Capacities 46 Projected School Enrollments 48 49 L18T OF F'ICIiR15 Region4l Location Of Project 2 Site Location of Project 5 3. South Ch.; co 4 4i Airport Rozone S 5: Soils heap 6 6. Location of flare Plants 11 7. City of Cliico Master Platy Service Areas - 38 40 The Butte County Planning Commission proposes to revise land use categories in the Batte County General Plan for areas surrounding Chico that encompass nearly 19.5 square miles (12,475 acres), A substantial amount of the proposed in Low Density Residential and Medium tensity Reesidentialsite,ect , is nowdeMuchaofd the land in the former category is g p a MAgricultural-Residential,p. ,le ae Gratin .and Open band and ©�rchardoandeFielc rhle a large majority of the existing Medium Density Residential classification is proposed for Low Density Residential uses, Several Environmental Impact Reports have been eared on earlier General. plan revisions and rezones thatvfocusyon�rsmaller geographical areas within the boundaries of the project site currently under consideration. A list of these EI Rs is presented below. Northwest Chico Rezone(ERD Log # 77-04-22-08) North Chico Rezone Chico Airport Enviro is Rezo)neog � 77-11"18-01) (ERD Log # 79~04-24-01) North Esplanade Rezone (ERD Loge N 78-03-06-03) Fig. htlra 32 Vest Rezone and General Plan Revive ion g Y (BAD Log # 78-03-08-Ox) Proposed Rezone and General Plan Amendment of County Land South of Chico (ERD Log # 79-09-18-01) A G--neral flan revision and rezone proposal affectingapproximately 10600 acres south of Chico is currently` under re vewb'yountyin Mate agencies. This portiori of the present project proposal, hawri W Figure 3, is therefore not discussed in detax�, in this document. q�f County Land South of Chico posed: Rezone and General Plan Amendment Meter to tl�e corn leted IaT'It I Proposed, 4 enVrronmentaj i. ormat on conGeriling, this area,. or :spec is Butte County recently adopted a General Plan amendment for an area that encorlpasses slightly more than 6 000 acres surrounding the Chico Municipal Airport: For specific if 000 information Concerning this land; depicted �n 1~igure 4, refer to the completed ETR,, Citic Air Ott Environs ketone, EitD Log # 79-04~24.01. Land containesi"within io t to oun ary o t lis recent project s not iricluded as Of the present proposal, a formal part 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Z•1 Location. The project site is Composed of a lu-, t'17-Yacres (17 square miles) oi` land surroundingm�}ieiCit f Chico.* Peripheral boundaries of the project site range from two to five miles from central Chico, and encompass Land within the Chico urban area (see Figure 2), 11 a United Geologic Survey Quad map the I located within Township 22N, Ranges 1E anal incliudes tall`te or parts of Sections 1 through 36. The eastern portions of includes alle site lorepartssojf1Sections 16,p 7, Range 23i, and 29, 300 31 and 32. All or partssof�5ect Sections, 2l' 10 And roject1of siteaTotvns}�ip 21N; Range I are also a part of the Project 2.2 I'r} oject Ob��e_�c�:�,tives The Butte County Planning Commission _ Has propose—Ic a�e`neral Paan amendment n an order to ac}.ieve the following objectives]: project area 1) Achieve land uses that reflect development p tterns in the .project site; 2) Promote compatible laj)d uses in the County, a growing area of land; While preserving productive agricultural 3) Provide for orderly development comensurate with local natural, fisral and social resources; 4) Revise the General plan in accordance wit7i. State Statutes governing formulation and implementation bf local general pians; Coordinate ate a .vision of the Butte CouxttY General ,) m with the City of Chico to promote implomentatrion Of similar lar'l a goals; 3 2'. Technical and Economic Considerations of the Proposed Project The proposed project does not includq specific technical in- formation, since proposed amendments to the Bute County General Plan postulate only general constraints for land use Development plans for specific sites, or subr►is,sion of build- ing, designs are not included in the project proposal. Economic considerations are essentially problematic at this timej singe the eventual type and inten :ty of land use is ; Potentially, the County may inc.,ease not precisely known its rev,,.;nuc base from the industrial and residential develop- ment of former open spaces and agricultural lanais Con- versely" industrial .and residential ax -as require more public services than farm lands, and therefore cause greater County expenditures. Both industry and agriculture have multiplier effects on the local economy, though a comparison would not bepossible until the type of industrial development; is known. Resiaenti.al development in the project area should spur ex- pa.nsioi of the service sector in the local economy, though this would primarily benefit the urban sphere of Chico, Proposed residential land us"'i at varying densities within urban areas ,may encourage the`construcrion of affordable4 housing for, a, growing population near pl pce5 f egiployme,nt and commercial districts., This would P -wsumably have the ancillary effect of reducing commute costs foT local residents" Residential and industrial land usesb however, tend to con- sume greater amounts of energy than agricultural activities, havinga cumulative impact on the cost iaf that energy.r This .oasts of s ore . than off;5et by the proposed return lattecopse ueiYca is more t.h o,f' lax go am k "' - residential to a,.ti1 classified Agricultural uses. S 0 DE-sCItxPTJ0N OF �&NV'I1tONM. B TAL. SETT N1J (EXISTING CONDITION$ 3ol1 To'S0 ,r 11 The project area Lies withitt, o transitional sono between t,le relatively lavel novt.'aern floor of the Sacramento Valley and the foothill slopes of the Cascade mountain range. Much of tho site is located Avithin a broad alluvlal p.,ain known as the Chico Fat't. `I'hi.s plait, generally slopes geltt'ly to the west, having a gradient of less than two percent, hlevations vary from 1501 feet above sea level. in the west to 700 feet in the east. ;lJvations range from 17$ to 185 feet AbOV0 secs level Porth ar.d go,ath of central Chaco. 3.2 Arshed Climate. The climate in Butte County is a comfortable e xtexranean type, v:xth t average rainfall between 24 to 28 inches. Two main seasons dominate the year, wttli a shirt transition per;od between. The hot, dray : ummer season is in luenced by high pressure ridges, ighile the mild we't win,.ers are influenced by a low pressure area over the North Pacific, The average rummer temperature in ,July reachzs 97 degrees 1~., with highs above 100 degrees F. The mean winter temperature in January is 36 degrees F., with ":Nws reaching to below freezing, The shift from high pressiwre to low pressure that influences the western cli r1ate so drastically is partially the result of alternate cooling and warming of arctic land masses. Winds aie gefterally fro;n the South -Southwest of North-Northwest. The South wiflds are ti tally related to storm fronts. North winds are typically assccz.ttted taitli high pressure ridging and brim; warm weather. Wind speed is generally less than 9 mph. Aireualit Alt q,ualit)" ill butte County is relatively good, o but e rstandards for carbon monoxide (CO) photochemical oxidants (smog,),, dad suspended paxticula.tes are occasionally exceeded, and the County has been designated as an Air Quality Non-Attainment Area by the U.S. LPA. The northern Sacramento Valley has a very high ;,it pollutionpotential l_ ause of the surrounding mountain ranges, w,#stti tcd surface wind flows and. frequent persistant temporaturo inversions; Vehicular traffic has been the r,, ajor source of CO and thei primary con- stituents on-st ,tuents cf photochemical oxi-dams. Agricultural activity, ineludi,ig open burning and plowing is a significant source of suspandod, particulates. All of these factors are present in Chico's urban core and surrounding agricultural ;lands. The County Air Natality Non—Attainment Plan proposes methods for reaching attaiar'lltent status. 3j Geoluy. btost of` the area consists of scd�t�t,atary alluvial epos fs located throughout the Chico 'Pan, containb a loam y loam surfacel layer. This al'tuvial sur ace area soil gated clays, sands, and, salts that composed of uncox�;�ol3.[x form the Vina, 'hard, and Farwell soil series, Some isolated lenses of lacavier clays ,grad silts occur i.rt the 'area, basin deposits which weve forioed as a result of flooding and :vocal pondit�� during the gonos s o l the allrtivi' al plain Deloll these surfa.o alluvial +'leposits is older alluvifflij containing consolidated clays,, sands and silts. Below this, Fanglomerate. occurs, compose* 3f hard dabbles and boulders comented in a sand and salt matrix (this formation.-is exposed ,at th,� surface over much of the lozyer extremities of: the Cascade for.thills east of Chico). The Tuaccan Formation occurs at an average depth of 350 to 400 feet down to 800-1200 feet deep in the Chico area, is r_omposed of imp.:rvi.ous layers of volcanic mudflow deposi t's, alternating with gavel -sand lenses (high groutcdwater content) The Tuscan Formation is r. xposed as volcanic .scabl.ana on the middle and upper slopes of the Cascadc Foothills. The per- meable intervolcanic sedimentary layoIrs within the Tuscan Formation are excellent aquifers and provide the primary groundwater sources iic the Chico area. These abundant aquifers are recharged in the fQothills where the permeable sediment layers crop out on upland slopes or where stream charnels intersect them. Potential geological hazards to the area include subsidence, expansive soils and damage .from seismic activity, Subsidence .is a potential problem in the entire Chico -Durham area (Butte County General flan, Map III -I). The cause is the heavy withdrawal of groundwater between. Mord and Nelson, the area of heaviest withdrawal included Chico and a: out 2 miles north and south of Chico (Lofgren and Ireland, 1973). Effects of regional subsidence can include damage to well casings and gradient changes in roads:, long sto�vn•drai lines, canals, etc. Itis not po,,s:i:ble to predice in advance eithor the amount of sub-`,denc,l or whether the subsidence will be differential (taut i $ whether one part of tho .region will subside faster than another); in general, the ,jpper (eastern) part of an alluvial fan ought to subside less than the lower part, because of changes in the gravel/sand/clay ratio. The issue 1!3 complicated however, by the fact that ma�rimum groundwater with is occurring north of the site. Swelling and shrinking of expansive soils is caused by melting and drying of soils that contei:n certain types of expansive L.lays The safety, element in the Butte County General Plan identifies-, the project site as an area subject to "moderate" soil expansion« This type of soil movement frequently causes cracks in concrete slabs and other hArdened surfaces. An earlier . tudy` of property l.ocateji within the project site revealed oracles up to 0,2 :inches wi ee on a concrete slab, apparently broken by soil expansion. Adjacent sections of the slab also showed a slij'ht vertical offset(Butte . County Environmental lta'view DepaiLiiient, elft Log � 78.05M1,�-0�i)+ Possible and known faults exist within six miles of Chico tLP the east and northeast. They travel in a northwest to South- west directions traversing the eastern periphery of the project 'site. At least two ea-thq akes, registering from 4.0 to 4.0 in magnitud- on the .ichter Scale, have occurred in the Chico area, l Butte Creek formerly flowed through much of the land in the southeastern portions of the project site. An undeterm ;+ed amount of valuable metal ores sand and gravel may be present. The economic feasibility of extracting minerals, sand and gravel,, however, has not been demonstrated. 3.4 Soils. Although several different types of soil occur within theproject area, varic+is phases of vina loam account for an estimated 80 percent of all soils (see Figure 5)*. Vina loam and viva fine saituy loam is found on most ]adds surrounding Chico. The shallow and stony phases occur east of tol;rn in the lower elevations of the foothills. Small pockets of vina clay loam are primarily located south and northeast of,Ch.ico. The farwell and nord series of soils are generally found west of Chico, just north of Big Chico Creek. Soils co,ct'airiing large amounts of gravel and clay, such as the !;nita, keddi.ng and Tuscan series, typically occur in the foothills east of Chico at loner elevations. r * The soil map on page 1.1 is intended to serve as a general guide to soil, types on the pro,leet area. parc el-by-paTce1 s611 tests have not beda conducteO, and soil types and conditions may vary in specific locations,