The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About82-42 EIR, MAPS, MISC 1 OF 4MAL ENVIROMIENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR FOURTEEN MILE HOUSE REZONE AP # 63-s01-02' Prepared by: E CO -ANALYSTS 114 West Sevonth Avenue Chico, CA 95926 (9161) 342-5091 February 1932 Reviewed by BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 County Centex Drive OVOville; CA 95963 March 1932 August 1982 January 1933 February 1933 'File # 82-42_ h09 # 81 -10 -14.03 - SCR # 32053104 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SUMMARY j INTRODUCTION 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS Geology and Soils 9 Hydrology 10 Climate and Air Quality Habitat and Wildlife 11 11 Archaeological and Historical Resources 13 General Plan and Zoning 15 Land Use 1.5 Aesthetics 19 Noise 20 Access and Traffic 2,1 Public Health and Safety 22 Public Services 23 Fire Sheriff 23 24 Schools 24 Utilities 25 Natural Gas and Electricity 25 Water 25 Sewer 25 Telephone 26 ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED 27, ANY SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES WHICH MOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSAL, SIiOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED 27 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACT'S 27 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 28 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 28 i PACE ALTERNATIVES 30 APPENDICES I. Persons and Organizations Contacted 32 2. References 3. Geologist's Report 33 4. .Plant Survey Report 34 43 S. 6. Wildlife Biologist's Report SO` Archaeologist's Report 7. Initial Study 56 8. Fiscal Impact Analysis, Comments and. 60 Responses on the draft BIR (items sent to the Planning Commission for 1/6/83 meeting) 9. Comments from Public works, Chico Unified School District and Caltrans with Responses 10. Revised Fiscal Analysis 'wit:h. Staff Comments LIST OF FIGURES I. Regional Location 2. Project Vicinity 6 3. Site Plan 4. Zoning 7 S. Proposed Developments in the Project l8 Area 18 I I This Environmental Impact Report adds esu os the potential impacts of .,onstructing a clustered developmont of 21 rosidQniclos. The 186± acre project site is adjacent to JJJgJIwLy miles northeast of Chico. Only 10.4± RcrOs ar(% Oanned Cor development. Development will include 21 re.-,Jdonces' a mini - storage facility, community water and sewer facilities, swim- ming pool. and recreation building. The developer is proposing a zoning change from the current TM -5 and TM -40 to Planned Area -Cluster (PA -C). Geology and Soils (see pp. 9-10) There are no significant geologic, of scli.Smic hazards specific to the project site. Adherence to Uniform Building Code regulations xill mitigate any earthquako groundsbaking hazards. Construction activities could cause on-site erosion. Proper construction practices can mitigate this problem to an insignificant level. Hydrology (see P. 10) Development of the project would cause a minor increase in stormwatet runoff, Little Chico Creek is located 2,000 feet southeast of and 600 feet below the development area and no significant impacts to water quality are expocted,. Air (duality (see p. 11) There would be a minor increase in air pollution duct-, to motor vehicle emissions and short-term impacts resulting from- romconstruction constructionactivities. These impacts are not considered significant. Habitat and Wildlife (see pp, 11.-13) Wildlife *habitat and wildlife could be somewhat affected by development of the site. A total of 168± acres, including the steep canyon wa2ls and the main habitat area across High- way 82 would remain as open space. N'o rare or endangered animals are known to inhabit or depend on the site. T140 small populations of the rare Bidwell's knotwoed are located on the Site: These populations are located 'Ti an area d08igftated fOt use as Pasture landi The developer must arrange fo:r a botanist to 'replant .81'divelV8 knotiveed in a Ilea-rby location with seeds f -TOM the existing plants, ' Archaeological aitd kfistorical Resources (tiG(- hA • 13-1,1) One proh stor5.c site with 2 small budrocic mortars wa.s found on the project site The mortars have been Photographed and mapped by a qualified archaeologist and no J'urt:lic'r mitigation is required. These mortars are aocatod in an al*oa not l)lanncid for dove] ()pment , Remnants o:t the .Fourteen Mile 11011s(1 fc�uttcirtl; i t r , cin tk xe pzo,lOct: site, They have been subset t.tt�t.tt7 r� ; W01:0Lout7d by site clearance n,ctiviti � Qlilninat•c d es. The archaec�lo r 7�tt; the Butte County Board of Supervisors submit �antappliica.tion to the State Historical aal Resources Commission recommending the Fot1r- ton Mile House site as a "California Point oil' 1ntz�rest" a historical Itiy; with marker laced along the h3.gla Ttri,; r•ttic�ca►tmtt�ndt�- tion is not, however, a required condition of -approval. General Plan and Zoning (sect p. 15) General Plan designation for the site includes Grazing- Open Land and Agricultural -Residential. The site is zoned Tit -5 and Tho -40. The developer is proposing; a zoning change to Planned Area -Cluster (PA; -C) , Land Use (see pp. 15-11) The project site is currently vacant; and except for Highway 32 and a single house Just north of the Site, surrounding land uses consist of open space. This project is x w Proposed projects between Chico and Forest Ranchtandeon, Doeverill Ridge, This project is much hlill. smaller than these other proposals (500-1,000 lots) although it may, i.f s for Clustered housing on smaller pp�otrd, set a precedent parcels.: Aesthetics (see p. 19) r. Most homes will be set back over 400 teat; rr om the l�i,ghwuy away from the meadow area and w ithin the tree! l..i.nc�, A few homes located,within 100 Poet of the highway be liighl. visible to motorists due y to terrain. A homeowner association's set of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&,R,$) will Provide architectural controls for color, texture, and form of dwelling units and accessory structures. Visual impacts of this project are not considered s enificant, No1.se (see p. 20) tf it on the highm ay is the site Proper constructionprl►nary noise sc�urt;c; for t'hc Practices Ca nliti.gat.c, any noise._, problems cin the 4 lots located nearest the highway, r FE 0 This project would genera -tea LIJVu,, ��.� highway with a capacity of about 15,000 velt, t les per d2 , . Current traf E is volumes in the pr o,j c�ct are'LL axC abt��'( 2 , 0now 00 ADT Caltrans will require ate t+nc�i1)L rII" t �ti l„l,.lt�rc�tir access; road into the site . Nosignificant as a result of this project. pub. Hea.ith and Sgfty_ (see p. 22 ) will residents of this project nocert ate or be ex - 't posed to any unusual public health oar safety hazards. Iyublic Services (see pp. 23-,24) :�_y t O :70h()()J , i'°tro :incl No sib nif icant impacts would o0Cur Yjt}wt'VC?r ) this Sheriff services as a result of tro,,�ectsl along highway 32 and. 1)roj c:ct , along with other major' p � o Doe r4i11 Ride, would eumulativelst affect these scr`vic;e�. A new lire statiop, increased. sheriff patrols and a nc*�y salzot�l, bus route will isventually be needed in the 'orc�:�t Ranch area Utilities (see pp. 25-20) No problems are foreseen in ypro'vidia��;heating 1C �� I��i and cc)ol.3:ngoM p phone service to the project sits• Sol y Domestic alternatives should be encouraged by the Count t;ed to ' an onwWa 'Well ater ore ire suppri-ssion water will be provided by OQ0 gal” storage tank and gravity -fed system. with a , will 'be provided, by a gravity pressure system ion reserve stored in the swimming pool= Sewage treatment will be provided by a low pressure system and community leachfield. Alternatives (see pp.. 30-31) osed Three alternatives to the proprid' 11eM 1 11 rDensit Y - These include No Project; Lower Density MA INTRODUCTION This Environmental. Impact Report dese'rillWS the existing 14 miles t'lorth- ccnv3.ronment of a 186± acre parcel loca�tod k,tboul tho i(]llllll�t�llt �L�. 7111��i1C`t'�''"� C111 CS(7 and Vconst C.445't t)l` , a 21.d:1C7tSses Cl.u�tC='.x'�C.�bd(yVC'� l)E CI1C`11 � CSC ucti.ng tlr(A,' C)f about 1.0.4at res. The Butte County Sal lttitt i.ug 1 optirttiWilt st lLft h-,ts c+xprussed concerns about potential: advorso ,tillPU'OtS re latu'd 'to s Soa.l. Drbsian (See pp 9-10) • On—site and off-site dr,,Linage (SOO ].7: s Plant life (see pp. Noise (see P. 20) • Land Use (see pp. 15-1.7 • Circulation (set: p. 21) j o Sire Protection, (see p. 23 ) 25-2G • Sewage Disposal (see pp. ) ee Short-term benefits vs. adverse effects oil publicly adopted long-term environmental. foals (SGi p. 25) • Cumulative impacts (see pp. 28-29 See Appendix 7 for Initial Study and add!ti.onal Count concerns: PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a tentative subdivision map and ' rezone request for a cluster development or 21 single family lots. The project site is locat4d approxirntt,toly 2 miles south of Forest Ranch at ail elevation of 2,000 f t . and lies adjacent: to Highway 3.2. The site is a pori ren of the Wy of Section 1.$0 T23 N, R3E, M.D.B. & M. and is identified as Assessor's Parcel ##63-01-02. (See Figures I and 2) boundary As shown in Figure 2, the proponent's proporty includes a total of 236± acnes. The proposed rezone and de- velopment area includes only 136± acres east of Highway 32. ' The 42 acres wes'L of the highway and 7.4 acres at the north end of the property are not a part of this project and will remain as currently zoned. A clustered development of exclusive custom-built homes of at -least 1 j 800 sq. ft. is planned- The proponent plans to develop 21 noncontiguous lots along the edge of the canyon rim. The .35± acre lots, covering a total of 10.4 acres, will be sold to individual. buyers. Lot #22 (11 ar.res) will remain as open pasture land. Approximately 2 acres will. be covered by roads. The remainder of the project site (163+ acres) in- cluding the steep canyon walls of Little Chico Creek, will be left as common open space and includes areas for a recreation building, swimming pool] bathhouse, pedestrian trail., mini - storage facility and leachfield. (See Figure 3) A homeowners association will be formed to provide main- tenance for on-site water and sewer systems, recreation facilities roads and common open areas. Coveuantrs, Conditions and Restrictions will establish regulations governing archi- tectural and, 'landscaping plans of individual builders The butte County General Plan designations for the project siteinclude Grazing -Open Land (minimum of 40 aePo'S per dwelling unit) and Agricultural-R.esidenLial (minimum Of I acre per dwelling unit). The developer is requesting that the site be rezoned from TM_ 40 (153 acres) and TNI -5 (33 acres) l to planned Area: Cluster (PA -C). The site is currently vacant, and some clearing has taken place. Prior to selection of the proposed project, engineering and environmental surveys were conducted to determine t ho development potential of the site. Thrsr :stivvoys established the density, building areas, and sewer and water system plan ' included in the current proposal. m ,, ,, t �., . u ; TlIAlI� � � j � �,� . � r 6. �`"• �� • �Apl'e:�C �ZIII1C�t .e TSI ,,, .� t,. ;i i . e. • � r/ -a • I i� r �1� .. .¢', A. 1 � e .yam^ r a.• J , e f , 1 � � r ^� �+ I r 'JEFF•, •! � fAc��? � Y ' •;j' � �11�`• 1+ 4 � �+ , �. � � t act+ • ' Y I� k � 1 Ike / t ±• t /Y � •pay l l q1� 1 � �� C 1 ! V • M � Yt� Y . .� lad r �o FIGURE 2 r ta. h Y r 7� t •aR 1j9 , ' FJOJECT VICINITY j j • , j}} I .m ... PROPER'T`t BOUNDARY � � FIs s Y •T.� .r .[�}'.! .. � f-�1 t'�� f e r N s� DEVELOPMENT AREA NOT A PART OF THIS PROJECT p. 2% %" cirri FEET ! clMON0 k. °w 101 w a LL O. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS GEOLOGY AND SOILS The do"velo T nment arca: consists of ;slightly rcrl ,r.n r tti' gulliod torratn lalong the rim of a steep c'.�rnycst� w.t77. Si ii�c�; I t.ho .8o l horn portion o;f thy: development rirool, rangy from i 0-1.5'x,, with more than two-thirds of the arta qI(i pinR loss than 10T. A prominent gully and minor ridgos L°ro present Ln tho northorn portion of the site,, resulting in c111,l.y scat'terr'c areas with slopes of Less than 1.5%. Beyond the canyon rim, slopes quickly reach 60% and iv, places. 100%. 1"-,7 cvnti.ons on the site range from 2,210 feet towards the north to 1,950 feot to the South. Tho project site is located in the northern �>ttcnt ctif thc� Sierra Nevada uplift, and is underlain by vol can t r• mud.fl caws; or the Tuscan Formation,and by younger flows of basaltic vo Lc anic rack. 'Tuscan rocks are the only rock type oxposed at the sur- face. No evidence of an active or,potentially Active fault was detected on the site during field .investigations and review of aerial photos Soils belong to the Toomes-Pent, nssor, l at, t yin . Thr sur favC' soil averages 1 to 1� feet deep, ranging up to 2�, toot to sr,rno placos, and consists of brown loam and reddish or o-va.ngish- brown clay loam, Subsoil is less than l to 5 feet ttoc�L�', and consists of reddish -to orange -brown clay or clay It -am contain- ing abundant weathered roc; f agments The Soil i~C nservatic n Service rites the Toomes-PentZ soils as having "low" oxpans'ive "high" potential, and erosion hazard. However, the rel ttt i voly IO slop0s on the portion of the site proposed for development: produce a low erosion potential, Percolation rat,os in Toomes- Pent? sails are low to moderate. Potentia] Bill:acts Impacts not considered significant, or reduced to minimum levels of impact as a result of mitigations, include loss of Mineral resources, vault displacement, flooding, erosion, eXpdn- sive soils, landslides, volcanism and selvage disposal. Potentially significant imtracts are related to earthquake grotxndshaking. The strength of groundshaking depends mainly on the magnitude of- the earthquake and its distance freta the site. Groundshaking is the ordinary horizontal and vortical vibration of the ground during an ear'thgttake Groundshaking can damage roads, utility lines, underground pipes foundations, and btlilel= The California Division of Mitres and Geology places all of Butte County in a "16w" ca.rthquake severity zone. Maximum probable intensities tango ,from VI to Vill on the Modified Mercalli Scale. Intensity 'VIZI indicates that poorly built structures will be moderately damaged, but Well built structures designed to lateral resist :fa-rres Will suffer little or no damage, ygL D I I I i I i I i Zoite 3 All Uniform Building Code Standards �ro, a Seismir InIlst be onlor,16* oilths alla all 1 be done cluring the dry m tod bOT OTc� Grading shall coveted or revOgOt'l bl iShOd d bo eStft exposed 80il surfac rms s11010 newlY Perimeter Site be: t erosion istruct,i,L '111 to illiAibi the rainy se,,�son. ,for each building site duri-tfT, COr Its to be into and to reduce the potential for si ,.t,,,am channels. 11y1)Tt0L0GY vicinity 1.9 rmanent stream in the PrOJQc't r3.y throxigh OL The only PO Creek which flows SOuthe the crack ftctu,,il3ylies Little Chico itp project 9 1-,,owever) t boloNv the are, portion of the and 600 fee 2 feet Southeast Of end of the propOrtYt about ", 000 e. At the north there is a planned for development mini -storage facility) neat` the area planned for a mit' to Little Chico pOrennial. Spring which flows easterly ea (J 2 an n Lot 94' small end of the meadow &I I rltnta -,L Creell�. At the south ins winter and Spring r -,vi. n intermittent stream dra C11jeo CtQ014�, The' direction down to Little 111 seem to in - a southeasterly located along -the Canyon wa'l- t. local rtinof steep-8ided gullies temporary and loc dicate significant but Oct Bite is located) which the PV03 'n rormatiOn on wh I 011s and location The Tuscan of Water to %� ticult, How~ typicq fields low 110NV8 very dif] ,Ily yield ortion of the even low_flow wells are northern P predictions f' I I -i ocated in the no rAl" minqtO, :L 11 g VY 110— V ev or i an exist lY yields about 80 ga meadow area curront potential Impaq—tS site, including construction cif. t of the he project 8 stotilge f aoil' tyJ Developmen center and mini 01 011 -site residences) recreation roads, i's ase it the rate and vOlUMO will lead to an 'ner stotmwatev runoff. 0. sod by increased ation of Water duality caused Increased Local degrad achf ield lailuVO could a a Cut toads, drive - Sion arld/0r 10 pollutants from the degtitdatlOn r I n and other P, JcantlY to I from e 08ia ute signif the sediments will not contribute This is dite tO wW-s et6o i and the Little Chic Creek ment arc r)r water quality in f too, the develop e to the areek ,)verall di.stanc of the overland flow atOas filtering effect I't quired-Miti . ations, do, tad,ation' S"tos roquilrod to proven Mit a iluto or contaminUtion Nona, ig tion mea of water q�Lality duo to le"'t1fi'Oeldol-fathis roPOvt, di.8c, cussed ,Uss,, in the "Sewer " See 1 1 CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY The climate of the area is a modified Mediterranean type with hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters. Although no sito-specific meteorological data, is avail-abl o, temperatures are, slightly cooler than those in tbo .Sacramento Val lt,y Annual precipitation at the project s t(A uvera cis abouL aU inches. Light snowfalls occur ihfrequ;on ly and molt rapidly, however, in January 1982, significant snoWfO.11s Were recorded on three occasions. Air quality in Butte County is relatively good but federal standards for photochemical oxidants (smog), carbon monoxide and suspended particulates are occasionally r.xcoodod at some loc .tions. The California Air Resources 'Boavd and t..ho U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have dosi:gnaCod Butt(, County as a nonattainment area Tor these pollutants, Motor vehicle emissions are the major source of carbon monoxide and tlo primary constituents of photochemical oxidants. Agricultural activity, including open burning, is a significant source of suspended part%culates Potential Impacts Development of the project would result in a minter incroasLi in both stationary and mobile source air poll ut.alxt emissions. Stationary sources include dust :from construction activities and emissions from trash burners and fireplaces, Although small convenience stores are Located in Forest Ranch, the nearest major retail outlets are in Chico. If each dwelling generates an average of two roundtrips per day to Chico, total; mileage traveled by all residents would be 1.,1.76 miles per day. Total vehicle emissions f'vom this increase in travel is not expected to seriously reduce air quality along -the Righway 32 corrido^ or in the Chico urban area. Required Mi-tigation Nome, IiAJ31 TA`P AND WILDLIFE The project site lies within a transition zone bLitween Yellow, _Pine Forest and Chaparral habitats and contains elements of both. Some major species of Yellow Pine Forest habitat such as sugar Pine, incense cedar and white :fir are absent. Other species such as yellow pine and California blac.l: oak are wide- spread, Manzanita, and wild lilac are also found throughout; the 8 to . f erbaceous species include .several. grasses, hodgo parsely, Woolly sunflower, coyote mint, skullcap, hedge nettle and others. The Chaparral habitat intergrados with r Pine Z'orest habitat and occupies a considerable area near thew edge of the steep canyon walls. Typical t species include buck - brusll, toyon, scrub oak, manzanita, buckthorn and poison oak. Herbaceous species include ,-attlesnalce weod, pl an l Hooker'ain , Smooth cat's ear, wild s iris and wosterll t s morin ng i'1.o Small areas of riparian habitat occur. ill t , the spring in the northern Llan. va.i,�►7 ca(:' t larger ephemeral stream channels. Vegetat,i Vegetation llesela areas is primarily herbaceous, including beardgra,ss, l7r�rseweod,.cat- tails and monkey flowers. (See Appendix 4 for a complete list of plants identified on the project site.) Several introduced species are - ,. , l�ourtvon Mile house site. These include Japano:�rt� illc'tll(ltlti)uhc shrs, potich trees; black locusts and black walnuts. Star Covers two Large open areas on both sides of thstlo Coversey hightvay; A rare plant survey of the site was conducted in October 1980, Two small populations of Bidwel.l's knotweed Pot yidwelliae) occur on Lot 22 ( ygonum just east of an existing fence and about 600 feet north of the southwest crax`ner of the erty• This species is p currently recognized as i'rare butjot endangered". Butte frit_illaria1♦ritilla another species in the same category, has rbcat nairev�ously , r�ww ported at a site about four miles east-•southetxst of this property, No remnants of the previous seasOn's growth of this plant Were Obs observed during the survey, ' ethird to be anti is t .present. Brewer's rocket (Axal�i.s brevet i presumed not y Y �rr. species in the same category,, hay been xoported" from rock faces several miles to the soutl,k ai this oi, It was not observed on this site but even if an mahatre 7 undetected, nne o construction is planned on the rode faces. Robust checker mallow (8idalcea robins-'ta) is OJffici.all.y recog- nizem as "rare and endan eyed" and ha„ few ►rl1 of this site, R been reported within a Although a ro lated species of 5i.dalcea occurs near the spring, no remnants of robust checker mal t itself were observed daring the low survey, ' The vegetation on the site many species of wildlife, inc:ludingvdee.r,eu��e excellenthabitat fey- rabble, squirrel and mice, Many species of birds inhabit; the sito including glail, meadowlarks thrushes z jays, woodpeckers and mourning doves. } Pio rare or�lendangered fthiMal species are 1r gown to inhabit or depend on the projoct site, (See Appendix q for the Wildlife B1()j()gi„se's Re�pc rl Potential Impact Development of the project site would result in some vegetation removal and moderate reduction in wildlife habitat. The two populations of the "rare but not endangered" Bidwell's knotweed occur on lot 22. Although this lot will remain as pasture land, grazing animals may eat or trample the plants. The intermittent stream which flows through lot 22 and the spring located in the northern end of the property provide water for local wildlife and could be disturbed by construction and habitation of the site. Domestic dogs, if allowed to ,roam unattended, could chase deer and other wildlife. Required Mitigations Seeds :From the rare plant, Bidweli's knotweed, shall be collected and replanted by a professional botanist in a suitable proximate location before site development is completed, or the ;plants disturbed. (Bidwell's knotwted normally produces seeds in the months of May and June. Stands of trees and shrubs should be left undisturbed wherever possible since they provide the greatest degree of wildlife habitat. On the west side of Route 32, the fairly level forested area that could ,conceivably be developed should be left untouched, if possible If not, then development should occur with removal of the fewest number of trees. Besides providing wildlife habitat, trees buffer the effects of tile climate, stabilize the soil, and retain moisture - all beneficial to human inhabitants of the area. Trees and shrubs near the highway are particularly important ,11 stv.'Li)ilizing the soil and attenuating the traffic noise -beneficial.' to body people and wildlife. Trees and shrubs lining the ridge Of the ,tis on both east and west sides should also remain to help p ,,vo,ilt ovosion. T,he intermittent stream coursing through the grassland should be maintained in some way as it seems to be an important source of water for wildlife. ARCRABOLOOTCA AND F1I8TOA1CAL RpSOURCDS An archaeological and hi,storica.l. reconnal . sauce or the project site was conducted in October, 1980. The complete report, is in- eluded in. Appendix 6i prior to the :field reconnaissance, archaeo- logical site record files maintained at. CSU, Chico were consulted to determine if any sates had been reported on the project site No archaeological or historical sites had been recorded. During the field reconnaissance two sites were discovered. One is a prehistoric site consisting of 2 bedrock mortars and the other is an historical site consisting of the foundation and associated features of Fourteen Mile Flouse. This area had. been disturbed during construction of 1lighway 32 r_l M 1 t The bedrock, mortar site is considered :;o;treWha�t significant 'rh because it is the only known prehistoric site located along the top or that particular ridge. Itotivever, thc3 mortar holes are very small and indicate that only a. limited amount ofactivity occurred at the site. The historical Fourteen Mile Tiouso Cotitid ation waS, could on the east side Of ];iigYiway 32 adjacent to the moadow area, The structure was originally constructed in thcl :Late: 1800's as a \vial;on stopand toll lathe lower It as two leve . Lorias Sur- T\vo otherhbui ldi,ngs , rounded by a wide porch o a barn and LL slaughterlhouse, were later used ilea It school but were destroyed when Hi;g'htitay 32 was const•,ructetl, Although there was Little potential .I0 ' W, 11"iJI addition,"I historical data from the materials at the a:'c�urtt=c n Mile lI�u�x' site, the archaoolog st. recommended that the sitz, area and features be left undisturbed for llnn�evert,sinc eWId �theoar cl ��,Gologist's by a qualiTied archaeologist. report was completed, the remnants of the Fourteen Mile house have been destzoycd by construction 'activities- The archaeologist recommends that -tile si.to be doSjgnat c d Lz a ,California Point at interest" with a historical, maria x� plated along the highway. potential Impacts No further impacts can occur Thethrc l prehistoric bedre�oUrtoen Mile Icicuse mortar site because of its; d�;struct3on, p site is located in an area that is not planned for construction. Itggj! .red Miti&Iat ions None Recommended Mitiatioi�s The bedrock mortars were mapped and photogJi�tph �d during ` 4ures the ieomtn;indedna ,ss,ance and no further mitigation mczL:� are The Butte County Board of Supervisors should submit an appli.eation to the state �Iriaal HouseResourceassaC"Ca"1 i.l~oit :ta recommending the Fourteer�Mile point of Interest." This recommended procodtire is not, how- eve,,, a required condition for appro�ai e1' this projc�cl. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Currently, 153± acres of the 186± acro 10•roject site are designated Grazing Open Land (minimum 40 acr(18/.DU) and votiod TM -40 (T.imbor Mountain -40 acre minimum ]0t w i ;c*) , Tho rom iti ing 33 acres are designated Agri cult ur►r `l. -Hes i doti 1. itt,1. (tifl tt til tti one acre;/DU) and zoned TAI -5 (Timber MOUnt"Lin-5 ue;rz> m nillIUM lot sizo). (See Figure 4) Current zoningi'tl, ttllow �tppre�x- imatei.y 10 units. The project'proponent ha.s requested that the site be re— Zoned, to PA -C (Planned Area -Cluster) to allow 21 lots covering 10.4±- acres. Lot #22 (11 acmes) will r eman 118' o �c�n land. The remaining 163± acres, 8VXo of thQ Si tci, i will. bk, 1'( l•t as common open space.: Theoretically, a PA-(.' Xone�, alwi wv],th the existing General Plan designations, wi:l:l ul,low 34 lots, on the developable land_ (1 DU on the Grazing Open Landand 33 DU on the Agricultural -Residential land). Potential impacts The proposed. PA -C zone is an overlay zono and, as compatible with the current General flan dosil;nati()ns, The PA -C' zone will allow lots Of less than 1 acre, taut only 22 lots ake being proposed rather than 34. While the Project Will, alter the planned Land use of single family homes on Large lots (5--40. acres), clustering of the 21., 0.35+ acre lots may )e EL moe environmentally sound land use, allowing icer Moreopen space: Local agencies have begun to question the guaralltjies of open space dedications in rest= nt PlannedDevolopment proposals, Under a PA -C, a certain perce, , . 4e of land must be leTt as open space by an association of homeowPners. aThe re ir homaownets to be ,sas in common association has control over this land and While there cane be no absolute guarantees that a majority of those homeowners might not wih s to convert the land into building sites, sod l and watcsz� lima.k�t- tions present on the site may preclude further de=v(�10p►ile.11t, Required Mitigations Norte, LAND tISL" The Project site is currently vac-Ltnt; a single 10lisr, located just north of the site, Surroundi n Properties , , been developed and are ,prtmaril open i, l�icat�d Calls h,�va neat Y p n i�ootlix.11 and iwanyoii lands. �15�, The project site is located on the ridge between Big Chico Creek and Little Chico Creek and several developments are pro- posed for this area. (See Figure 5) The 2'0 -acre Nichols parcel, about 1.5 miles south of the project site, has been approved for a TM -5 rezone. In the vicinity of Ten Mile House, about 5.5 miles south of the project site, 3 developments have been proposed which may result in 45-55 lots. The 96.5 -acre Isom -lull Band Division has from 110-125 lots proposed. Two other development proposals, Canyon Park Estates (1,050 acres) and Bidwell Fleights Land Project (1,000 acres) have proposed 109 and 250-500 lots, respectively. These developments, along with an approximate 100 existing lots in the area, may result in 500 -;1, 000 future residences. The following adopted County Policies, stated in the Land Use Element of tite General plan, are related to the proposed project. Housing Supply and Variety a. Establish appropriate zoziing to provide sites (including various c}ioi Ws) to meet housing needs for the ensuing 20 years, h. Provide a diversity of ,h density and location. ousing sites varying in size, Densities a. Correlate residential densities to sail, slope and other natural site characteristics. b Correlate residential densities to availability of water and sewage disposal and proximity to other public -facilities c. Relate residential densities to intensity an& com- patibility of adjacent uses. d. Balance residential densities with traffic -carrying capacities of existing and proposed circulation plans. Scenic Areas a. Protect valuable scenic areas and parks for enjoy- ment by residents and visitors, b. Consider development of a system of scenic highways. c� Encourage compatible land use patterns in sconic corridors and adjacent to scenic waterways, rivers and. creeks. 17- Potential Impacts If this project is approved, it may set a precedent for clustered development on small lots. Successful buildout of this project may encourage other landosmers in the arca to consider residential development of their property. Project implementation will diminish the scenic viewshecl cast of 'lIighway 32 to some extent. The construction of 21 dwellings on this site represents a change in land use and character along this section of the Highway 32 corridor from grazing and open space to residential developed land, The project liras outside the boundaries of any existing community or urban aroa where public services are readily available. Residential development of this site will require greater fuel consumption for travel to work and shopping than an equiva- lent development in an urban area: The development criteria of the General Plan addresses this on a cursory level, but no formal policy on rural subdivisions has been established by the County, Required Mitigations None r� 1 ' r 3 1 ,I Nureiditnncllalmv tf Cf1IS e m rme S(] ji>u4ugtr V ,.i ti 1 V ?311 r ...�:PROJECT SITE If,9 1 f ,� ° M *Yrnntr Mlne o y�, e G � "I � ,k , FoUr4sni41k Ndluieh Y., �, r t r R Q 1 NICHOLS 1 , `' X .l � 1 r 4y. y r� •r 1• �, " � { ,') '..,•�. .. ,.R, " ,,�: ''.w..`r,« + �4a` � r .r r � �".. a -+ ",,_ ' , ►► t ([ YCi , yhittuwn I crm ft "y; (Sits) p Aill , nM ` 1 ` ..1� 1. r C, i I ! t'•"» a ai I .r ` 1' ,'. � + ; ! " .n �R � is fy�� IR`: r. ! .I �•, :� 1Y' (t r '!' 1 ' • i J �� a r� �, t • e I 9 • °i,� p , ru. ,Yt•'S' 1 Jai Y } 2 �.i 3n. t.,.J IdCT w eg.R ♦, i ` ,, {{ ,�r Y,j' j{Y, , a}4;k.l 1 s!' 4 + G i�4 �. Y {a, j r iij PROPOSED DE�/EL.OPP�iiENT8 IN THE PROJECT AREA oM +P Vin, a t 'ftzslsj#y�FY,".s•StdaYl,�'1+idr M, t x b ,t5 �±" h r `I [ .. 1♦��I �' �i -^,1i 7 �`tl � #'.FFf �,�a �Yv �� ~ q ! o1 effimm .- MIL AESTHETICS IiTuch oC the northern portion of the project s� to �.s readily visible from the roadway. Dtvell�,n �� not Portion of the site may bs on t.ltt� 8011-the.rn y be noticeable to auj,(Inlobile pa.�;,;en c,z•;, i�otential Impacts No significant visual impacts should in these occur if structures areas are properly sited, and have rooar 1' colors which blend with the erili and natural landscape. which are too visible may attract p Dwell criticism Prom the puh`Lr. Required 14iti atons None. ■ Recommended Miti ations Adequate setbacks from the highway should be , Architectural design controls Provided. such as form) that blend with the natural background rxt';ure, Cnd 'Gained in development .Shin ,�;laUU�.�I. IJci con- CC&Rs. Homes should bz _ Spaced to provide visual diversity, 6ula7ly NOISE The primary noise source in the areapercentage�ofaheavy"- Highway 32. This highway carries a high p Traffic t diesel trucks. The 1980 AnnuaFlouser was 2,050 D2a05Q vehicles (ADT) passing Fourteen Mile (ADT volume The peak month ADT was 2,850. The road graatrucksstoedeceler- steep, 4-6 percent, and requires heavy- duty noise levels . The ivoig]Zted ate downhill thus increasing r * This produces a traffic factor is equivalent to a,n,•00 ADT.* and 20 are within calculated Ldn level of 65 dB at 50 feet from the edge of the 18, 19 a roadway : The front lines on Tots 171, 1 �.s banked, to the 100 feet of the highway, but the highway Y areas, therefore, north and is 20 feet higher than elle building sin �.c- story directing sound above the occupied areas of any ]louse and at the attic areas of most double-story houses• ter Measurements made with a GenRad 1,565-0 Ssln531�Be�o�remid- at ' the existing well site, established an Lel traffic flows, Ambient noise levels are 35 dB afternoonlight. The I and traffic is relatively a tl-.e ,grade. No heavy-duty produced by a van accelerating p the measure rent period, although their trucks passed during �e' a,er uf: the calculated Ldn noise contribution is a sign'f'Ca_0t p at values. Noise levels of 75-50 d!; hive been Current locations for decelcr5 anglavasdsrediesel adsequate to prod.` e An of residential building �0-50 dB. 1lowevor, attenuation of sound levels by the q lots closest to Highway 32 siioul.d consider the; Proximity of the highway in design and orientation of homes, Potential Ympact.s oserl be to Ldn: The Q lots dl0witiz peakxnlo�se� events32 lbetween 75-80 dB. levels of 60-65 , lteguiye`d M ti air tiOns Through structural nsul to o tsiaelnoiseand site sources to levels reduce interior noise levels from no greater that] 45 dB. Recomnlendecl Mi.ti ation lV a.n down facing the highway should be minimal in area, and triple glazed. rade; 20 nighttime ADT and average speed of 60 mph. `I *Based on 4% g -20- ACCESS APED TRAFFIC The prsite lies east of and adjacent to ;,gate Iii.ghway that dc.;, the l ranspor.t •1- _oject 32. This is a wade 2 lane roadway provides Chico and the f oothi l tion route between Ranch, Butte Meadows and Chester. Chomen of ;just above with few Forest Hauch, the highway is in excellent condition vehicle speeds of less -than 45 mph. 1. 980 curves that require Calt•ra:ns traffic counts show that there is an average of about the Vicinity. The highway ' 2,000 ADT on the highway in project capacity of about 1.5,000 vehicles per -clay• has a design A 20 -root wide encroachment to the highway 0,11"ently t)ro" Sight O stanc:r;81 1'rOM e vides access to the development area. 'the both north and south along t.he: highway are access point excellent. A dirt road traverses the project site from the to the existing on- access point --north through the meadow area highway's edge to the southern site well and south 'along the property boundary = Planners in the Caltrans District 03 'b . a1fice have expressed between I�orest Ranch and the concern about impending projects might result in requests for several new City of Chico which encroachments and require intersection improvements on Highway rIi.]e House project will 32. While traffic horn the Fourteen little of the highway's capacity and will use up comparatively require improvements only in development of a new encroachment, significant. other proposals in the area are more Three major projects are currently under revicm or in _ The Canyon Park Estates project preparation. (See 1!igure 5) stalled in the Butte County Planning Commission (109 units) is at present. This proposal would funnel tralfi•c onto Highway immediately 32 via Humboldt Road,The Ha -11-180m proposal., Park Estates, will contain 110-1.25 units. north of Canyon The only access currently available for this project is 'to is the ma.tr� nt�Cess Highway 32 at Santos Way, Santos Way also Doe Mill Ridge including; the Bidwell ' point properties on Heights land project. This project may propose 250-500 units development and could serve as an inducement for additional. on Doe Mill Ridge. potential: impacts The project proponent plans to abatdoti he existing 20 -toot iesetIL t.r;i encroachment and replaeeetitowtl � north,a, new 50��6t�t distancOL �.t be located about 200 f will be excellent the new encro`adbment .21:W �•�;r-:site roads serving the residences, mini -storage fa -c i,]" t'i and ,., c ratoi center will be gravel -based and oiled. er As :,i result of this pJe32; about This in�reasecle in axeastraffic. day 1, Id d be added to -Highway of the highway and is ;,ell 1) seriously the dimpact�ievel.sevel nofcservice on the highway. A will not seriously moderate increase in traffic hazards is expected as a resultrds Of turnanP� movements onto and off the Highway. 1?otentia.l h�caingr'ss 'oe reduced if the access Point is rosccteds:Cosliaceparatea ana egress. The access point for this p 7 from other proposed and existing encroac me conflictsx, should, s2 and no significant impacts, i.e., }7c ic created; �req'ui.red Mit:�at_ ions. Caltrans will require an encroachment ermiis t tit oandhad�qua•te pose: 60 -coot enc�raachment� nOtmetigations are required... design of the access point, PUBLIC IiEALTH Ab SAFETY 11Y face a. r 'Lt:f�r Residents 0, foothillinudisease�andgpest1problems thatedo rise, of contact With ctial urb:In residents. Then most serious pocarnivores inlNorthernposure to rao`es, Which is e r spring; California. Rattlesnakes may also be a proA�sdSerrensis, i<< an{� summer montbis. The treehol mosquito, Aides -," months,. It a severe pest. in .late spring and early is a vector of tsanine heartworm: Potential IMRSC s, ttlat ans. The project area, currently supports carnivore pop Residential development co ad attract Moreindtoaseeski�nks hrac raccoons food and shel.tibr which wou foxes, and coyotes into the area. Rechu` 3.red Mitigations ies and Dogs and cats should be Vac iesite anated rea5swlleiihtaLendecl� Leptospirosis,, and cont?ined to hom it s enera.l. y Althoughthe la:ttmeasure do3lddeedbe eco�renants andlrestr ct3.�:1:►S, iinenf orceabl+a unless Rem e;1 cled Mitiga.tioYts, The homeowners may wish to purchase their own cold-foggit'6 device for adult mosquito control. All dogs should receive prophylactic tro-,tment for canine 'heartworm; -22- PUBLIC SERVICES Fire ,Five protection for the pi,oposed project will be provided Department of Forestry in conjunction with the by the California Butte County Fire Department. Response time from the volunteer Back- Station in Forest Ranch is estimated to be 5-10 minutes. Response time; would be up engines would respond from Chico. 15-20 minutes. Because of the hot, dry summer weather and the potentially flammable vegetation types, the project site is classified as Hazard Area by the Butte Covnty a High to Extreme Natural Fire General Plan Safety Element, The proponent plans to install a community fire ,project hydrant system.. Fire suppression water will be obtained from the 20,000 gallon swimming P0014 SpecificationS for the fire be approved by the Butte County Fire De- hydrant system must partment/California Department of Forestry. In addition, sufficient turn -around areas will be provided at the ends Of, the cul-de-sacs, and turn --out areas will be established near fire- the midpoint of each internal road to allow passage of fighting vehicles. Potential 1ppacts _ Development of the proposed project Nvill increase the fire services. The cumulative impacts demand for protection of continued development along Highway 52 will soon 'reach a Level requiring a year-round managed fire station. Required mitigations implementation of a fuel reduction program and the use of fire resistant building materials and landscaping will reduce the demand for fire protection services. Recommended Mitigations A year"round managed fire station should be provided before Details any large developments Occur it the project vicinity, equipment, and funding will need on timing, location, -personnel. to be worked out by the Fire Department, area residents, developers and Butte County Board Of SUPC:rvisOvs, -23- Sheriff, The Butte County Sheriff's Department is responsible ;dor Sherif Under` current policy, the lav en dor cement in the project area. ies �lina county is northern half of the of the�deput:i.esdaretbased sergeant on each shift. Three of sergeant divides U.s time between Chico and 2 in Pa;s.-adise; the area rly tolthenot the two :areae. The FOtRanch projectasite would patrolled. Emergonc'S response time depending on the location of the patrol average 10-20 minutes vehicles. Potential fsr�(acts As the popu]Lation of theWillebe placicclaoft athonShnies fts increase, additional demands Of special concern to the Department is the po- Department. tential for burglaries and vandalism. Required M.tiionsq�„:; None.. Recommended Ilitiga.tions Security devises such as an automatic sc c>tr3ty gate to systems connected to Chico and control vehicle entry, alarm of be ins i im lementatireduce dor deadbolt, locks should te on al neighborhood watch program w llled crime ScIinols` C1iil.dren residing iii. this liousirtg do°�relopment Wouldattend.. for K-b; Chico Junior High pcest Ttancli Elementary School grades dor grades 7-9; and: Chico Senior High,School ioY• grades juniors and School al.on i-1 rhway' 32 serves 10-12 llie school bus rolit.e g b senior high school students only. Potential -Impacts No adverse impacts teould occur toethe sccletools Attendetyby they t students Itom this project because `chis development 5110U1c1 hda � 2 i11CTCaSP.S`y andele t entarynschool Hi.g y the population along bus route may be needed. Mitigations None: UTILITIES 1 Natural. Gas and Electricity Pacific Gas and Electric 'Company provides electi cal service to -he project area. Natural gas is not available. Potential. Impacts Although power lines will need to be extended onto the project site, PG&E foresees no problems with providing service. Required Mitigations Comply with recommendations in the California Subdivision Map Act, Section 66473.1, requiring subdivisions to provide "to the extent feasible, for .Future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision", accomplished through site and building design. Recommended Mitigations Electrical lines should be placed underground, Water Water will be provided by one on-site well in conjunction with an 8,000 gallon storage tank.. An existing Well in the area yields approximately 30 gallons per, minute A pump at the well will provide pressure flow for domestic uses as well as the :Fire hydrant system. A 20,000 gallon swimming pool will be equipped for back-up use for fire suppression-. The water system will be maintained by a Mutual Water District or other suitable mechanism approved by State and County ofi•icials Potential Impacts No impacts are foreseen in relation to de-.elopment and operation of the water system: Required Mitigations None. Sewer ,Sewage disposal for the project will be accomplished by individual septic tal k`s uti lizing low. pressure effluent lines aiid a community leachfield: The leachfield will be located 7.n the north end of the project site. A lift station will be effluent from ' located at the south end of the site to pump uphill to the l.ea.chfiel,d. the individual units Tile sower system will be maintained by tile: Homeowners of financing i t7g and regulation Association or otter approved method Potential Im acus Soils in the area proposed for the leachfiel.d may have a limited capacity to handle septic effluent,. Required bi:tigations_ A registered engineer will besetaie. Importedeiillimaywbech areas are suitable for leachfield u -to adequate permeability and filtration cY needed provide characteristics.: Telephone ' Pacific Telephone Company provides telephone service along II'ighway 32 and would serve this project. Potential Impacts Although telephone lines would need to be extended onto in Providing service. the project site, no problems are foreseen Recommended Miti ations Telephone lines should be placed. underground, ,r ' -26- i ' F, VERSE Titq)ACTS WHICH "CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJVCT IS IMPLEMENTED Measures for reducing the significance of the following impacts have been discussed in the preceding sections of this report. / • People and structures s could be subjected to earthquake groundshaking. w Stormwater runoff and erosion would increase. ae Two populations of the rare Bidwell's Knotweed Would be threatened. s Wildlife habitat woUld be reduced afto. a reduction in carrying capacity will occur. The land. use pattern and density on the project site would change. The visual nature of the site would change. s Demand for public services and electrical energy would increase by a Minor increment. r ANY SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CIIANGI S WHICIi WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSAL SHOULD IT BE I1.![�LEMENTED Placing structures and roads on vacant land is considered essentially irreversible. Newly developed residential areas tend to remain in such uses for very long periods of time: In addition, large -' amounts of nonrenewable and limited resources (building materials v.nd fuels) would be consumed during the construction phases, Although approval of a Zoning change a.- subdivision map necessarily an irreversible actiorl; it � does provideat entitlementor construction of permanent structures, GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS The successful completion of thisp' r btvners of nearby or similar oject could encourage r to initiate new PA -C subdivision proposals: The Sp only ec f is growth inducing impact of this y P ,project is an in creased nixed for anew fire station in the area, The project may also increase t}Ye demand for additional coinme"' al ser�ricos in the comm�.tnity of rorost Ranch, also to discussion of Cumulative Impacts on pages 23 and 29.) _27" E The protection of prime agricultural land is the major concern in assessing short-term vs. long-term environmental goals in California. Although this project site has some nearly level land, on-site soils are riot considered to be prime or potentially prime. in addition, most of the open and nearly level areas will remain as open space. Another concern in assessing environmental, goals is the energy efficiency of the project New housing can be con- structed to meet energy efficiency criteria, especially with solar designs. However, overall efficiency is affected by the energy consumption :dor daily travel to and from the pro Ject site. Since the primary destinations are located about 14 miles away, in Chico, the overall energy efficiency of the or�adct is acentltastheau;rbantof areaa similar sized project within J due to the small number of dwelling units and the short travel distance from Forest Ranch to the project site, this impact is not considered to be Bialy signi icant. Short-term effects of the project include an economic gain for the developer and an increase in construction activity and related employment opportunities. Some economic benefits will also be accrued by the county and some local businesses. Long-term effects include the essentially irreversible conversion of open space to rural residential conditions and an incremental addition to the cumulative impacts on public services caused by land development in the foothill areas. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Site -related environmental impacts have been reduced below a lovel of significance through project design. Butte County, however, 18 concerned about the cumulative impacts of a number' of developments proposed between Forest Ranch and Chico because of budgetary cunstrai.nts upon. County services. A review of projects under eonsideratioct in 1980 indicated that the County approved only 1. of 5 parcel splits proposed for the general area. Currently, however there are at least 3 major proposals under review or in preparation. Canyon park estates proposes 109 units on 1,1.00± acres. (see Vigure 5) with Primary access onto Humboldt Road, 800 foot west of its interim section With Highway 32. This project is a planned area cluster and will have community water and sewage disposal systems. Two other projet;ts, Isom -Hall and Bidwell Heights, The Isom -Hall land project are still in the design stage: 1.10-125 lots with access to Highway 32 via Santos proposes and presumably will also have community water and sewer in a.n clarlior systems. The Bidwell Heights proposal is a. for 250-500 dwoll:i.ng units stage of design with potential small commercial store • Thisp opo al will i e c fire a plus a, Tire station with 1 or 2 Fengines 3).s development la. department to assist in meetingaa critical Mill Ridge Theacced ideby proceeds in the Doe Bidwell Heights may induce growth of an additional 200 or more dwelling units. The contribution to cumulative impacts of 21 units it' is 2.4`� of the po'LttnL•itLl. 500- the i�nurteon Mile House project theThe com�- 000 lots pr cs,,.osed between Forest' Ranch an I Ch eco fire department_ munity sewer and water districts and volunteer ) although no will reduce some impacts upnduCeoimpa:ctsruponsthe Sheriff's to re proposals are evident department 1 'Establishment of numerous water, sewer and other special associationsunty can districts or homeowners some potential problem andolocal�hehalth officials pose qualified,ic ater , cemsiandsthat�n� need firm assurances that properly dividuals ate in funds prr�ethis�cannotcboanuarantQ�dan ,ythe repairs or�replacements. rel legal and fiscal. liabilities y county could. acquire deficiencies ar system failures. Rtions shott'Id establish 'benefit (impact) assessment Butte County fees to be collected by the county and oversee- contract employees the vara.ous special: or companies retained tained to provide services to districts. _Zc�� L-11 0 0 i ALTERNATIVES described in this Environmental mpnct nep t The project ecii ° c envixonmenta.l and riftg was selected after site sp ,xc;avat.ons plus The parcel was survayed for '.,iolog x cal. , .tactors were ana1, andeg• geological conditions. utility on Kcal, eolog the and q sirctyaeol,og . _ percolation tests determined the soil depths and stab ih ed level areas of the site. Additional. tnstitig established all, of an :adequate water Supp y I avnilaLiil.i.'ty ld disposali i, to r soils were suit able for leach a,e rranging from develop - A number of designs were reviewed, �� This ment of over 80 units to developintially xdducedent of a few �toe 0.. This The total n�iimber of units was ina. 32 final plan proposes 21 lots on the east side �;l oih eahighway . 0 osal for the west sad • w.. which with no development px' p f ae toxs �. Soil. and water cevelopment density- determined ensity limiting determined the d vantages The following discussion addresses the relative project. d disadvantages of alternatives to the pLopwered - ity, and an c 3.t Alternatives included are Higher Den v.r A1t� etive 1 Hi her Den"sit alternative the site would be dbeelocated on Under this �, acres. Units would gZ clustered units on 82, utilizing the entire parcel. both sides of _highway public rjrvices, roads, Advantages,- Per d8would be reduced - costs for p Cl+;;•tering more and other improvemenatsreduce development Pre ssur. cs in Surf ace units on the site may A package plant for sewage treatmcn vicinity. ht be f eas�ibl e disposal of treated effluent might im acts associated with Disadvantages. Environmental. p o upataon of the site vJoulde res�deincreancesihas�not i�een human of tater for mor action The availability Soils established. The leach±field area for the eastern p hi of the parcel Will hot ssocm�marioneon thewesternportal ion Of of the Aiken=Cohasset a reatet . the parcel are not onitubli cf serv3.cesf Would dbe sins ease eff7.uent, Demands p Electrical energy and gasoline cway 82twouldobe retluirca. Additional. encroachments on Highway Al.ternat ve 2 Lower. Densit x Pro site can re stabdivtded into fewer large p az cels septic systems, The p Jd Its tl�e cone' arcel ouzonesd neeaild General '�'lan��bl�nat� ons , hack p . rovided other' environ- tinder existing struction of 11 d�+�eL na gS orks conditions ons Iver suis Ei ed i mental xealth and p -30 Advantages Some environmental impacts rel.atod to develop- ment of the site would be decreased. Roads and road construction activities could be reduced. Traffic generation and demands on public services would be lower. Electrical energy and gasoline: consumption would be reduced. Disadvantages. Per capita costs for services, roads, and other requiredmay be ,improvements excessive. Individual septic systems may create problems on certain portions of the site. Economic return to the proponent -from the project would be diminished, reducing the likelihood oiF subdivision development. Alternative 3 - No Project Under the No Project 'Jt,ernative, the slAC wou` in its ld remain present state. Advantages. Impacts related to human occupation of the site would not occur. Potential impacts include disruption of ground surface and increased erosion, loss of vegetation and wildlife habitat, increased traffic traffic-related and hazards, increased demand for public services, and ,possible exposure of people to wildfire hazard and animal-borne diseases. Disadvantages. No environmental disadvantages can be ldentxfied for this alternative, except that a '.future ,project having'less desirable characteristics could bre proposed :for the site at some future date. Denial. of the project would not Preclude development of the site under the current ^oni.ng and General Plan designation, and any development could. create some habitat disturbance and potential for erosion. r t ■ APPENDIX l 1' PERSONS ANI) O;1i.;I(ANI7,ATIONS CONTACTED Butte COLI'Ity Sherif' f. s Department Richard B' us,1a CaxifI ortiia Department tax Transportation Jeanne Baker, A-95 Coordinator Dan Calvin, Assistant SUPerintondont; Caltrans District; 0113 Robert Slci.c�nat�i rr , Cl�i e C; E V jronmn c l Lo 3 '` Calilarnia Division dJ ll ctor Reed)District Rangel ,rarest y Batal,lio] Ch'ic,f, ' Chino Unified School District Ben Mmtthe%VS, Director Of E10I.Ment.,;ry gItI'00ca.'t ion Rolls, Anderson & Ro'71s Civil, Engineers Mike Byrd, 1 1.0joc;t Eft gi,:i eov, APPENDIX 2 ' REFERENCES Cal itornia Department ,of, 'Food and Agriculturci. ' 1978. D � > Deport on Environmental Assessment of Pestici,de� Thu u1.ato Programs, Butte County.Component. California Dopartment of Txall s sport 198q.�J-$p Traffi.o ,Vol.titnos on Cali: ornia State Highways. 'Analysts. Eco 1.980. Draft Environment al Ym iactrare tar• Can on 'Patic Estates Butte amount. Cali Cor'tyia.' `��"`�"` I x'33 nine r,Ydon page I,)oVK''mber 1, 19817 rJ f JJ P1,111p .3. Lydon ��egis�t�re°ad Geologist # 1.99 :.4Zx, APPMIX 4 SURVEY FOR RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES OF VASCULAR PLANTS CON- DUCTED OCTOBER 10, 1980, ON PROPERTY OF RAY JOHNSON AT FOURTEEN MILE HOUSE, BUTTE COUNTY CALIFORNIA A. Habitat'. The property lies in a transition zone between Yellow Pine Forest and Chaparral r habitats. Some ephemeral streams traverse the eastern part of the area, ultimately draining into Little Chico Creek. Steepbluffs occur on the eastern boundary of the Y area surveyed, and State Highway 32 crosses the site from south to north, roughly parallel with the slopes and creek. A small power line also crosses the property from north to south near the western boundary. A small loop of the old highway occurs toward the southwest corner of the site. The remains of on old building are present just to the east of a gate slightly south of the midpoint of the property ad- jacent to the present highway. Some Japanese quince bushes rsenescent peach trees, black locusts and black walnuts are associated with the old building; the area immediately adjqcent to this ruin on the east has recently been partially cleared. About 500 yards to `rhe north of this partially cleared area there is a spring that has been dammed in,a small concrete trough from.which a metal three inch pipe leads back toward the old structure. Seveeal narrow bonds of vegQtat on have been clearaa at intervals throughout the eastern portion of the property. tExcept for the various structures and clearings noted, the area appears to hrive been little disturbed in recent years. Yellow Pine Forest.Some of the typic ' al elements of this major habitat type (e.g.,< sugar pine, incense cedar, white fit) are Virtually non-existent in the area surveyed; but dominants of this forest such as yellow pines and California black oaks pare con- spicuously icuously present. Other woody species resent include wild lilac and tnanzan1tas , _ _ _ , ' Herbaceous species include several grosses# hedge parsleys, smoll-flowered dwarf flax, woolly sunflower, coyote mint, claikia, western rue dhemone, skullcap, madla, hedge nettle; agoserks bedstraws and others. Chaparral. Although this habitat type intergrades with the yellow pine forest on ' the .vest and somewhat to the north in this area; it occupies'considerable area on the east above, the steep slopes: The characteristic species present include buckbrush, --43=- -44— 2, toyon, scrub oak, silk tassel bush, manzanita, pitcher sage, buckthorn, honey- suckle and poison oak, as well as numerous herbaceous species including several grasses, rattlesnake weed, several brodiaeas; Pursh''s lotus, Hooker's plantain,, smooth cat's ear, wild iris, thin-stemirned navarretia, clovers, Fitch's spikeweed, lessingia, calycadenia, beggar gilia, Indianink p ,grass pinks, western morning. glory, purple godetia, filago, and others. Ri an. A small area of Riparian habitat, which is characteristic of areas adjacent to bodies of water, occurs in the vicinity of the spring, and to a minor extent along the margins of the larger ephemeral streams, In this particular in- stance the riparian vegetation is primarily herbaceous, with species such as - beardgrass, navarretia, horseweed, cattails, rush and umbrella sedge being conspicuous, Both common and shield-bracted monkey flowers occur by the Spring and in spots along the runoff channels, B, Rare and Endangered Species. The categories of the species here discussed are as Indicated in flit 2nd edition (1980) of the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of Cw;+fornla published by the Cal iforhia Native Plant Society, The status of same .,�` the species is contra- versial and may be Indicated' as being more sensitive on certain federal and state lists, but the CLAPS Iist has been used by most county environmental review boards (including that of Butte County) to da"e Two suralI populations of Bidwell s knotweed (Pal arum bidwelIlq )occur just � -----fig R ..._ inside (east of) the existing fence about IOU feet south of Highway�32 and about SOO feint north of the southwest corner of the property as superimposed on the aerial Photo furnished by the engineer, This species is curi•WAy recognixed as "rare but PA not endangered,', Butte fritlllaria (Fritillaria eastwoodlae), anWher species In fhe ..�._. ,.. _ _. . w sa_.. ge cater9 or y'ir (� reviously has been reported from a s,ite approximately four airline miles east southeast of this property, but 11,4 remnants of the previous season's growth Of this print were observed during the survey, and it is presumed not to be present, Brewer's roc)<et (Arabic_ brewer) var, aus third species In this cateyo,}F Inas been reported from rock faces several miles f0 the south of the site, If was hot ob- served on Hie rock faces durl g the surveys but even It any tray have gone undet3ct d if is assumed they would not fie endangered since construction in such a zone is hof planned: lZobust checker mallow (SIda.' F-0-0 tusta)0 is officially mtognIzed us -44— e 3. "rare and e111angarad," and hasbeen reported from within a few miles of tato site; A related s, OF of Sidalcea occurs in hhe vicinity of One spring, boo no remouo of the robusf-ileckel. mallow itself were obs�vved duriag the surve/+ Kinjsley %„ S*tern Peofesy'N �)f 60tu I�' ,'1' 1-1 r Meld Bort; i,• C v-0 Depctrt�n•t�t4 a�" �i' �1 a>�i',al, s .i � ��.: C (�lirornia Sloi•a Uiii v,:rsit y r Chi+zop CA r W�S_ IN 4' CHECKLIST 01"VASCULAR PIANTS THAT WERE IDENTIt'IABT+E; DURING THIS SURVEY FOR COMBER 1 C1 1980, RARE AM) ENDANGERED SPECIES PROPERTY, FOURTEEN MILK; ON THE RAY JOHNSCIN HOUSF�� ;BUTTE COUNTY, CA1,Tr0i2NTA COMMON NAMESCIANTIFI NAME Trees__ Shz bs and Vines -C Yellovr pine a ; Digger pine---------.._ :Pinus.. onderosa hisnzanita Pinus sab---in�aha Pale u►anz,anita A i!24tap�+vlos man---moi tia 1luckbzltsh Are tos��os Vivi, scid CofYeeberry Ceano� t� s c_ undatus '— California ba, R�liilitntl$i Califo, Umbellulariacal:i'ornica Verba sante Redbud Eriodictvon:oalltorn%cum Wild lilac Cercia _ocetata] s �� California0GaeA�ot�a black Oak---..� nt rrimuCaliforni Blue oak 1t.eratto kel----1- ° ji Scrub oak ueraus do lash Poison oak Q- dumosa Honeysuckle ToYicodendrcndiversilobum Pitcher ct� _ :,niaera sp, Sulk twa �+ .� yuan S�spe--- 2-hi'""n.ia oal o3:ne SnOWberry t3+ai--- r ,a fr�i Blackberry: SMEA2VIcarp08 ri�--vU1-� a Buckthczti Rub .,ue jLryinUs Toyon &s —0-r-00—bus �Cot;tonWood Het,.. e,,,,.r_omelea arbutial3a S444Wbubh OL ulus fre� m�—ii Bub�h monkey flower A hus 1----tri� °�b_a t a. Cleaatis )dt--mbi-- fidus bdountr`�in Mahogany Cle--- Maatt l.asi�ti a Cercccar us betu�-- uloi-des Grasses Wild. oats hescue A-,xq�la ep• Bunchvu"ina gras�l 1ap uhlenberQJa r3 e 6L46 001 MON NAME; SCIENTIFIC NAME Grasses (cantinued)' Soft chess Bromus mollis 'oxtail chess _ Nromus rubens Cheat grass Nromus tectorum Rescue grass Hromus catharticus Ul t grass Gastridiu;m ventricoriUM Hairgrass Aira ,aaMophylles. Annual hairgrass Descham sia danthonioides squirrelta l grass Small_ rattlesnake Sitanion hLqtrix: grass Briza minor Dogtail grass bynosurut echinatua Mediterranean barley Hor_ d,eum hystrix Beardgrass Polypogon monspeliebsis j, Other Herbacerus_p1wits Turkey mullein gremocarpus setigerus Star thistle gen. taurea salstitialis Thistle Oirsium ap. Ourly dock Rumex ari_spue 1.0rehound Meal rubium vul are Dig heronbill Rro� diem bots i'ureh s lotus Lotus purshianus Small --flowered lotus Tumble Lo_ tus micrahthus mustard 31.s�hnbrium officinc le Grass perks IC`ohlr! uI Chia veldt f�na Willow herb Epilobium sp. Common hedge parsley Torili:s heterop!&Ila Knotted hed aa.rsle p y To�g nodosa Hookers plantain planta, hookerians, California knotweed Po;Lygaiium californicum Bidwell's knotweed Polygohut bidwel;liae 00ttoriweed Micro' ils c ...-c .. P.lifdrT1j.C1.1s- ropObloro �' GaLifoarnia aoaproot alum _pomeridiantun Agoeer:Ls Il` Cseris sp. Smooth cat o ear H,yLoehoeria ALabra S, CCJM1OI NAME Ot;ller Iierbaceou9 Plants scr�NTx�rc NAGE (continued) Stnalliflowered dwarf flax nettle He li miHedge er� Woolly suntlower Staehyssp, Coyote mint F�:riop vllut llanatum Clarkia Xon--- SL della spy P rple godeti, a Wild iris Clarkia sp. CLE- Lkia 2aDLLrea 130dstraw2- her- twe i_.3. Paris'b@dstraw Galium sp. Nuttall's bedstrawGalium jxis:Lense _ Goldenrod Gam- nuttallia Rattlesnake weed Solidago sp. Bracken b8:.acus Lief] ].us Blue dicks Pterid um �,�1in ManY-flowered brodiaea Harvest DicaheloMMe, Z1 cl o�a,a D3.chelostemtna brodiaea mutt_ i,r, Grass buts Bra--oddiaea el gaans Skullcap Tri-- t__ eleia taxa Thin-stetmed Boutellaria sp. navarretia Navarretia Nava----_rr. otic it i , Western rn meadow rue hiav----varret sp; mistletoe rsojiR occiden_ a e Piiago Fhoradendron jlaveens Media Fi-- L- &O sib; 1 Snakeroot Media ep, Tillaeaani+ctja b�inata Rose 016Ver Li_"aea erectill Tomcat clover Tri--mum hirttin Gowhag clover TrifOlium trebtidb ""------- Smallhead clover Tri--'-- o—liu—m dep� Tatum Clover Tri----mum al.., Tri-- ifto.ium �'itchla s�►ikeweec� sp. Tarweed He-�ia itchi i Tarweed; G�r" ' n---d- lia cl®rum p woad nia. Aca- b__ rel -48-, -4'gi.. COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAS Other Herbaceous Plants (continued) Wild sweet pea Lat rue latifolius Lessingia Lessiiv4ia 1lemaclada Wild buckwheat Erio$onum nudum Centaury Centaurium fioribundum Beautiful centaur Y Centaurium venustum Prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola Hansen's clubmose Selegiinella haneeni Valley tassels Johnny tuck Orthocar us attenuatus Crthocarpus 2rianthus Beggar gilia Microsteris ETC -i Lis Indian pink Silene califorhica +, oldback fern Pityrogramme. triangularis Hot ruck penstemon Penstemon deustus Purdy's penstemon Penstemon;hete m hylla var, urd i Lupine Lu ?.zi' a op. Salisfy T-xag°PS:B.on ep budleya budleya Symosa ' Western morning glory _CalYate�i,a accidentalis Checker mallow Sidalcea op. Cattail VU)_aa latifolia Horseyeed Cu zaeatasdeneie ;I'oosestrife Lthrum ap.- Umbrella sedge C eros era&roste Rush Cinquefoil Juncuo ap. Potentilla op. Dodder CCusouta op. Aster Aster spe Wild onion allium amplectene Douglas' sandwort Areparia ao_ uglasi Viddleneck Amsinckia intermedia Introduced Woody Species in the Vicinity of Old Dwelling Black locust Rot, ini.a pseudo-acbcia JApanese quihce- �dQ@nomel@& 1 egonaria Peach PruhUM Q%ygda loides Black walnut duEz &Ea -4'gi.. rAPPENDIX 6 WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST'S REPORT RAY JOHNSON PROPERTY -PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT I-labItat, Description The area is upper foothill habitat with patches of grassy area, chapparral, oak forest pine forest, and mixtures of those vegetation +ypesi The western edge of the property is dissected by Highway 32. East and west sides of the property drop precipitously into canyons. The proposed development site is onthe relatively flat area bordering Route 32. An I ntermittent stream traverses part of the eastern development site. Value as Wildlife Habitat The value of the area as wlidl'ife habitat varies as does the habitat. The diverse structure of the land and vegetation provides for an assortment of niches. First in importance are the areas with mature trees. The trees provide food (acorns, pine nuts) for numerous animals as well as shelter in the forms of tree cavities, perches, and nest sites. They also provide nrr-1- - lon from e;.vir�nmental factors s i nce trees prov i de shade d I i n i sh w I lid, ao6 re i d Ue prevriftt eros i on. Trees help to retain soli and atmospheric moisture, making the habitat more suit- able for other plant as well as animal species-. Pine forests provide different kinds of food and habitat benefits for wildlife than do oak forests; pine's and oaks are each relatively more Important to certain animols, a-gw squirrels prefer acorns to pine nuts, but their overall wildlife value 18 probably similar. Chapparral is composed of brush which is primarily evergreen and produces berry- like fruits. It typically, as it does here] groes In dense stands which provide excdllent cover and food for small and large mammals. SCgns of deer were abund- and through the chapparral trails, deer beds, and heavily browzed buck brush Weanothus sp.) Wore evident. Chapparrai provides ample food and cover for birds as and a largo number of birds ware seen in If. The open grassy areas are of least value to wildlifey but they are of some value as dense grass does harbor a number of species of animals and provides a gond supply of ilmlted kinds of food. Star thist10 and weld oats yield abundant seeds which are eaten by some species of seed -eating birds ,and rodents, Dense grass provides nest sites for birds such as Meadowlarks and is Inhabitated by large numbers of pocket grophers and mice. ' The small intermittent strRam that traverses part of the grassy area east of the highway appears to be iopur;tant to wildlife. The entire area is very dry during the summer and fall; the only source of open water seems to be the small shallow pools In parts of the stream bed. Around these pools was abundant bird life using the water for drinking and bathing. Door tracks were abundant and'a deer was even nearby. General Wi'idiife Observations s to be large. Ample evidencO of other mammal adtivi anon o this Deer bed.,, trails, and browze are ver evident; the deer tucha'seburrows tracks and/or scats of skunks, rac.coohsy tivity was found r � � squiereis rabbits, rats and grophers. Large numbers of Wintering or migrating birds were seen to _5C�: