HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-62 SPECIFIC PLAN & REZONE 5 OF 15j
M SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM COMMITMENTS OF R] SOURCIaS;
in its undevelopedstate, the project site has value as tvildlife'llabitat ,and watershed, I
and this value will be reduced substantially by the conversion to residontial use. After
construction, the site will take ,on long-term value as a location for rural homesites I
offering the amenities of country living on the fringes of the Chico urban area,.
The preservation of agricultural land on the western side of the Chico urbanized
area has long been a stated goal of planners and community residents alike. To protect
the fertile ,and productive agricultural lands, the areas east of Chico have been
considered 'for development, .if wildlife and watershed values cah be preserved.
The project is located primarily in chaparral, a vegetation commur)ity which is well-
represented in Butte County. A review of the vegetation map prepared for the 19 ( 0
Update of the Land Use Element of the Butte County- General. Plan indicates f
approximately 64j000' acres of chaparral are present in the Butte County foothii.l5.
Approximately half of this area - that portion lying north and west of the Town of j
Paradise -- is protected by the 40-acre ;minimum parcel size specified in the Open and !'
Grazing Land Use category.' The remainder is designated almost entirely Agricultural-
Residential, leaving it exposed to small-parcel development, Those . ehapa.rral areas lying
within the Central Butte Study Area (for ;;rhich a zoning study is underway) and thoae
areas near Oroville and to the southeast should be reviewed so the valuable chaparral C
habitat car! 'be'sui'tably protected.
The Bidwell ileiahts project is Within 'an area designated for Agricaltural
Peaidential use, 1 to 40 acres per dwelling units adjoining a large e5cpacnse of
protected Chaparral whichis designated as open. and. grazf:►g. Loss of tn- vriid-
life habitat world represent about 4 of the estimated 64;000 .acres or Cra,parral
in the footi.,dlls of Butte county.
Watershed values `on the 'project site, although reduced by development, will be
preserved to a great extent by retnaining open areas, project ;mitigation measuv.es and
cluster development patterns. Adjacent areas will remain in 40 acre mn nimlar, �Sarcel
sizes; under the Grazing and Open !.,and, designation.
Some short-germ comm'itment's of resources will occur during' the construction, ,
phase, when fuels, labor and build'irig materials evil; be pUt to beneficial use. irk the
longer terrn, energy for home heating and transportation back and forth to Chico will', be
used on an on-bong basis. Scenic qualities of the aitt
will also cha7ae, from natural
chaparral to chaparral interspersed with homes and residential landscaping.
--46-
a
X. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
Approval of this project could result in growth on: several fronts. rhe tai base of
the County would increase by the amount of the assessed valuation of tlio project, with
corresponding amounts of taxes 'becoming collectable;
Subdivisions in adjoining areas to the north and south could :be frac„ilitated by the
precedent of this approval, together with the improved access, the public Water system,
the local public services (fire protection, security guard), and the utility extensions
(power, telephone, television cable) which will be es ablisi�ed to serve the Sidwell
Heights development., Improved road access already exists, and is not. contingent upon
project approval. To the extent possible, the developers of Bidwell heights would like to
limit access to adjoining properties to emergency access only to maintain a degree of
privacy. To the extent they are successful, subdivisions to the east and west of this
project have independent access and are not dependent on this approval. Such projects
arephysically isolated by steep y are therefore somewhat isolated from
a. canyon walls; and
the growth -inducing effects of this project. In any case, such developments would be -
much less dense due to steep topography and sewage disposal
constraints.
There are currently two other protects underway in the vicinity. Canyon
Park Estates,, a Stsecific Plan, PA -C Re-' ane aril Tentative Subdivision, pa*oposeti
1C�9 residential
parcels on 1050 acres T 4 is located it Section. ll -l9, Tz2li,
R:E, The other project for lsattz-Hal has nog been submitted to the Ca«nty of
FAto for review yet. An esEiirated 1.17 to 12,5residential Lots are prof:ased; on
the 960 ocrF;� +site in Sections l, :, ll and 12, 122N, R2E. . Far reference, the
Biiwel.l l7eigh„ts project is in 'Sections 6, 7and 18, T2211, Tg3E and Section 124
TA Id, R2E.
The total proposed population frOT thv three projects, within close proxihiitw,r,
is approximately 1680 pc�esf�: r ', ts2C iw+eJ lin una to � . Th total, number of
dwelling units is speculative at thin point. The .fi&ure of x.,61, person--, per
haasehold (1980 Census figure;.)' was useito arrive at the .figure oX 1620 <persans.
Bidwell Ileigl7tt would contribute about 1.,000 persons to that total,
It should also beHated that the >+ourteen dile llnuse l o an'-- and Subdivision
will add to the curl:ul.ative effects, Part cal.arly (raffia onto Highway 2 toward
Chico. Th`8 21 dwelling unit ;praposal is an a 168 sore site adjacent to
Highway '32, about 14 miles northeast of Chico
REFERENCES
PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
State of California
Michael Retiornar
Air Resources Board
Ed Y"otter
-
Susan Scott,
Richard HaiMWIi professor,
Chico State University
Department of Geography
Jim SnoWdeft
Fish and Game Department
Boil Mapes
Hector Reed ,
Forestry Department
Transportation DepartmentBob (CALTRANS)
Sam JBurrow
ohnson
Gena Atshier
Bill Wells
Dick Dyer
Robert Skidmore
Health Department -Office of Noise Control
Jerome Lukas'
County o f Butte
_
Air Pollution Control District
Richard Booth,
Environmental Health Department
Tom Reid
froward. Snyder
Dan Costello
Fire Department
Chief Dick 'filler
Charles woods, advance
Planning Department
Planner
Steve Streeter
Public. Works De artrnent
Hobert Jones
Ede-11
Stuart ell
Wa.l.xarr, Chaff. �
Richard Brush; Lieutenant
l Sheriff's Department
City of Chico
Tom l,rzndo Director
t Planning t?epartmentl;d
p tlrreci Plrtnner
Unified School District
y
gen Matthtws, Di redox' of
Eletnentury Education
APPENDICES
AITEIID17k A
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To be completed by Lead Agency)'
Project /f
82-62
ERD Lo(
82=-03-o2-02
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent Bidwell Heights Land Company
2. Address and Phone Nwnbex of Proponent;
PiOi Box 3040
Chico, Ca. 95920
91-1727 _
3. Date of. Checklist Submitted
_
4; Agency Requiring Checklist butte County Planning
lDepartmei��
5. Name of Proposal, if applicane Bidwell; Heli 1ti�rjand
Company specific
plan, rezone and st bdivision., -creating rural l omesites
on Portions of 1200 -acro
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
site.
(Explanations of all "yes" ani "maybe" answers
are required
on attached sheets.)
YES
MAYBE NO
li Willro
P Phe osal result
rth4sig
Enilt
a Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic structures?
b. Disruption, displacement, com-
paction or overcovering of the
soil? x,
c., Change in topography or groond
surface relief features or
removal of topsoil? X
dD'e'struction, covering or mod i-
fication of any unique geologic
or physical features?
x
e Increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either On-
or off.- site?
X
fL Changes in deposition or
erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, depo-
siition' or erosion which may
modify the channel of a river
or, stream or the bed of this;
ocean or any bay, inlet or
1a`k i '?
X
g. Lo s of prime agr is°ulturally
productive soils outside
des ignated' urban areas?
X
YES MAYBE
NO
i. Reduction in the amount of wager
-otherwise available for public
or private water supplies?
J, Exposure of people or property
to water related hazards such as
xc
flooding?
4. Plant Life Wii1 the proposal 'result in
substantial:
a. Loss of vegetation or change in,
the diversity of species or number
of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs-, grass, crops, micro-
flora and aquatic plants)? X.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered
x o
species of plants? r
ce introduction of new species of
;plants into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any
X
agricultural crop?
5. .Animal• Life. Will the proposal result in
sustantals
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of, any species of
animals (birds, land ahima10
including reptiies,$ fish, and
shellfis?h, benthi.c organi ms
insects or Imicrofauna,)? x_—
b Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered
:X
`
i
species of animals?
o. Introduction of ne-a species of
animals into an area, or, resu1C
in a barrier to Che migration
or movement of animals? X
k
d., iteduction of, encroachment upon,
or d,eteriora'tion' to existing
fish or wildlife habitat? X
Y
6. No Lge, ivill the proposal result
ids ant i al K
.. notse levels? .:
ay, Increases in
xC
additional vehicular movement?,
YES
MAYBE NO
Y_
b, Exposure of people to severe
noise levels?
x
'7.
Light and Clare. Will the proposal
produce signiz:icant light or glare?'
x
8,
Lund Use. Will the proposal result
in a 'significant:
a;. Alteration of the planned land
use of an area, or establish a
trend which will demonstrably'
x
lead to such alterar.ion?
b. Conflict with uses on
adjoiningro erties or con-
pp
f.d rectea-
'l ct withest,abl she
tional, educational,, religious
or scientific uses of an area'?`
X
y.
Natural Resourcesi Will then proposal
result in substantial-:'
a. Demand for or increase in the
rate of use of any natural
X,
resources?
b. Depletion of any non-renewable
X
natural resource?
10.
Risk of Up<iet . no.es the proposal
'involve a risk of an ;explosion or
the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to,'oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset
x
conditions?
11.
Population, Will the proposal,
signi icantly alter the location,
distribution,_ density, or,grow'th
rate of the human population of an
area or physically divide an
established cbmniUnity or facilitate
development of adjoining properties? _
12.
Hous n Will the proposal 8ianifi-
cantly affect existing housing, or
create a det�and for add Ytonal
housing?"
13.
Transportation/Circu!ation. Will the
proposal result in:
a. Generation of, substantial:'
additional vehicular movement?,
YES
MAY68 NO
b. Significant effects on existing
parking facilities, or demand
for new parking?
x
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
X
d. Significant alterations to
present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or
goods`?
x
e. rail
ottwaterborne,
rair traffic?
x
f. Increase in traffic congestion or
hazards to motor vehicles;,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
x
14. Public Services. Will the proposal
have an ettect upon, or result in a
substantial need for new or, altered
governmental services in any of the
- following areas:
Ca Fire protection?
x
b. Police protection?
X,
c. Schools?
x
d. Parks or ;other 'recreational
facilities?
X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
X
f. Other governmental services?
X`
L5. E n e r gy 14111 the proposal result in
a. Use of substantial amounts of
fuel or energy?
b. 'Substantial increase in demand
upon' existing`sou'rces of energy,
e ui're t `e deve� o' en of
or r h pm
en' �- p.
x
new sources of energy?
16. Util.iti_es. Will the proposal' result
in L,a need .for .new systems, of su'b-
stant.1a! alterations `to the. .following
utilities;
a. Power or natural gas?
x
YES
MAYBE LNo
b. Communications systems?
X
C. Water
d' Sewer (will gunk line be
extended) providing capacity
to serve new development)?
X
e. Storm water ;drainage?
1.7.
Human Health. Will the proposal
a. Creation oany health hazard
Or potential health hazard
(excluding
mental health)l
h
b• Exposure of people to Potential
health hazards?
X.
18.
Solid Waste. Will the proposal result
n
zany szgnificanC impacts associated
with sol
-id waste disposal or litter
control?
19.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
1n the o struction
or any public
aesignated or recognized scenic vista"
open to the public? Will the proposal
result in the creation
of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
Public view? mill; the proposal
significantly alter the character of
t`he area?
x
20.
Recreation. Will the proposal e
-rsu t
i
In n an impact upon the quality or
quantity of existing public recrea-,
tion facilites?
x
21:
Archaeolo ical/Historical. Will the
ro osa
P P esu ;kIn an a aeration of
a significant archaeological or
historical, site, structure, objeCb
or building?
x
212
MandatorySignificance.
a Do Ot the projecthave the potential,
to degrade the
quality .of the-
en'Vfronment, subs Cantia1iy reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species; c use _a Fish oar wildlife
F-- 6
m
Bidwell DISCUSSION, p 2
}
3f ConstructiOTI and improper maintenance of ro,nds ur homesites
near drainages may contribute silt, increasing turbi.(la.ty of: surface
waters; storm runoff traversing homesites and roads could carry
residues of petroleum, pesticides and other toxic st,�'I stances typical
of urbanizing areas,
3h,i: Aquifers could be cut by excavations ,for hop'caites or roads
:gin hiJ) wells for water
llsides, Groundwater }dill lie w :titdravn Hiro ii;
supply; adequacy of groundwater supply for sustained yield should
be verified.
3h: The Environmental Health Division indicates that ;areas proposed
fox high density on septic systems will require proven soil depths
of over seven feet located where tests indicate sewage will not
percolate on stbstratas. The existing well, yielding over 300
gallons per minute, could serve much of the rezone; area. Additional
well sources would need to be developed to assure ample supplies for
domestic use and fire protection. Water avail abi.7.;i,ty is not con
firmed throughout the rezone area.
3j Flooding downstream is not expected to increase -significantly
due to this project because of the comparatively large size of the
drainage basin.
4a: Clearing, for access roads and homes could remove a significant
proportion of certain vegetation types, depending on placement of
homesites
4b: Bi.dwell.'s, knotweed was observed on the site by the botanist
on several slopes_. Mitigations were not deemed necessary.
4c: Human habitation inevitably brings new species of house, garden
and landscaping plants into a natural area.
5a,c,d: Construction of- access roads and homes would eliminate some
wildlife and encroach upon the existing wildlife ]iab - tat. This will
_
reduce the wildlife carrying capacity Of the site. Animals intolerant'
of man's presence,; or those whose specific habitat type has boe-
reduced or eliminated will relocate to other, areas initially and
may displace existing wildlife or die off. Any dogs which are
allowed to. roam free may bo,come� local predators incl chase 'deep` and
other wildlife a road kills from increased ve} iC1e `�raffic ;would
also increase with developutent,,
The Californla Department of Fish and' Game shows'' this area -as ,part
"o F the Dalt Tehama Deer Herd �vini:er range on the Area, of Special
Bi. ologi cal Xm ortance map Forty acre minimum parcel .5 (or a cluster
arrangement of dwell.in,g' unfits with comparable ef�ect� are remixed
to insul'e migratory deer herd survival:
If the projected development density is'approved, they anticipate
the 1200 acres will be destroyed for wildlife habitat. O.f-site and
cumin at:i.ve impacts to Little C31ico Creek anel the ��il dlife haba:tat
are a180 stated to be key concerns
`8idwe11 DI'SCUSSTON, P. 3
y ti inc
levels over the quiet ambiens levels in a natural. otting.
Ga: Increase in road traffic and human activity wc�tilt �rease noa,sc
8a: The proposed project involves parcel sizes lat'gor than the one -
acre minimums specified.for the Agri.cultu74al-Resid'oiitial land use
category, which covers about 90 4` of the property.. however, how much
larger would be appropriate depends on the applicatA on of "conditional
criteria" which are subject to interpretation. Appropriate, densities
in light of General Plan policies will be determi.norl through the.
public hearing process
8b: The development could affect wildlife habitat use of surrounding
areas by the introduction of noise, traffic, humans and their domestic
animals.
Caltrans comments that the project appears to be inconsistent with
the goals of the State's Urban Strategy, i.e, to use land that is
immediately adj aceiit to urban development whets expanding beyond
existing urban and suburban areas,
9'a,b: Some amount of natural resources would be used for construction,
of roads and residences. Upon completion, the use of non= enewtable
i°esources for heating, air conditioning and appliance operation-, as
well as commute travel would occur at a sustained level.
11, 1Z: The residential area would significantly increase the popu-
lation density in the Doe Mill Ridge 'area. it could, by precedent
and growth -inducing improvements, facilitate development of adjoining
properties, resulting in, an increase in the population growth rate
o this area to satisfy the demand for additional housing The
tureau of Land Management believes that continued development in
'this area will eventually have a significant impact on the: public
lands. They further encourage a, rezone of the projec area to enable
orderly and proper_ growth.
13a,c,d: The proposed 330-385 units could generate ap'prox?mately
2300-3700 new daily trips on highway 32. Present tl'affic counts are
under-: 2000 trips/day. Caltrans, is concerned about tr4ffic impacts
to Highway 32 and Santos Way. Left -turn channeli.zation would be
Warranted at that intersection with the cost bovno by��the applican,t
y to share in'the cost.
The ''requested that
unless the Count is able
needed roadway improvements within the State right-of-way be studied
as tothe construction -related impacts, i.ncluzling vegetation removal,
and grading. The Public works Department states that "for a project
ofthis sizeze and density; gravel. road's are inadequate'" . A circulation
route from the southerly enol sliould be required. They note the
project area within Section: 1.8 is not within the PxJ sti-n Mountain
Recreational Area as designated on the map.
13{: Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles could result
from the i.ncreasetl turning movements at Santos Way and Highway; 32,
and fromheavier traf'ir on narrow 1 -tical rr�ads such as Doe b9ili Roatl.
13:i,c}tiell DTSCUSslON, p. 4
1,4a ' Some form of ensured :fire protection will be nocessary since
this chaparral area is one of high fire danger. Pvov i si.ons may have
to be made for an adclitional, firetruck and adegia'ato water supplies.
1,4b County she or other police protection ar"c nat reacli.ly
available for the residents; new routes or a shi.i"t :}.I� l�e�sonn:el may
be required to cover this large development, or the residents would
have to be content with a low level of police protect,i rah.
14c The Chico Unified School District indicates thw proposed
subdivision is 12 miles pins from the nearest el.emontory school
(Parkview) and S miles plus from the nearest juna.o.►" (Chico Junior)
and senior (Chico Senior) high schools. Bus txanspo'), t:ation would
be available unless District policy changes.
lluildirt' a. new school, expansion of
present school, sites, and
busing of students are future alternate means oT housing additional
students. Any expansioa funds must come, in part, f'ro,n the developers.
The increase of up 'to 585 families would contribute about 193 children
to the school district, possibly enough to necessitate school
expansions.
1,4d: The use of parks and other recreational facilities will occur
by potential residents of the project to an undetermined degree.
14e: Due to additional, traffic on local unpaved or unimproved roads,
the County may have to improve or maintain certain ones to maintain
safety:
14f: The provision of public services such as building inspection
ari,d mosquito abatement will be more costly to provide to this outlying
location.
The City of Chico commented about the County's ability to provide
services to`the area.The levels of service proposed aria mechanisms
to pay for those services will, be addressed in. the Specific Ilan...
15,a: Increased 'amounts o, gasolinewould be used in commuting to
Chico, electricity and gas would be used in significant amounts i"or
home heating, G.00ling and appliances.
1Sbt Substantially' increased demand would be placed. on the electrical
power distribution system,especially as a load increase in summer
months.
16a,h+ Telephone systems would have to be extended to the pxopertY,
ed
as would natural ,gas, unless the residents u��clectrxcity solar
1 w� o I or bottled gas .
PC`�E maintains the power line which traverses part;o.fi t`he s to. A
lb foot minimum set m irc'the centerline o f the facilities is.
recommended for homes and wells,
_J
Bidwell DISCUSS i,o;,', Via. S'
16C Refer to item 311.
a:6e: Surface runoff may be sufficiently increasec�' drainage System may d
by impervious
surfaces that at some point a stormwat5
to be installed. y _.liave
l7a,b; Potential, malfunctJ
loning of septic systems could create
a
honith hazard in which ,ground, and surface` water cotirlGl be exposed
to wastewater` contamination. T}1e
abid skunks in the vicinity would. P 'expose o I'Ottl:csnakees and
hazards people to potential health
1.9: The residential development could detract from scenic
of views from Highway 32, and may alter the ager,-� qualities
the area. I space character of
The Bureau of Land 1'Ian8gement has expressed concern
about
on the scenic qualities of the canyon. Architectural desitn, impacts
compatible. with the environs, is recommended, b
21: An archaeological survey has been performed
recommended since no significant archaeological sites wererobserved,
22a: Most of the wildli=fe habitat would be eliminated by the proposal
'It full. buildout. I
22b: The project would provide housing appartunities in an a•
General Plan designates for Eventual residential use at den .rea the
between 1 and 40 acres szties
balanced with Long-term goals oft }�eteedensitral ylaxll need to be
Plan such as discouragiirg
urban development isolated from existing developrnen't and urban centers
unless such. a ryeed can be determined (Open. Space Elements regulating
development in identified; winter deer ranges to Facilitate
vival of deer herds ,- g ng,
the sur -
r (Land Use Element) and encouraging adequate fire
p 'otection cervices in all areas of population growth and high
recreation use (Safety Element) g
22c; Project impacts which, though individuala�� limited in
or scope, add up, to make the project a source of Considerablee.11everity
particularly when vleived together with, acl'ninin pact,
impacts; propose
sed developments
J
� io�o
erosion and stream sedimentation
reduction o:F wildly fe habitat
significant increase in local' population densit�r
increase in vehicular air,pollutant emissions, gasoline
use and traffic :Pram Chico commute
earthquake hazards
groundwater availability and.supplyenergy co'nsumptxan
increased traffic, impact on on- and off-si.
ulatte roads,
ci•ci.on pattern
�,
�':�%`;•
+j *� �
e.
��; y��
�
c�,u ,�\ 0
� �.
\:�
��
® _ 1
:� • "' �.'. �
Ah ill-d"efincd Zane of small l Y fatales incl fxacLues e.tnds
r
Lydon paCIG' C'lL'rrn
Uctober 1, l�l£Sl
this Spot, thr blocks f011 many yoars ► • torn a ago f . `
! 1.41 Y (+r of mt�lr3 -
flow trfatt2rial just uphill: T}Ie blocks arra SA, r• rres�y , falai
erasion of the fiat ? onch In future yea
roll downhill. `"he southrs might t~ zttasn i:ltr�m to
c,r�
y spot i.s occupied by ;1 ls)rge flat
black; restinq near the crr,s
t of a small ridue.
be stable in its l t a?sia��ars� topresent position, and the slopes dowr11Ii11 from
it are riots steep as at the northerly blocks.
Edges at bluffs in the Love'ay Basalt should be ,reciarded
generally unstablo with respect to rockfalls, b�pkausc the racks
typically is crosscut by numerous $,Mall fracturek
Mitigations that can be
usr_d to reduce k azard from roc}.falls
includc, (1) not buildingciz;ellings at the ?ease car nt5ar thn eco
of blQ `_ fs in the'uscalt and Lore 'p qo
,3 y, r-speci ally whore erosion
has begun to undercut the bluff; and (2) aLoidinq areas dots=r
slope from the latge blocks described earlier, or below any other
urge blocl�s that might later be discovered.
primary effect of an earthquake is
erti
Ground shaking, the }ioriZontal and �,° ,
cal vibration ax the
grotand that can result in dar»age to buildin-jS
tanks - pi.pes, storage
etc. ��+ condary effects it�
,;lumping, and rackfallcluc?r� liquc�;action, ltarc;ir,
{
Liquefa�:tiort which; can, he a �1,
,clranul��r, sa turated soil �r
problem
In loose)
Exs to create on of a
li uic -1i10
condition on i.n sea l by cribration. Lurchi.na and
4 -
5lum?aa:ncr, Which -aro Most ,
sn ore .� n 1.0050, granular sail, rofers
to motrnc?s; dep,si:ons, CIrld largo r
t cr4tc?.s ?ay vi bra-
.an: :3lacl:s Of rcii~l, that ro on they verar, Of -511are cv aSoot}-
times shaken lc�nsV during an earth�gta- -
?�.e.
-`Iecauso {fle laosr+, ,s�t'�iZCC_y' '
C) sail most
slab l'l; t to a l tC;Gxc?Caci.S cin 1 ltirc'Y-nq j and slulxt ii na r(v, not x,r�seni
45th Lht sitr, L+»acct t <. p
p prrh�tpw, i.ctttir�ti���t{1y' �llc,it�� tzttc�rmittont or
�`12'-c� "atlnd s �'r�t,ttti cc.attrt��:, tcsCa prrac:,V'S s
do not
ci .SoYtStltL1�
i 41tt fi l4ritl t. tiro ;c! >°d stn thr� i L
cOtt.id bo tl problem
I rt, c's i CIH ti +l ttik tl 0irthql. aJT[ 0-1nCil1o0d
rFti ih.f?
c;, -O's dot,, !"1 L, Lid l.tt i:11ta'i 11,C] 11.��r2,9; anii
Lydon" pac4(-' twc 1v4
O toi)c,r. 13 , 1981
`a`hc, sevcrrity of, ground shr.lking depends msaa.nay on Lhcr da•stance
to the causative oartJZqul:Othe strencJth, of the
and tht? nature of the ;,oil and rock at tho affoctedite. The
strenc,th of earthquak(—.,s is oxseci as mafian tit #e (( ichtr_r
scale) , and the sevcrit.y, of damage in inhabited aroo s is express
L as intensity (Modified x.esrcalli scale)
Significant earthquakes wi thin about 27 mi of tli� sat.. in
cli.tde one of 'I (magnitude) 5.7 near Stirling City J,tt 19_10, � X1.6
north of Bidwell; Park east. or Chico in 1966, and :'1 ra.7 at Palermo
in 3,9715., In addition; earthquakes ha,,Anu an int r,+yjkli;i. L.y of %Ij at
their source (magnitude not recorded) occurrod. in 1942 east of
atirlinq City and !1-)45 sout,l7 of l.`aradi e: (aeai ct 11.1 1978, Div.
Mines and Ceolory 1978) .'
[1-araplarasinra part of the 'Modified ;NSercall scale:
V1 Weak piaster and unreitafokcod adobe crack; windows
break:
V11 Weak masonry damaged; .some crams in good but unreinforc
ed Masonry,
x a C � ` masonry ged somt� dam-.I qo to
V7 ,c�oci but unr,�:�nforceci rra�,-anr� datt':a'
reinforced structures With good mortar and workmanship;
lapse panel walls thrown out.
Several smaller earthquakes within 6 mi of, the :site, mainly
to 'the east; occurred following the 1975 0' o��i,lle earthquake
(Maras and L,ihdh 1978) ,laile not si ritiaiicant in tprrr,s of
r damaq5; tlrti° irac3acatrthat t1leaJ7e of linramonts r�fithin which
the site li as is an arca of onooiftcj seismic activity,
>ml inferrod fault SI-10Vn oil Map lti-1 0� the t.:ounty general
flan is t}7! sane a:, the litrcat'etit °'that e.�t!t7dsou.t:h�:cst iron
the center of tho tibrt.h litiv O. Sec. 18.
%eta:use ,the Kaitc la es'
ta
taitlzi:n tort:}torn r:.tenion iof the
E'OoL* ills f`oult �yOt r_,M) and bocaus 0 the jyst~em is c)L?nerally
cc�nsicic:rr�d c,dl)ab1ra prcicltrci'ttq ut tit,can Lucio G. 5 dartficluako. Cevici-- a
once; from t►cmor6 s Pw_i.veAte a,nd I,Oclic 24tuditss is summari`�ricl an
1?iv �4irie5 and Nfooi.cl _°' .it�a,.t 1q7� e it `is rotisotaablplat nine; to
.p ,; •:ho Sita to bo s.ub,�'m4tod to a mac}nitttc;r� cart-.1igU'yke,}
o� c.rLa t.
.��. a :,� f',
,1 A
r ;. �<< I l/j � a t 1 � 1 • I� `+�.�','', , -rct` � ..% �' j+r .I+"/' .��. �',:'v` � lF.,, 4. � .'_,t,» r ,`!,jlt �� � � '
l EY.pLANATI ONj •',�rl.{ f ! i, :; . ,� �� �s+'�7,� / J!': ii +'�^: �... ;,
a. T scanForma tion
T
GEOLOGY
CSF Ate' ARF -A
� ] ,./Ll YJW 4
L, 1,,ove;joy Basalt � _~»� _ ,,� ��-
�+ '1;1� l !' �1ANG Lx'T'PLF CHICD
Chico FormationCREEK AND DOE h11 L,L i
CRR A r
boi.ndary bet=ween `' j' j°' .r. :, ti X1,1 1 RIDGE
resck ars:ts; dashed
ere obscured.,41
-where
ible e on » ''„_:' c '+ , : `,' > 11 r ,
fractureS V'sair r r , ~max' "-- �.I `"move r r�
'photos; dashed � t,>*-- f `~�., ',►� , I ,,� ; . , .1 J Iy� . �-
1 where taken from ; .. Q, `y .,y`a�
ha rwoad, et: a l , 19,81 T ',” �. ;? �- l'� ``� I �'^
1 i �• ""tt X07{ i w .-` '' `.,,• z --.,
• r I w �""
z property boundary ► —' r
f 1
at:ian approximate
pJ 1oc^ T^
r., F µ. � y �,...✓`. Jv.l'• ��rr r�a •, ��� .. .... � .._ ,'. ave.♦
T.r
f ,
�� _)�^�� �' - /J ,+ � 1 � �•t. .t. ��/!'Y u,J i' �'•t"2: � �, , `` ' I � ��.yr, vv � r.✓ r,�"'-,��
1¢J�+ A { i+lNtl ') �'`I,' �'� v� , ✓'.-"1 ' I g;,«
• r
•r
A; LYDON
GeologistElm
.. i _
{ryw r
LLL ' •
71
n 1 �
+ ,«-�/� w. yr .._.�..� .. .�.« --_• . � � y/� � .,,;,, , ,,r . �.� , r
a
Y 1
,
.I
np.
2000
I»y;, - �..,,�,.� �" 1 Y. X11 n� ^,'` �''•„�.�'�1��i � t::_.»z.
%! �` ° 's e � . , r'! ' .r .� a ... � �'r ",�- ' .y,w.....,...� .:: —a a �.W «.w , r., , , � /'r'� f / , r, •
�"u` GCa 1 e
Int v `: x'" ,�*`'.. n,.r „(') , . 1"• �� 'Iv ,
� • � � 1 � � r�i av P' ,� j� � "" " �„ 1
t
6
rte' I � , Y d �� '*+ r• i= l l r�`" y1 . ,.e,--, .�,
-r
1 �
+
r, f 1 /I :+«.� � /.• �� t� ,� J i ; ` y ,�. �� /f L'rr�r X"� 1 � � � �.. - ' •a' a:�+ • f �:. ft ,
r Ex. iANATI ON f.. �r�/. ......; (,� � !'.a �. ..` 't. �:�\sal: `•'{^ ��•7t F: //, .�,) 5� �` -■•ill y.;,,++• .. 1 r / ,
\
r T` ���:scan Formation ,1.� , ' • ,
�.._. �w....'1 x .,r1'- GEOL,C�r,Y CJC' fel;
y r r _ r
tR
L 1,ov e - o y Basalt t �;.
L
Chico Formation:. {!• +�� r�1;Ul`C 1'I'TL CHICO
C CVEEK AND DOS: MILL
boundary betweenRI DG E
rock units; Mashed
l r
.., "
where o�soured
Fractures visible on 6
photos dashed
✓' I w17ere taken from
air.`'�`� � � ���,.«.� � ✓ �� �� _ "`r' _
Harwood et al. 1981 T I. "w ,: ( �„',-,'` �'�'"� .� �?•
property botindary,
w , location approximate `j1f 4. �f�✓ •��y �% r��., A<—� 1 �r 1'
NZ 11
,.. ,,_J�^ F is •f r) .. / , . » , � '""
a ,
r.
P'. A, LYDON �. ��` rte; 12 I ='
GBQlogl$t L
_ r
�.yy f.�"\.../ ,' irr� I v rl,i ,~.rr ' tt..i.«, :/'. ~� 4'•'"^f+ 'J/:` !. ! *"k.(y i,?> �✓ i
r� / � l `tr-"."' ./' a' w , � � '°`` � ...! r I T r"' . : ••� r Y � r if � 'I
_ 0 2000
...�:,.... +..:w ./.,{.�,a..r.... ,.. x ..r... 'scales tt. !''` ° r ;.`� `•';},.. '�,,—:a,.�,f.........(.:�, , i , e
`• r
�� ��`' s � � . + 3� �t` • ' !'�I��j. r%f�i�✓t"1 � Jr Y �%{y�ilt ,•.�+�/J .lvu .�`a `? t• � ' � R ' { � r ' % ! r ,`.`
c.
,
JON M. ANDERSON'
- CON.6ULTINO, 'CIVIL CN.6INEC'R'
.966 MYRTLE AVENUE. YCLEPMONC 19161 343.7396: -
CHICO. pALWORNIA 95926
EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION LOG
* * •# * '* * * * * •k ?k •k 'k `� �f * * � * * * � 4r � 'k * '>4 �# t�t'k #'
$r •k tk aAr •k •k 9t'r�' '� ��' * sti �t'fr
Ht'k ye >1c �r •k •dr'�t 4Ie �r •* dr aAr �Ir `k 9r •fie "1r •& �'-� •!e •aAr 'k * � ,*
Project::_,
File No � :
.�,
Location^
-�
Date.
1-1010 No
Logged By
s
core it trench . roadcu;t, channel. bank.
auger
Excavation Type. g other
drill &type
• - • s lop a
'k'k'It.'k �t 7k �r 'k'k 'k 'k yt '!t •k 7k die k •k 7k 7ti � * at' *'� ie * it s1' �e �k �r �r * 'k �r A' �c 74 Jr 1k 'k ik �f 'k YY ¢r �c �r 7k_ int �C'k kr''t •�c 'fie' �It
'N' ;�+ ' �It'Ik �e 3r''A' 1k 9t'►Y it 'k •k �k �I` %
<, Depth
Thickness
in feet.- oC Classification & Descr.. tion
�,•',`''rr�m to
f
----
.�..........................
"�' `�>,� �
� �..�A.y����--•moi-� T-�-./�."c'� �• �, t, A I& rz.-_
-
bTel14,
u�l
,
y
,
I
ell-
J\'irMI
ItrJ•,1 Q
Reay d
..-: ,. ���.
.• t
�'
���x,.._._._.._.
"5.�-�?tom► t�� lr�/Si'7a
,..`��" ___.J-1'-•�Ll.`
,
. 1
a P,
ia��� REMARKS z
NO
w,,� ry
y
APPENDIX D`
AIR QUALITYCALCULATIONS
Project Emissions and Impact
Calculations
of vehicle emissions from proposed residential Subdivision in foothill
about. '7 mi E of Chico, CA
Assumptions:
1.
Subdivision would not be fully "built out" until about 1.090 or after; -1990
used as Year of analysis,
2
A ratio of 80 percent cars (LDP)` and 20 percent Pickup trucks (LDT) was
used to reflect a rural ,lifestyle:
3,.
Al past-1975 catalytic-controlled vehicles are assumed.
4.
Average speed of each commute trip is 45 mph (5,5+ mph on highway, 35
mph' or less in town).
5
Average trip length = 10.75 :miles (7 mules from project to Chico, 3.5 milos
a
averse within- Chico tri based on a T. Ferrara tri `
g p p :origin-destination
study done for City of Chico in 19101s). Round to 1.0 miles even for ease in
calculations.
6.
Each trip has emissions from either a hot or cold start, running exhaust,
+
and a hot soak at the trip en:d,
7.
Project would generate 2700 trips/day: 385 DU x 7 trips/Diu (using
counting trip generation figure).
L. Number df trips with ;hot or cold starts'
A
Cars (LDP) -,
2700' trips/day x 0.8 (.` crus) = 2160
x0.521 (fraction of cold starts front p. :-'7 of CA11S Suppi.'2)
2160. s 0.5' 7 = t 38.3 Bold start tr ps lti�� r
2166' x 0,473 (fraction of hof, ktatlts - p: E-7) = 102LY' hot start tr ps'dsy
B. Trucks (LDT)
2700 trips/day x 0.2 (? trucks) = 540
540 x 0.519 (from p. E-7) = 280.3 cold 5.t lrt trips/day
540 x 0.481 = 250`.7 hot start trips/day
2. Running Exhaust Emissions Tactors (g/mi) -from pp. E-143-148
co VIC
NO,
Cars 4.05 0.30
1.06
Trucks 4.33 0.30
1.12
3. riot -Start Incremental Emissions Factors (g/trip) - from p. E-150`
Cars 12.20 4.00
0.46
Trucks* 13.02 4.13
-0.40
4 Cold -Start Incremental Emissions Factors (g/trip) -from p. E�1:51
Cars, 103.67 7.32
1.38
Trucks 111.06 7.41
1.45
5 Hot_Soak Emissions Factors (ggm/trip) - from p. E-153
Cars R 0.83
0
Trucks 0 0.88
0
* under 2 -ton trucks.
INCREMENTAL HOT
AND COLD START EMISSIONS:
First cars (LDP),
thea picl<up
trucks (LDT)
CARS 1 trip; (cold start
orhot stfAtt
{• running exhaust
+hot soak)'
CO'
THC
NO
UNITS
Cold Start Trips
1. Cold Start
103.67
7.33
2. Running Exhaust
40.5
30.0
10.0
(gm/mi. x 1.0 mi/trip)
3. Hot soak
0.83
144.17
38.15
11:98
gm/tr.ip.
1138,3 cold start
trips/day =
164,108.7
12,692.0
13 636.8
gm/day
Hot Start. Trips
1. loot Start
12.20
4.09
MO
2. Running Exhaust
40.5
30.0
10:6
3. Hot soak 1
0.83
.52.70
34.92
11.06
gm/trip
1021.1 lot start
tri s/da
p y `
53,843.6
351677.8
11,300'0
gm/day
TOTAL CARS
217,912.3
79,103.9
24,936.8
gm/day
PICKUP TRUCKS
'
CO
TI3C
NOS.
UNIT$
Cold Start Trips
1. Cold Start'
111.06
7:41
1.45
2. Runinc Exhaust
43.3
30.0
11.2
3. Hot Soak
-
0.88
154.36
38.29
12.65
gm/trip
280.3 cold
tr
,43,251.6
100732.7
3,545.8
g n/day
Hot Start Trip
-
1. Hot Start
13.02
4.13
0.49
2. Running 'Exhaust
43..3
30.0
3. Hot Soak
56>.32
35.01
11.69
gm/trip
259.7 hot start
trips/day =
14,626.3
9092.1
39035.9,
gm/day
TOTAL TRUCKS;
579883.5
190824.5
6,581.6
gm/.day
TOTAL CARS
(from -P.3) _
217,95M
79,103.9
24,936.8
Trucks + Cars
TOTAL i,LH`,ICLF
ENiISSION5, .in gm/day
275,$35,8
98'?928.4
31,581,4
All vel-dolos, all trigs
in tans/i�ay _
0.3034
0.1088 '
0.0397
4
Pollutant
Averaging Time
California Standards'
Neflpnul 5londerds7
Concentration) Method'
Primary3 6 Sootlbdnrya " MothoW
Oxidant 10
1 hour
0 10 ppm Ultravioloi
Vrsibifliv
1 observation
(200 ugo'm�) Photometry
Ozone
1 hour
-
-
2,40,ugW
Somrl 11tr Primary.
Chemrluminescen"t
relative huandity is lv'4" thtln 70°ir`
(0.12 ppm),
500dord
Method
Carbon Monoxide
12 hour
I 10 ppm
(t 1 mg/m3)
Non,Dispersiye
Smile as
NonDispersive
8 hour
- — ^ --
Infrared
10 mglmz
Printery
Infrared
Spectroscopy
(9 porn)
Standards
Spectroscopy
1 hour
40 ppm
40 ing+ma
(46 mg/ml)
(35 ppml
Gas phase
Nitrogen 1 ioxide.
Annual Average
100 ug/m, _
(0.05 ppm)
Saltzman Method
Sarr)rl as Primary
Chemiluminescence
1 hour
0 25 pom
Standards
(470 ug/m))
Sulfur Dioxide
Annual Average
—
80 ug/ma
--
(0.03 ppm)
24 hour
0.05 ppm
365 ug/m4F�~
(131 ugymI)s
Conductimetric
(0:14 ppm)
Paraosanillne
Method
Method
3 hour
-
1300 ug/m3
(0 5 ppm)
1 hour
0.5 ppm
0 310 ug/m?)
Susponded
Annual Geometric
60 ug f M,
75 ug/m4 .
60 ug/m5
Particulate
MatterHigh
---Mean
High Volume
Volume
24 hour
100 ug/ m3
ug/m3
260 u 3
1:50 ugYrn t
Sampling
Sampling
SulfAtes,
24 hour
25 ug/m)
AIHL Method
No 61
Lead
30 day
1,5 ug/m3
AIHL Method
"
Average'
No. 54
r
Calendar
-
1 5 ug/m1
1 5 ug/ml
Atomic
Absorption
rption
Hydrogen
1 hour
0 03 ppm
Cadmium
SuIlido
(42 ugrmi)
Hydroxide Stractar.
Mothod-
Hydrocarbons
3 hour
--
160 ug/mt.
Some as
Flame fonitatran
(Corrected for ;
(6.9 a m l
(0:24 ppm)
PrimaryDetection
Using
M'ethano)
Standards
Gas Chromatography
Vinyl Chloride
24 hour
0 010 ppm
Gas Chromalog*
(Chloroethene)
(26 ug, m3I
raphy (AR8 staff
report 78.8.31
Ethylene
8 hour
0 1 ppm
1 hour
0 5 ppm
,
Visibibly1
observation
In sufli ent arnounl to CBI'
Reducing
reduce tho prevaillnrt visibility
Panicles
to loss dhan 10 n,ilrs who'n the
telotive humidity is lefts thar1 70%
—
APPLICABLE O'NLY IN THE LAKE TAH05, AIR BASiN:;
Cdlboh Moi oxide
8 hour
6 ppnt 401R»
Vrsibifliv
1 observation
In sll(ffewnt atiiowil to (B) ,
Redu'c'ing
Parlloles
r(,dluce tho preVilillni1 visibility
to IC'Ssihlfll11milt's w11'r+il lite
relative huandity is lv'4" thtln 70°ir`
(FOOTNOTES 0
N Rt;4'IiR.SI: 8100
NOTA
1.
California. standards are values that are
6.,
National secondary Staridardc -,—. Th()
riot to be equaled or exceeded,
levols of air qual ty necozina ry to
protect the public wwlfarc, rrom any
2.
National standards, other than those
known or anticipated advor,.O
based on annual averages or annual
effects of a pollutant:. state
geotnotxi.c means, are not to be
musty attain the secondz ry oLatndards
exceeded more than once per year.
within a "reasonable timed" after
implementation pleat is apjyroved by
3.
Concentration expressed first in
the EPA:
units in which it was promulgated.
Equivala,:nt,units given in parentheses
7i
Reference method as describod by
are based upon, a reference temperature
the EPA. An "equivalent method"
of 250C and a reference pressure of
of measurement may used but must
760 mm of mercury. All measurements
have a "consistent relationship to
of air quality are to be corrected to
the reference method" and, must be
a reference temperature of 25°C and a
approved by the EPA,
'reference pressure of 760 mm of Hg
(1,013. ? millibar) ; rpm in this table
8
Prevailing visib,,�,ity is defined as
refers to pp*n by volume, or micromoles
the greatest visibility whIchis
of pollutant per mole of gas,
attained or surpassed around at
least half of the horizon circle,
4.
lny equivalent procedure which can be
but not necessarily in continuous
shown to the satisfaction of the Air'
sectors.
Resources Board to rive equivalent
results at or near the level of the
9.
At locations where the state
aix quality standard may be used.
standards for oxidant and/or
suspended
suspended particulate matter are
5.
National Primary Standards: The levels
violated. National standards
of air duality necessary, with an
apply elsewhere-.
adequate margin of safety, to protect
the public health. Each state must'
10-.
Measured as ozone:
attain the, primary standards no later
than three years after that state's
i, plementa.tion plan is approved by the
Envizonrmental protection Agency. (EPA;) .
i