Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-25 DAN HAY'S DEV. AGREE. (4)°rcetual% c) no urban development should be pexmi,tted on llesi ga highly, erodible g land �" (,B) Design/ d) the County should regulate residential develop- meat in the foothills to EIR facilitate the survival and migration of deer hords (Dept. or Fish aI ad Game- recgntmends 20 to 40 acre or larger Parcels r in mi gra tion. corridors, 6. B) E. 3 Safety Element/Eire Protection Subelement l1 Circulation Considerations nesa.gn a) in case of a major, emergency or disaster, evacua-- tion routes andmajor transportation s systems must be located, ds:igned aY1c maintained for mobility. and safety (A, 2, b Dbsa h b)' ensure that acce� as f 11 noir development; adequate far fire protection, purposes ;(Policy ?) Design `• Fire Hazard PrQtsctzOn the ,Doe Mill Ridge area rated �i h to Extreme for hazard �Ji�h marginal to re tectio,c -County fire standards Px°- Coace tual/ a) maks protOatiOn from fare hazards a consideration in all lannin P g, regulory Design and capital improve mextt programs 4with, special concern for areas of tEhi gh" and. 1 It fire hazard (Policy 1 ) Design b) use fuelbreaka along tike edge of developin areas. i n "high,'" and uexrtreme" fire hazard areas '�Pa �; 3 y i since wda1,/ De51 11; c detel+mine the level of water su l e cessary for 'etT developII ent m .p (Policy 6 r OT fire roteoti.o purposes 1 Design f dj regulate use of certain building materia] s. in arias o higher uhan average fire hazard (Policy y P hoagie Element -» Mode applicable G i=c se Ele tet - none applicable Seismic ,Safety Element -.atone aDg�icable. rf t full development could make the area from the vineyard north unsuitable for some of the r � � larger eo It -sh wil g p p y dlife species, mainly through a proliferation .af roads and soattered' habitations rather, than direct ,removal of tt significant area: of habitat.Upland habitat removed would be. Mosr7 y new growth chaparral, wticsome rrioger pine, and open grassland, which are of moderate wildlife value, and not a rare, or sensitive vegetation community. Vegetation types removed in the southerly clustered. parcels would be more varl ed, ramposed of some, chaparral, some grasslands, some oak woodland, and small amounts .of ravine woodland, depending upon cluster placement. Oak and riparian woodlands could be removed, in small quantities; these are the most sensitive vegetation comm reunities from ecological point ;of vievr in that they ,tarbor the most wildlife and cannot readily r vegetate once removed; Cluster ,4tg will enable a design that avoids prime wooded habitat areas and leaves m&cimuin amounts of natural land (see, Nlidgation Measure list). indirect impacts to wildlife of both construction and on-going,residential use would include Road kills o Poaching ® ;Depredation by dogs o Possible reduction of :spring, water in drainages downstream of project w a ells ' Other impacts of dfstw bail cc (e.g. noise) associated with human activitye These effects would probably cause slight reductions in certain wildlife populations, especially "those inhabiting or moving through the portion zoned for two- and three -acre lets: Thus the value of the lards just north and ;east of the vineyard as a corridor for north -south wildlife movement could be significantly reduced upon total buildout. In particUlar, the pro -Oct lies on.t rel. i within the lCey Portion of the fast Tehama Deer herd winter range, and, would reduce available, wittering habitat i'os: this apeciea. Since the deer's migratory routes have been blacked to soinYe extent by development .farther east (at higher eleyatioiis — Forest Manch, Butte i47eadostis area), the Doe dill ® ;Ridge area has fewer migratory deer than in p'Evioua yearn. The project area supports aoroximatel� -' i?� y� cptdent doer- many of these deer will be displaced with development of the site, both through habitat, removal and ongoing disturbance. -�3- ngered P are _not considered necessary by Dr. ]ingsleY' Stern Who ' zya eendxplant surveys ' , carried out ` ys for this report. No rare or endangered animal species actua?v or potentially i 1r,( ivuggested Mitigation Measures t. the Site. -r�fYabi The value of the area as wildlife habitat is generally i g - Y Prol:�ortional to the variety and density of the vegetation as well as to the Water Supply, Th is, to ,preserve wildfi ' habitat, vegetation should be preserved as tnuc'h as fe Possible, The maintenance of Vegetation is also important in stabilizing the soil and thus minimizing erosion. Although Fire is a natural phenomenon which .mair�ti ins chaparral and C4mpgrassland communities and helps to recycle minerals, it is not Ol rays patible w� nth human habitation. $ removal of c ut haparral increases the danger of erosion and perhaps even mud or rock' slides: Thus removal of chaparral should be .judicious; .In general, development should use these guidelines L bath vegetation and wildlife and to mitio preserve the site?; value far gate Potential' cumulative impacts of this other nearby develr ments and -P upon the foothills habitat. 1= Concentrate deve op ,:nt in clusters,. leaving as much contlnuouG natural open space as possib'le• this includes not building fencing. ' perimeter 2, Leave .riparian, corridors continuous; keep major develo m p ent clusters out of wooded ravines through riparian Zone setbacks as _recomi ended by 'the Fish P and Game DE artmentl rnirxitutrn setback is 100 reef, the state 3. Leave connections between riparian corridors and major open space areas, { Leave substantial connect -ion of undevelaped land between themajor Open spade areas. This Mould mean leaving an open space corridor through lots zoned SR-or2 rtortR_3 to connect habitat in the 1 ower 40 -acre parcels with Open space to the 5. TncIude a variety of habitats (vegetation t-pes� in the major opens ace areas. some chaparral, some open shrub and Di7•er pine, ;as 4 P +eas, g p , some flat, g gland, as well as the oak wordland and: densely vegetated;, ravines. 6. Destroy as few mature trees as possible. 7. Preserve the coriheGtion between wetter bodies (the onsite cx�nd) and t` drainages (the wooded ravine to tine southwest), heir 8. Cross drainage beds with Ogen bridges rather than gineered`tl and c►ilvey ts. -35= r full development could make the area from the vineyard north unsuitable for Nome of the ,Larger people -shy wildlife species, mainly through a proliferation of roads and Scattered habitations rather than direct removal of a significant area of habitat. L7piartd habitat removed would be mostly new growth chaparral) with some Digger pine a.nd open ;grassland, which are of moderate wildlife value, And not a rare or sensitive vegetation I community, Vegetation types removed in the southerly clustered, parcels would be more varied, composed of some chaparral, some grasslands, sorne oak woodland, and smallartrounts'o'f , ravine woodlar~{l) depending upon cluster placement. Oak..and riparian woodlands could be F removed, in small. quantities; these are the most sensitive vegetation communities from an ecological point of view in . that they harbor the most wildlife and cannot readily revegetate once eamoved. Clustering will enable a design that avoids prime wooded habitat areas and leaves mwximum amounts of,natural land (see Mitigation )Measure list)'. Indirect irpacts to wildlife .of both construction and on-going residential, usz would include - 0 Road kills e :Poaching e Depredat ion 'by dogs a Possible.reduciimof spring water: in drainages downstream of project wells Other impacts of disturbance (e.g. noise) associated with human activity.; These effects would probably cause slight reductions in certain t+Tildlife populations, especially those inhabiting, or moving through the portion zoned for two- and three -acre lots Thus the value of the lands just, north and east of the vineyard as a corridor for north -south wildlife movement could be significantlyreduced upon total buildout. In papti,cular, the project lies; entirely within the key portion ot, the Yast ,Tehama Deer Herd winter range, .and would reduce available wintering habitat for this tnecies. Since the deer's migratory routes have been blocked to some extent by development further east (at higher elevations - Forest Ranch,, Butte ?Meadows area), the Doe liiil ,)tide area has fewer migratory deer thorn it previous 'years. The proJect area supports a:pp'ro.ci'tnately 40 resident deer; many of these dee-p will b displaced with devel:optnent of the site, both through habitat removal and ongoing disturbancei i w �� uatic of Impacts q r includes about 10.00 The pr je'et area.- _ feet of an intermittent stream on its western edge and about 1:100 feet on its southern edge: If these streambeds are to be included in road, homes, utility line or other construction, a streambed alteration permit (a 1603 permit), will have to be obtained from the California Department of Fish and Came. impacts of erosion and sedimentation or of surface or, groundwater pollution to the aquatic habitats these intermittent streams or of Butte or Little Chico Creeks are not anticiptled to oectir,. see &eus>ions in Water Quality Impact and Nlitigetions sections; Cumulative Impacts This gr eet vroul,a result. in aadve�ve impacts upon 'foothill ecolo�ty i4hicb taotad be Vtrbially ;reduced by the mi' - gation measures on pale 35. Local � wifdlife u ulations ,could be recunea. 'These species may adapt and ad' P y Just to p p.. .. . , 'per m movements, 1 disruptions in their normal v # , as long as the. surrounding. lands remain ' undeveloped 2.s a source of 'unrestricted activity. However, if adjacent lands developed 'become in similar fashion, the foothills outside of Chico would: unsuitable for larger wildlife, thus upSettitzu the ecological balance. in general, the foothills are an important .habitat, beim' a zone of trangition between the valley. floor and the 'montane habitats. Both plant and wildlife species need large exposes of undisturbed land ;in this transitional gone as a buffer from extreme conditions (temperature, r;alnfall, winds) in the lower and higher elevations. In addition, the foothi'1s contain a. 'flora and fauna of their own 'which are important both in their own right and as 'links in both valley and montane ecology. It, is this in portant to usz moderation bothinthe spacing out and in 1 j the Internal spatial configurations of foothilldevelopments to retain as much interconnected open space as possible (measures to `this erd are listed under, Mitigation)' on a regional reale, if dense residentialdevelopments are introduced into the footliill5 in substantial numbers and are located close together;` foothill ecology would be adversely l affected even if mitigation measures as listed are implemented within each development since no area,would be far from human habits ilon: Rare or Endangered Species Since the rare and endan,eredplant species potentially or actually gro, ing on the project site grow on steep, ,.rocky outcrop areas which would not be disturbed by a development, and since the one annual actually 'found onsite (BidwelVs Knotweed, Polygonum bid velliael easily reseeds itself, in its steep habitat Mitigations for rare and Yg 5 p , g ' _34 a i' r' i� endangered plants are not considered'necessey by Dr. Kingsley Stern, why, carried out reAre plant surveys fog this rop,6,11 No rare or endangeredanimal'speptles actually or potentially inhabit the site. :suggested Mitigation Measures The; value of the area as wildlife } abitat is g8nerally proportional to the variety and i density of the: Vegetation as well as to the water supply. Thus, tol preserve wildlife :habitat, vegetation should be preserved &s much as possible. The maintenance of vegetation is also important in stabilizing the soil and thus minimizing erosion. Although fire is `a natural phenomenon rvhic ` h rnai•ntains chaparral And grassland communities and helps to recycle minerals, it is not al lays compatible with human habitation. But removal, of chaparral increases the danger of erosion and perhaps even mud or rock ,slides. Thus removal of chaparral should be judicious. i In general; development should use these guidelines to preserve the site's value for i both vegetation and wildlife and to mitigate potential cumulative impacts of this and other nearby developments upon UTOe foothills habitat, I. Ooncentra a development in clustIN It rs, ]caving as ,much WI continuous natural, open space as possible; this includes not building perimeter fencing. ;. Leave riparian corridors eontinuaus; keep major development clusters out of wooded ravines through riparian cone setbacks as recommended by the "State :E°ish and Game Department;, minimt= setback is 100 feet. ' & Leave connections 'between riparian p an corrr,,ors and major open space areas.. 4., teave substantial connection lot undeveloped land between the major open space areas.. This ,wouldmean leaving an open b space corridor, through lots zonal SI -2 l N or 8A--3 to connect habitat in the lower 40 -acre parcels with open spd'de -to the north. 5. Include a variety of habitats (vegetation types) in the -major opeft'space areas: ® some chaparral, some open shrub and Diogrer pine,, some fiat grasAandt as well ® as the ;oak woodland and densely vegetated ravines. 6. Destroy as few mature trees as ,possible. 7. Preserve the connection between seater bodies (the onsite bond l and their drainages (the wooded ravine; to.the south"W"Ist}. 8. Cross drainage beds with Open bridges xather than engineered fill and culverts. -35- 0. Use exist! roa:dwr, �s wherever ossa g x" possible, to avoid cutting new roads through. the open areas. i constMet anO l ocat� ace ess .mads of sufficient Vtl.dtti to handle, fli e trucks and other err ergeacy vehicles 10, Around the perimeter, of develoment clusters, leave on unimproved', 10W,6-4ensity Use buffer zonesu c h as a foot or horse trail). , ' 11 Coordinate planning with proposed projects on adjacent ,lands to incorporate the above principles, especially leavingconnections of continuous habitat among the projects: 12., AlloW free-roaming ' no pets, prohibit hunt. ag, and postspeed lim 1a of 30 mpil on project roads. IL CULTURAL RESOURCES IMPACT !although, this property was considered highl likely to contain re p- P y a y 5 mains of prehistoric hunting or food gathering` eF,»nps, the findings of only one Insignificant mortar after a thorough exar0na.tion lead to the recommendation that archaeological clearance be granted for the pregosed project area. , Refex- to Appendix it. is TRAFFIC I4MPAcT The impacts of Bidwell Heights on traffic would occur in the same day as would those on nose, air quality and other impacts of residential creast, 'they would occur �radti ally ovea time as the prosect is built out = probably over shout 10 to 15 years -and they would occur in the context of other Stich developments, Traffic impacts would take place within the project ort local Doe Mill Ridge ;area road. on Iighway 32, and within Chico. Trip- Generation _ At a maximum anticipated buildout, of a85 h,• mes, the project would generate about ?700 trips, per da, y. i 1 *A trip generation factor of 7 t6ps/day, per unit is used here; althottch' CALTRA YS uses 10 trips/day per unit, this may be too high.. Butte County, in particular thi, =l r Pollution Conical District, uses 7 since it more closely applies to a rural. situation under conditions of high gasoline price. in which people combine trip». School buses would ta,�.o children to school, .and Butte, County Transit would- also be available; fuctt er reducing trip gen crntion, 3; Local Roads .project residents would use .the locale unpaved wads,. in partic.,111ar Doe gill Road, to Minor extent. According to William Cheff of the But Le Couny Public Works, Department, ultimate project ADT of 2143cl cars, of Which most will use Canyon Shadows Road, will e 'ea.te safety and maintenance problemsdue to the minimal road standards being used ill hfa construction of the main, access; road. Guardrail on tete outside Of curves on the �-UYOn aide of the road and on the bridge should be i-atal.l.ed. A gravel. road U,l.th the s0 jec 0d amount of, traffic and grades will generate dusty and roughs riding chemo ter-- af'.'" which will require caanstart raintenar x.11 Local access roads Would be available 1',)r emergency access in and cut of the ,project, with proposed, use of knock-do,,rrn ,gates P":I. project boundarier, Zu--h road: would inc-hide Doe 3,611 .Road to the north, ,Centerville r s VOad, and Doe Dill Road: to the south Project 4ntraxn,ee Staff of the District x Office of CA Zrf Ii33a 04ar;rsnrille):,, feel that some left turn. — oblems may occur at Highway 32 and Sarltos ria: . Although the highway g g ax �is .� relatively �:ecigkit :dor goad vision at this POilnt, beWv felt that since most project residents would c turning I-rft onto Highway 32 (toward, the valley) a problem could occur at times, r6rt'icularly with heavy velli -ales co -Ming downhill. Ttrpae•ts of construction of these Mprovemernts would, consist Of small amounts of grading , vegetation removal and drainage, M :zification within the r ght-of-vay associated with widening the road at this ro+i.nt. imlaaets would be minor since very localized; grading Would change the :and form -Avntl�j. Ero; Torn eni" the Mut slope should r<ct occur if revegetation is carried out rIM7=3;Ll.y and if stormwater drainage is g p-'operl„r channeled (by terracing, rising pipes ,etc. -Wh, ire applicable),, liighway J Between the pro;;ee"t d Chico, CA TIRANS staff felt that the highway has aalple cap-acity to handle the Ira imum project, ADT Of about 8,430..-* The .most heavily used :see w3,t3n of Hi hwa g y 32' is at Chioo , a east edge. Even at peak: hour, the current traffic vola --es of 490 cars per hoar are ai gn fi,cFantry under CAI,TRANSI design capacity oy 20fjq carte per. hour for a two-lane rued. The addition of another fens hundred rays per ,hour due to this project (Using a guide tai 10 percent Ali' for teak hour) would not bring the traffic to 'the,congestion pioint,' mesa oth unanticipated 'traffic increases occur between nowandrrojeet build -out., 'is applies also;.to the section of Highway 3P - Th Sar tocs Way and Chia .. However, since other residential growth is 'proposed for the project area, a small # heal eXi,sts that 2.,.430 ADT from this profect added with traffic From other projects ;ruai extend over the . fro jec tet$ 1'9: ADfo f '360,0for this ctionof H ighway 32 and 'bri og, the road ol.oser to capacii: , 0 percebt of 2701 project trips; 1C percent o , ar 27, iroislrl probably head eafit rt ffighway 32, w�� ni�n�f®�lr+floi�isisrw-n ... 2 In Chico P%t all 2,430 daily trips would enter Chico via Higltw��g� ;;s�t16a wouldheadnorthtar south on Highvr�ty �� • lif as much -as f'{� �o-thirds ol project W re to �enter Chico, aa mentioned earlier, congestion would not be likely unlo.nsr :several large dte"l.Opmentc Also built at around thy+ dame time, in which case tnitering Chico, by road, could become congested at peak hours. Hi pt'. �} � ay ,,e'� east of ll38hw4,jv 99 to abOW Hr nqe Poad, is expected to have a revel of Service D by the year 2Gi -' . Level C rte-rUcts occa84onal congestion and :,z ''Ypical.ly used in urban design standards. Traffic conditions whioh exceed: C " sv,.-.tz of service, that is D and E levels, are C*=Ilored significant impact's: peferencel Chico Area Land Use Plan EIR, April. 1982,f pago�v 112-1.22. t,Iiti ,atic 1. i,efr. turn channelizai lon, a lane in the downhill, lwestbound) lane of U to a"On"-odate Project rezideaf,:f and prevent other traffic irfl#r, having Ota Step, (Caltrans letter of March lc-, 1932.) P. Ati *radin g iclr left turn or other imprgvements can f i hsva r. ' g y 32 should he re�reg,ewate,i prrrmpt3.y with nata��e ve eta�tion y srcly r . g prior to winter teen season .,ober to Ii Thor dt vel,oper has, considered incOr- orgtir �a� A g the �."lowin.g measures i;ato, the 'd protiled design: (a? to provide auxiliary a-ce s ,to the project without creating undue µrafx is in nearby neighborhoods, several. local. ayaads (marked on Project Map, Figure 3) IWOU3 d be upgrad'o d to all-we 't . a her Craver , eabla (PS8i County Standard) and prowidod with a gat'a at project boundaries, to be for trip emergency y� �,"e Overall �" � use onl�J, a, i,�,� generation, the developer would provide a convet0 redu nience shopping and, gas station near the ro est ena.-r,8Mce Csee N-C area on Project ?-lap,, Figure :1 and Cci to reduce trip genera ion the developer woul.� vide a small transit bus ar van �' P ' pre to oir?:ul.ate through the project ani tie in ',eLth the cbe' Jule of the Butte Co tr Tr ink ans ansit systema bey deposit d collect g passengors at existing Butte County Transit and. Chico Area Transij- y��stem steps. �7 The fire station is, to be bullt by Summer 198$ ,, Timing of the neighborhopd co+ arcial area is depo4dent on having sufficient numbers of resident$ to justify it and tlRe pians cif tl:e Isom-ilall project for a possible store And gas station nem t10111tay 3? ani Santos Way, - A Community Services DI trict is proposed to administrate the fire station, t¢ar+ it. van and sin"ri ar factors beyond the scopex+ of a Homeow.ers i Asso;ia`t oiz. , y t police service where it: is already inadequate.Significant unmet demand will occur if the urroundin areas are also developed. 1titigations; The developer . pans t, pro-vid,c, a security officer patrol for the project, to be paid for through a l omaowriers' Association, in the manner of a special assessment istrict. This measure (aiz_, s;aggested by the Sheriff's Department) wouI,d provide regular patrol in the project as viell as good response time to calls, A, possible further ti 3,tnprovement in security would he to tie in a security alarm system with the cable television line the developer, is considering installing on site. This measure; suggested by .the developer, would enable residents to register calls for emergency aid (police, fire, medical) rapidly with the project security patrol (or proposed volunteer fire department), and would further raise the level of police protection in the project. Schools Since capacity now exists for 830-930 school-age children (grades K-12) in the Chico Schools, and the Bidwell heights project would add approximately 190 children (at O. children per household), this project alone would not strain or exceed the schools' capacities. However;, this project's addition, if accompanied by those of other large !' residential: projects either existing or proposed, may result in overcrowding of one or s, snare of the schools: $ 211tigatiosn Expansjoft funds for building a new school,' expan_givn of present schodl sees, *md/dr bu ing of students, Ontst come from a cooperative effort on the part of the eve1 opens, prtij{ect residents and citizens of the Chico Unified School Dintrict. 1 . UTLI MES IMPACT PACT The four utilities needed by the project would be telephone se; vire; electricity, *rater supply and sewxtge disposal system maintenance. `N"atural bas would not be supplied by the utility; those residents desiring gas would supply 'their own fuel from one of the local bottle gas companies. Telephone Pacific Telephone Company foresees no problems in ability to serve the,prc,ject froom the lines they maintain aioing, Highway 32. Determination of telephone line locations vAthin the project and financ"ial rrangements between the Telephonic Company ,ani the developer for covering installation costs would tale plaice after the development plans are firm and the deta ted subdi,vxson maps havo been prepared. -43:- : 1. PUBLIC SERVICES TIMPAC'i` The chief public servicess needed by project residents would be fire and police Protection and school facilities. For each of those services', the project's demand would not in itself overextend the capacities if serving agencies, but would be part, of a cumulative demand which, Jr, the case of fire and police protection, would result in inadequate service levels and a need :for Tni.tiadtion provided by theproject. Eire Protectichi. As human activity increases in the, chaparral 'Wildlar,d areas Iboth fire hazard (already high to extreme) and the need fuR fire protection will increase: According to the Butte County Fire ;Department; the 385 unit de.veloptrtent Would hove an ctUrnated population of 777 people generating 3.1 medical aid calls, 2.08 structural fire calls, 4,8 vegetation fire calls, and 3,3 miscellaneous calls for a total of i ®; 14,2 fire/emergency medical calls each year. These calls Would generate an addttional annual workload of '149 marihours, adding to the cumul&tive manpower and response tip-n�� problem ere p t a_ed bythe ecisting or planned developments in the surrounding area, i The project. Vrould, provide a volunteer fire departmept, to be located east of the vineyard on tine .Thutua.1 water, company land. : Afire track already � y -purchased and additional equipment bought in the future tn�'ill suppl<<ment the existing Erre departments, enabling A fast er response', time.- lti'ater for the boe Mill Ridge fire trucks, would be supplied from wellsand from the irrigation pond on ® site. This fire equipment would be made .available to residents on adjoining lentis, since the volunteer fire department -and equipment would become: part of the County Fire Department.ly"ith fife fire trucl�s located onsite, response time to fire.$ on. the site would be mtRch unproved "over present §nd projected service levels available from 'existing fire P, tate County, U.S. Forest SerMee). de "arfinents �� llilg7it It the County Fire department finds fi"re ,protection to be inadequate tar the project even With the onsite equiprjaent, its re uirer€�ent of fire Hydrants for develo with pments iti ith densities of one to 'five acres%dU would"be applied. Each hydratit must trove w min' irttt;n fioiv of 500 gales'., minute, ,must be so: cod a minimum o; 800 feet trorn adjacent hYdrat"ts and have'a four inch main hook -urs. t For safe circulation daring i`%rc;�resci�e errte:•genejes the Land neve o ment Secti Df the Public Works,apartment requireso on r 3 °' 4 L Maximum street grade on graveled and oIl.ed roads should not exceed 15 percent, oCi..erwise they must be paved. t 2. Bridges must be a, minimum of 20 feet wide and hve the capacity to carat a 20- ton fire track. The only bridge on the site is at least 20 -feet wide and can carry up to 50 tons. 3. Curve sharpness in a road must have a minimum 400 -foot center line radius within. a subdivision: 4, Multiple access is required because more than 20 lots are proposed for the subdivision; at present there is only one access route. 5. Cul de sacs, because. the ,project is out of the urban area, may be of any length but may only have 20 lots developed within them, A 50 -foot -radius tioning circle is needed to accommo ia:te fire engines, When plan details are complete, this requirement must be met, 6. Road names and Building numbers must be clearly identified from the road and names _must be approved by the County Street .'Name Coordinator. At time of construction this requirement willbe 'met. For fire prevention and structural safety; ,the rise department includes the following requirements/recommendations, which could become conditions applied to he -Ot builders at tune of construction; a. A one-h.naff inch spark Arc :sting mesh .screen be installed on chimneys for %,;replaces and w69,2burnring stoves. b. Roofing vd siding ias,iteriais should, be constructed, of fire resistant materials: c. Callfornia law' specifies that all wildland areas with development need to �t clear all flammable vegetation °'�r 30 feefi around all structures. 13owever If erosion might •create problems, some natural vegetation may .lett: it place but grass must be f iowed and a31 ,dea;ci Iambs from tree trunks and. down material on the :;round must be clear -d. , di Fuel breaks are recomme-Aa ed. aloug the edges nt proposed cevel,or���nts, width will vary with the type of ve,^e.tation preten,'v ano steepness of slope.. �1 Police "Protection Since there is no assigned Sheriff=s patrol in theprotect area ,end .no future plan far increasing, late enforcement there, the developmelit Ivill create an increased demand for -4 0- t t 7.CC�'iG, y Pae fic Gas and kwlcctrle Coo'any (P G & E) wot,4ld have the capacity- to, supply elcotricity tri the project using the existing powerline on site. Their requirements - 1 ;inaiude undergrounding of utilities with a single-family dwelling on a parcel .less than three acres in size. This would apply to the parcels to be zoned SR -2; to any other ,parcels with potential for future subdivision to below three -acre parcels; and to the dfl-- acre parcels to be zoned PA -C with multiple units. Power may have to be undergrounded from the supply line to the clusters, as ,jell as within the clusters. lluwever, these arrangements would be made in discussions between the developer and P G & E's New Building Representative after firm, detailed subdivision maps are complete. Although no additional requirements are apparent under County zoning regulations, any such .local � ordinances would have to be checked at the time of discussions with P G & EI ,s County � requirements supersede those of P G & E. 1 A concern for availability of pourer, especially in the summer months of peak derriond, has resulted in 'a policy set by the California Public utilities ;Commission �(CPUC) that the developer rather than the ra`te'payer should bear the cost of supplying z ,power at the initial staf:�e.x of development. planning. The developer must have a ;letter from P G &; E stent g, that financial arrangem'e'nts have been made to pay fb the power: "T'hese arrangements would be made after subdivision maps are corrrptete. This CP(7C policy on developer financing of power supply reflects the cumulative nature of the impacts of development proposals on availability of power supply. While the Bidwell p I, :Heights project alone would not strain the utility, it ii part of the projected demand r whi. together, 'represent considerable allocation of resources for the .Northern '$acrarnento,, V"ey. i ;ATTIGATELOR-, ? ten f'o'ol. set :from the centerline of the power line is to be enforced for dwelling units and trjella. i ',mater Supply Water would be supplied to all project residences through 'the mutual, water company, Buza Tail Water forks, whose service area boundaries coincide at present with the property included in this report, Find which now operates the two wells onsite. More fwells would be developed by the water ompany as needed. k llvells would be part o� an, entire inter -connected systern throughout the property. .All residences would be served, i y a piped water system, with noindividual wells. The developer would provide pipes to the lots, and each homeowner would pay a fee to hook, up to the main pipes.. ,i ' r Y , II Water supplJ shCiUlci be more than adequate for the develop►nent as proposed. At about 625 gal/day * coJi.>ttmption, L385 residences would need 240,025 gal/day; the existing AM large we11 can supply U5 gal/miri. or about 324000 gal/days more than the supply needed for domestic consumption. The Oxcess supply pP-Y in this .and other wells would be available t for fire protection,, dur ent'tater a orae aapac i i y is ars eve aerated 34,0OC? gallons. The 96"'wfiy ot;' he *�',+ak: :ai the existing wells meets all standards for potable water ,Supply. Resuits old lest d��ne b � ,, } Monarch Tabs of Chico (see Appendix 1) are on file with the. State Corport►ti:on Commissioner and the County Health Department. sewage Disposal Project. residents would be responsible for proper sewage disposal in the individual dual or combined septic tanl/v-Ja.ach field systetrs through a Sewage Di ,posal, Maintenance ®' District, This Distridt is a means proposed by the developer to ensure that sewage disposal i n the septage Oreas identified as acceptable by the, Count S+ Health Department ► Would continua to Operate in a manner acceptable to the Healt}r Department, Under terms of the :District a- reetnent the Heal { fi th Department would be able to ins pe,,t the septic, tanks and leach lines periodicallys notifying homeowners or (in PA -0 areas) ameosvners' Associations of; any malfunction or improper condition,. and., bocce tt corrected at the owner ps ex e.s-e n _ if �f they did not correct it within an agreed-upon tame period. Thus through initial approval of septage areas before develo n�ent p and on-going authorityto monitor and make repairs, the disposal. of project sewage should be done in a manner that prevents environmental contamination and health hazard L(see afiso the section on Water Quality/Public Health impacts). i. ,L ENERGY Residential, use of thL'site is Ilkely to result in the following energyimpacts;L. Assuming a. maxzmura buildout of 385 homes using electric heat'(withotlt any offset for likely solar installations) the worst case ;for electric consumptionWill be a total of 5-$ million kilatvatt-hours ;per year. Casolin.e consumption for catnmutin� (assuming c 'trip ends per residence, 'ten miles per trip end, and 25 miles per gallon per vehicle) will g llons per year. total 393,470, a Typical water ushgc by Metereel residential customer in Chico (18750 gal/month/ resident divided by 30 daysbnonth)—Gens Grant, California Water Service Company. =43- I Mitigation Mitigation measures would include extra building insulation, use of solar, energy for heating, and establishment of a small commuter bus run between the project -and the County Transit terminals in Chico. Ideally, individual Butte subdivizion project . ,lflnign cho-j-.d cont'crn to passive solar access criteria specified in Section (1'6k-/3-­' of ";s4 :dubdivizion Map A^t Vt VVECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT T"ne following prnje�;i effects upon the physical, and urban hnvironrnents have been evaluated as irsignificanki, This .means that adverse impacts would not be of such intonsitty or nlggnitude tkat substantial mitigation would be required to bring them to an acceptable level, howevor in certain yeas some mitigation measures have been recommended simply .for ,preventative maintenanco of low impact levels, especially view of potential for adverse cumulative impacts., Effects Not SignificAnt, I. Noise exposure o noire generation: 2. Disturbance or de,$tpudtion of Cultural Resources. 3. Water Quality degradation., a. pollution of surfacewaters by,urban runoff: {{ b b. Pollution of groundwater or soil from inadequate soils for septaga. -4. Hydrola a. Alterations in drainage patterns. b. increases in runoff quantity due to .impervious surfaces., ■ .6. Traffic, Volumes on local roads, Wgh%vay 32 (with the. exception of file Santos Way intersection) and within Chico. _ 6,- Soil erasion/stream siltation. 7. Increase in ,serviee load on schools. 8« Increase in Service load' onop L1/er and telavhone systems (impact on. ability to ,serve). -� 4- VII. SIGNMICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICII CANNOT BE' AVOIDED %V PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED IX. SIIORT-�T ?RM VS. LONG-nM4 CCiMMIT�1YENTS Or, RESOURCES In its undeveloped state, the project site has value as Wildlife habitatand watershed l and this value will be reduced substantially by the conversion to residential useAftG construction, the site will take on long-term value as a location for rural hornesites 1 , 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 astated goal, 1 of planners and community residents alike. To protect the fertile and productive agricultural lands, the areas east of 'Chico have been a considered for development, if ti•yililife and watershed values can be preserved: The project is located primarily in chaparral, a vegetation community Which is well- represented ir. BLItte County, A review of the vegetation map prepared for the 1979 update of the Land Use Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates approximately ,64,000 acres of chaparral are present in the Butte County foothills. Approximately half :of this area -- that portion lying north and West of the Town of 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 chaparral areas lying within the Central Butte Study area (for which a, zoning study is underway) and those iareas near ` y reviewed so the valuable chaparral , i habitat can be'st_taaly pratected.�utheast should be a j The Bidwell Ilei hts project is within an area ,designated for Agricultural 1 , llesidentia.l, u_.-e, l to 40 acres per d4relling unit, adjoining a large 'expanse of protected Chaparral which is designated as open and,, grazng..,oss of this wild- life habitat vould represent aboixt p zm of the estimated 64,OOd acres of Chaparral in the foothills: of 'Butte Coun yy . Watershed values on the `project site, although reduced by development,will be preserved to a great extent by remaining open areLns Project mitigation measures and cluster development patterns. Adjacent areas Will remain in 40 acre Minimum parcel, sizes under the gazing and open band designation. Some short-terra commitments of resources Mit occur during' the construction' , phase; when fuels, Iabor and building materials will be put to .beneficial use. In the longer terrn, energy for home heating ,and transportation back and forth to Chico will be used on an on-going basis. Scenie gtialities of the site will also change, from na chaparral to chaparral interspersed with homes and residential landscaping. turaZ -46- X. OROVJT11-INDUCING IMPACTS Approval of this project could result in growth ren several fronts. The tax base of the County would increase by the amount of the assessed valuation of the project, with corresponding amounts of taxes becoming collectable. Subdivisions in adjoining, areas to the north and south could be facilitated 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 established to serve the Bidwell Heights development., Improved .road access already exists, and is not contingent upon project +pproval. 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 exteint they, are successful, subdivisions to the east and west of this project have independent access and, rite nit dependent on this approval. Such. projects Are physically isolated by steep canyon wdlls and are therefore somewhat isolated from the growthndueing effects of this project. In any case, such developments would be mach less dense due to steep topography and sewage d� sposal constraints. There are currettly two other projects underway in the vicinity, - Canyon Park Estates a apecifia p1am, PA -C PA -C > ezone and Tentative Subcllviwglon, propoces 1 9 residential parcol.s on 1050 acrez, +. It is located in Section 11-15, T22N R,2 E7. The other pro4eat for !soar -Hall has not been submitted to the 00' unty of B ltte for review yet. An eswim ted 110 to � 2.5 rewident al lots are proposers on the 960 acre ` site in s'eetlo.x�, 1, 2, :11 and; 12,, T22t1, E�'� For referea�c�!, the 12 Bidwell Hei rzts project ro'ect is in Sections 6 �t aced, Section. S , � and 1.$, 'f221, R� T 17, R2E. The total ; proposed population from, the three projects, ,.! thin close proximity, is approximately X2p peoli, in 6241 dwell, ins units k. The total n�,,,mber. of dwe►ling units is: speculative at this point. The figure of 2 61 p�.Vt6ns per ho`assehold (19$0 Consus figures) gra used to arrive at th. e figure cf 1.62o persons. Bid -tell Heights would contrititte about 1,000 persons to, that'total. 1t should also Abe noted that the Fourteen Mile House ='Re zone and SutZdavm ,ion rdi,l.l add to ` the cumulative eflootz, partic4larly traffic ontoHighway 32 tot,gard ;lhico. This 21 dwelling unit proposal is on a 168 Acne + site adjacent to 'H ghWay 321 about 14 miles northeast of Chico s b n ` XI. A1,TI;I NA.TNES Td THE PROPOSED k ,ACTIQ.N Four alternatives to the project as proposed awe described below, with their attendant P�Anefits and costs in terms of ability to meet the l%coject ab" ectivs.s and potential, for adverse enl vironmental impact, in each case the pro s p posed project would represent•a more favorable balance of environmental' t costs and benefits fats and would meet the project objectives of Providing affordable rural homesites in harmony with h the natural setting. An alternative location 'would not be meaningful, since thiss to has i Already been parially prepared for residential de�"el"ailment } by the Appiacant, No Project F Not building the project Would leave the property in its present state, and have the following effects: i Benefits 1. None of the unavo'`able adverse 'effects on the environment,' listed in . s,� environment' ~ Chapter VII (impacts on air quality, veeetati6n and 'wildlife, ever � use e fire and earthquake 'hazards. anti' increases in''tr 'g' , xpasure to affic and public service loads) would occur. The projF"ct would: nofi contribute to regional cum areas. ulative Impct in these; Costs k 1• The project objectives would not be met. 2. The resources used for roads, v.*e11s, .fire equipment and othermorovemen would receive less use than -planned by the h�plican�. is Z. Same, Density - Different Distribution A. No PA -C Zonir, With, no clustering of homes the en#ire 1200 acres would' be d" �` n pendent lots ivided up into s to ac,cai�oda�e the ro osed number af' unite Na litimeowmer P P s+ o Associations would exist, and lo t$ would be sold and developed independently,, Benefits { f r H6mosites would seem more secluded and re mote as individurtI lots would be larger« Fmi Costs 1 � Ad v verse effects on the visual, physical and biotic envircnme nt (erosion, increased runoff, habitat reduction) wouldbe of greater extent and rrtagnitude due; Xn' to ote roads andWidespreadgrading and. development., it , _tea- 2. Tneffi ciences of piecemeal buildout would make homes more expensive, 3. .Absence of Tlomeowners► Associations would preclude method of for neRded servicea, mainly fire phYienti protection, security and transit, resulting its unmet service needs and over -loaded service. agencies 4. Absence of PA -C, zoning Would. provide no means of guaranteeing sound future :use of non-developed Iands even i€ homes were clustered in some . YIany lots Would be unfeasible to develop due to lack of suitable soils septic leachfields, or to ,tee slopes es i s for P p Preventing access; therefore the overall i, of g oRf buildable units Would in fact be lower than proposed, impedingPro 0 ., Entire Project Clustered, PA—C zoning P j objectives. This alternative either -witlh : , � snits in severaI clusters, few large clusters or one g n the ro e ty, is possible only by reversion to acreage, since the d ea --t auk �O th of the viheyardi Is already tentatively R I alaprciv,ecl „for 3 and 5 acre lots. The Fourteen differetat prapertY ovMers iu the northern sector, could potezatla] lg oaoPerata in, an overall PA-Crezone for th,' 322 acres � _. i. ti, Benefits x• Open space, wildlife habitat, visual aesthet%cs, lart�Y form " minimized through impacts would be g minimizing,roads and maximizinv 2. g guaranteed natural areas, • , safeguards; Project objectives would be met ,�n terms of densities and enviroriment6: 3. Ec onomies could be achieved throtaff t thr� �� ffciency ak of grou ed 1 roads' and utility lines. P ilTiYt3, 7 ,Wer Costs J 1• Residents 'would . be relatively cl gP togdthdense. er if clusters where few and 3. Reduced Overall, D' as ty substantiallyreduced density either 1%11 h or with Ut clustering, .following effects; would have the Benefits 1. Project incremetat of cur oulative adverse irnpacte. in such ar uality'! visual aesthetics, traffic ser , . � has as air a vices, and u tali ties wautd'> be less. 2• Adverse ihipacts to th Physical and bio> ie envit'ontnent would be lessened ..5q_ r ti r REFEREN CFS r Butte: county 1, Butte Count General Plan Land Use Element y: _ ► , Noise Element, Zoning Ordinance 2, Butte County Planning Department. (Sept., 11 198 1) iMenio to Board ofpervisors 8'= ..(Augast 1-4 1y81) Memo to Doe Mill Ridge landowners Mate of California. 1, Air Resources .Board. (flay, 1984) lecture Notes for Workshop. on EE -s Caron Monoxide Concentrations Hot S ots Anal .for sis. ARB Air Quality iVlocielt'ng ;Section - y Research ;Division? 2� (Tune 171, 1981) Predicted California Vehicles, Emissions (EMVAC 6C computer run for Sacramento Valley Air BasiCi, Du'tte County, 1994 , 3 - (dune, 1981) 3 Iement 2 to Procedure and Basila for Estimating On- Road Motor vehicle Emissions. —C—ARB Sta o—nTry SOurce Coiltrl)1 D vISlon Emission lnventary Branch, 1lotor? ti'ehiele_Eirtiss ons and Projections Section 4. California Admin. Code, Title 251 Housing and Community Development, Chapter 1; Subchapter 4, Section 28, Article 4. "Noise Insuiation Stand-_ cis' s 5. California Highvay Patrol. (Octooer, 1977) CrIotor Vehicle Noise Laws 6. Department of �leaith, Office of Noise Control, (iViay, 1975) Estii�tation of ( Com it Nonce Ek-p)sure in Terms Of Day-Night Average Level iRoise r ran) Contours 7• (April, 1977) Model Community Noise Cbntrolordinance 8. Office of. Planning and Research. (1978) An Urban Strategy for California Miseellanec�"Ir, jaft Applied Sciences, Inc.. (April., 1971) Paradise Pines _Surfade Rater Quality Report l`l0AIA, Climatologieal Data, Annual Summary Eco-Ana! �s. rx1 x 82)ti bIR for Ganyor Pant ales P _ C '� Est A G Reoie and �'erzEative ENio--AnalysZ's. (Pebruar 982) Er R F urseezxfa�o se Rezone and 3itEt Lye Subdivision. B4 te Coanty. Planning Pepar zeht, (April 1982) ��R for Chico Area laiduSqA32• if the writs were clustered, if units were not clustered, lots Mould need to be a t r comparable degree of pnvir6rlmental min:�rtra14 of 20-40 acnes I size to afford a ^ + pro tec tion . COSI 1, The developers cor-;t per unit woul ti. increase if the same level IX amenities and, mitigation c.ts (dire proteot .on, security meures for �;�xvzcQs .and otlaex a:at�laa gazarc , cormercial area, transit system, etc.), are included. ,u, r 2. if prices of 'homes were kept to ,a reasonable level, services and .Impact - mitigating, snoasures such as those listed in. item (i,) above would not be provided, resulting in unmet needs for these ser7ices and increased demand on service �, agencies. 4, Increased' Density If project densities mere, substantially increased, the following effects would be felt . i even; with clustering. Benefits ' 1. Dollar . costs per" unit would be lower, providing possible lova to moderate income housing: Casts ' 1. Primary effect would be in overloading areas designated suitable Lox septic ' leacbfields, since densities l roposed reflect sewage, disposal constraints`. 2. All, project increments to offsite eumulative physical rind urban service impacts Would,be significantly larger. 3. Gln -site impacts to biological, visual and physical. resour4es would increase and be harder to mitigate, including exposure to fire and seismic' hazards. .i PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED State of California 'Resources Air Board Michael Rederner Ed Yotter 4 Susan Scott Chico State University Richard Haiman, Professor, Department of Geography Fish and Gamc Department Jim Snowden Bob mopes i Forestry Department Hector Reed Transportation, Department (CALTRAINS) Bob Burrovi Sam Johnson Gene Abshier Bill Wells Dick. Dyer Robert Skidmore Health Department -Office of Noise Central Jerome: Lukas County of Butte Air Pollution Control District Richard Booth Environmental Health Department Tom Reid Iioward Snyder Fire Department Dan Costello' Chief Dick Tiller Planning Department Charles Woods, Advance Planner Steve Streeter "S Public Works Department Robert Jones Stuart Edell Sheriff's Department William Chef Richard Brush; Lieutenant City of Chico Planning Department Tom Lando, Director 1.'d Paliteri, )?l nner Unified School 17stricti 13en Matthews, 33irecox of Elementary Education" ` NO EX'P08Ure ofpeoproperty~ .� 21 .�y` to geologic haOr 5 Ouch as earthquakes, lajjd-S Ides, owd- s1 des;, .ground failure, or similar hazards? Air. Wi11 the pro result in: a. SU b _ xiat deterioration. of " ambienf or local air aual,ity? x 7 b The creation, of objectionable F odors smoke or fumes? x c. Significant alteration of air movement§ moisture or temperature. or any chane, in climate:, either local..1y or regionally? x 43 Water, Will the proposal result in substantial: ,a. Changes in `currents, cr the course or direction of water movements? b. Changes in absortion rates, tes, drainage pat,ter_ns, or the rate and amount 'of surfao,e .Water runoff? x C. meed for off-site surface drainage improvements, Including vegetation removal, channeliza- tion or culvert install.ation� x d. Alterations .to the course or. flow, of flood waters? x e. ' Change in the amount' of surface water in any water body? f: Discharge into surface waters, or in any, alteration of surface waterquality, including but not limited to "reu�perature, dissolved oxygen,;or turbidity, x g. Alteration of the direct%nn or rate of flo�i of ground waters? h. Change�.n _ the quantity oz quality Of, ground waters, either through direct addl,tions or withdthwals, or through inter ception of an aquifet,by cuts.`' or excavations? I I r, YES MAYBE O i.,. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise. available for public or private water supplies?'x J. Exposure of people or, property to water related hazards such as c flooding? x 4. Plant Life Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Loss of vegetation or change in. th.e diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including_ trees, shrubs-, grass, crops, micro- icroflora floraand aquatic plants)? x b. Reduction of the numbers of any u niquet rare or endangered species of plants? k X C. introduction. of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- i' ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any x agriculturalcrop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Change in the div'ersitof species; or numbers of any speczes of �. anamals (bird's, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shell.fisha benthic organisms, - ins4cts or mi,crofauna')? x b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new s`pecios of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? . Y x d.. Reduction of encroachment upon, or deterioration.to existing fish, or. wildlife habitat? x 6. Noise. will: the proposal result in substantial: a. 'Increases in noise levels? X� AOL YES MAYBEr�0 o. Exposure of people to severe y noise levels? aK . Ci 7. Light andr Aare. Will the proposal I+' produce.siQr_ricanr- light or glare? X fi g Land Use. Will the proposal result in a significant: a. alteration of the plannedland use of an area, or establish a trend which will demonstrably !` head to such. alteration? x b. Conflict with uses on j adjoiningproperties, or con- flict with established recrea- tional, educational, :religious, . or scientific uses `of an area? 9. Natural Resources. WillCne proposal result in substantial-: a. Demand for, or increase in the rate of use of any natural x reso ar_ces? b. Depletion of any non-renewable k natural, resource! 10. l,i-sk, of Upset.. Does the proposal involve a risk ox an explosion or the release of hazardous :substances (intl.uding, but not I 'mited to, pesticides, chemicals'or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset , conditions la. Population. Will the proposal .,. �.. sign;a,ticantly alter the location, : distribLItion der�.sity`, car growth rate of the human oop;ulation of n, area or phys ,call"y-divide an established c.omttlunity L ar, faci1ita.te X cievelo tient f ad ".olnina ro p adjoining P pertie ? 12. gous i nA Will the proposal si nif - cantly affect OXI'stiog housing, or create a demand for additional' housing? X 13. Transtiort'atio'nlC1rcul,ation. Will the proposal `result inn: a. Generation of substantial additional vebicul.ar movement? g YES MaYBi NO, b. Significant effects on existing Parking facilities, or demand' ;w new parking;? X c'- Substantial impact Upon, existing tr'ansportation systemsr d Significant alterations to pies hllt patterns ofcirculation or 4,:�:vement of people and/or y e.. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? - x f Inc'reas`e in traffic congestion or� hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x 14. Public: Services. Will the proposal nave an er.recE_upon or result in a substantial need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas r a. Fire protection? x ba Police protection? K c.- Schools? I d. Parks or other 'recreational facilities? X. e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other govertinental services? 7C 15. Energy,, Will the proposes rAsuit in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. ' Substantialincrease >in demand; upon existing sources, of energy, or require the" development of new sources of energy? =; 7 16. 'Utilitie_s. Will,the °proposal. `res"ult t,.n a need for necq systels f or'' sub- stantial alteration's to the followin uti;Lities:, - a. Power or 'natural gras? -.. x; _ ",,•, 77. YES %IAYB�; NO b. Communications, systems? "x � C. date' 7 X d . Sewer (will trunk line be extended, providing capacity to serve nem development)? _ x e. Storms water drainage? x 17. Human iiealt'n. Will the proposal result Ln: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (e a-l.udi.ng mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? x i + 18i Solid taste. t.4ill the proposal result ( in any si-nific`nt impacts associated with solid waste` disposal or litter control? x ly. Aesthetics, will the proposal ,result intheoustt'ucti;on of any public. designated or recognized scenic vista open to the public? Will the proposal _ result ir itbe creation of an aesthetically of;fens.ive site open to public view?Wili the proposal 4 significantly after the character of the area? _ t 217. Recreation,. Will. the proposal result' ` in ;an impact.upon the, quality, or quantity of ekisting plablic recrea- X Lion facilities 21 Archaeolo• ical%Historical. Will the proposal result its an a terat ion of a significant archaeological or historical site, structure; object; or building? 22. Mandatory F.iodinas of Sianifi;cance. a. Clow they ,project have the potential to d'egrede 'the 'gL( lity of the � environmeat, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or ;wildlife: species, cause a fish or wil.d'life F� _....�...��..., ri Bir3t�e1L Hem �ht :`1�t�o 46-71, 01, 02 pro jec t # 82-62 Speci"d f} :aw, rezone, and subdyis�un _. The project is .I subdivision of aboott 1200 acres ..'r to around homesites with appurtenant services, ;,.;ti• -,a . ,; Vest side of ;Doe 1.M Ridge, mi1Ps Y�E of Chaco, between L Lt.le Chico ;reek and 'Doe Mill Ridge Road# Portions of sections and 18 of T22N, R3E, MDM. Portion 12 -of T22N , R2E and a ortion'of Sr�ct�.on DLt 3 acres av p .'i', i't ±: .t a 4r ::. srk dt-'���t4a•:Iw �� f• turf%i' f."'^r, : Approx. 7 percent of gro'ect -, a red. .�r�.��•. xiCi ,fir, ��z' .° t'tt Access would be From Highway 3 via Santos Igy` extension through 'Isom -Hall property} Doe Mill Ridge Road lies to the east.. Individual. septic tanks. ,• if C3-pwd y Iadiy dual wells. • '17 P lLin-c.Existing to projectsite. X "oY-litYcu1nral-Rest- dential designation allows, for '1,-40 acres/M. • M i) y 7^ r a atr>:c't'�1 'a4`at�c"," ° x"^"^' .:3 7r•Flat to gently roll.in upland ^.vast of Doe J-1111 Ridge, with small steeper' portions as land slopes to Little. Chieo and Butte Greeks. b. Under 5% on maap, uplandportion 100°la on eastern s'loves. 3�i-&U at port`,,, west, south rtarg.ins t, t ;r 1160 - 164 feet; the flat upland is at around '1460 feet. small areas of steep slopes "s. "x �?C`"Xp� a�`.7"o4fS1eS soils thin UYlf�e7: s eet :fll�C ): � or 5 feet deop in some parts; a stonvMreddish-brown clay. loaTh with 1 tr_�tr a L subsoidium to raid runoff., +„ • iii" * ++ w' IfSeVere limitation" ratin for suLl ability of septic -'tank leach fields. ) "�tG'��N •.,.y i .+.. .,:c.ie. ''.. �•: a`ta: ` ;�,4 + t fse : Moderate Earthquake Intens#q Zone V111 -. : S11.g11t V L �, 4 ygh H p,,.} ,.v i"' rate . r*. r,: 1't. " 2 _' � LoGr to �Soderdte .�: ; tri'1`,=. • . , , , A small storlr Ovate in pond is 1ocstid near the c ratei:ru-_-of the propexty4 AIL ti.di ell, Ite ahts, p.2 b. Circ: X d W kt(.r: Available from local aquifer- 7.00 Coot' deco ael9. ;exic'ti� Iil> taE Ga3''OtorL,C Property is drained by several intermittent tt: i.butaries to Lf the Chico and Butte Creeks, i d,, 1Yc2aC a Tl�:i.�xl�.'- � %x� 't,z e� Approxi 40-45 inches/year, None known High t.,. AiCOUS is tiali.tf': Rural -open land character. ' Air �{,Ltc, l+;f s Good w , , + ,aLati *1.: FoothiI1--ridgeland c character. Seedling Ponderosa pine, digger pine among; oaks, chaparral and large grassy areas. Large areas have been drained (about even ears ay; ars hoar reegc;a ing asnung c parva ;�. Wild- e fa ilttx�': U tier :Sonoran Lie 2one� wit-Inabindant wildlife, including deer,. '10. ArcbaeolD.gical and Historical resources in the area: One recorded site netentially _sensitive. Archaeological clearer+rce gi ren -A- resin � c` rfostl AQricultuoral- �s dential A-1 Butte County Genera: Plan. des4 Gn�x�i©r= y (1-40 ,aas at N and S ends of open -Grazing (40 ac/DU minimum) L 3:r-2 General �a �. S t l � g ZO1] 111 ',-A� .------° E i 'tin& lanZi Orie -vineyard; remainder is olDen :Land wiih seasonal grazi.ng- 4, qurrounding Area s. j ar, d Uses : open Cooth ll and canyon land, with light grazing and widely scattered homes.ite.. b Zoz,,ij,G: Mostly A-2: G. Gen. Plan desi;Tzss.:io*lls : Open -Grazing with. :areas: i ricult trel-ites,i+dr;ntisl. 0 60 thweat and f`a richer to east and zzi5rf ht d... Parcel. sizesA z0, - loo acres. o. PopkIlatio11: tcatterad-rural. -�.aS'aCt �` U SA F' and Art• a: Open foothill tetzain.' Wi,delY scattered houses. ��eax"est 9rbar� A e .; Ghi,c,o 7, miles southraest -4�. peiovaiit Spheres of IlIflUEqjeL ; N.A. bice PT'Ot cUOT e r'vi Cir CA Dept. Of Forestry Ch co's a. Nearest Qoul �.y �S��atLl �"ire �va�� �rY: Fair St,. , C�hasset fid. stations . ���ite A,vaila .ility ? Rtock trater.in pond within project area. .xcl]quls in Arotx;, Chico unified School District App ondix V - page ?b of 9 f� ,r Bidwell ibT8CUSSIQIv`, P. � Y z}; Construction and improper mainteiance of roads or holoosites near drainages may contribute silt,. increasing turbidity of ;,urface: -gates; storm runoff traversing homes;:tes and roads could carry i os does of petroleum, pesticides and other to.cic substances typical o.f UrhArxizing areas. 3h, i ` Aquifers could be cut by excavations for homesites or roads On, hi;ilsides. Groundwater Will be withdrawn through Ivells fob water supply; adequacy of groundivater supply for sustained yield shot�wa be verified. 5h. The Environmental Health DiVision indicates that areas proposed for high density on septic systems wall require proven soil depths of over s6ven feet located where tests indicate sewage 1,,7ill not percolate on substrratas. The existing .�ell, yielding over ► gallons per minute, could serve vuch of the rezone area. Additional dome source s would need. to Tae developed to assure ample supplies }:ox ' domestic use and fixe protection., mater availability is not con - throughout the rezone area. 3 , . Flooding downstream, is not expected to tl dfe to this pzo�ect because of thcamparative'lyeTargesizeofnhe j drainage basin.they 4a: Clearing for access roads and homes could remove a significant "homesites. of certain vegetation types, depending on placement c Homes tesof 4b:, Bidwell's knot need vas observed on the site by the botanist •a1 slopes. Mit Mitigations �Plere not deemed necessary. A71 s�VCl 4c: Human habitation inevitably brings new species of house, �,�xderi and landscaping g p. g plants into a natural area:.. Sa,c,d Gonstrtzction of access roadsand homes would 0°litninate same Wildlife and encroach upon -the existing wildlife habitat. Phis trill, reduce' the wildlife carrying capacity, of 4he site, of man's presence, ar those tshose s w . Animals- intolerant reduced or eliminated will reloca'tepto�other aareas iitat nt'Allyabeen :may displace existing wildlife or die off, Any dogs Zvhend a11o„ed to roam free may become local predators and, chase, deer and other, wildlife, road kills from increased tehicZe traffic would also .increase with development. The California Department of Fish and Game shor,rs this area as part of: the East Tehama Deex Herd tuin.ter range an the Area of Special Biological I'tnportarce .map , Forty acre minimum parcels p (or a cluster arrangement of dwelling units with ccr t�parab'1 e effect are dust g tory deer herd survival, ' to insure m ra If the projected deveopme.nt densit is a the 1200 acres tvl.l be de stro y approved, they anticipate e d for Sv �' a.l.dl�.fe Off-site' habitat. 0�'f-s�.te and cumulative impacts to Little Chico Creek and. the wildlife habitat are also stated to be key concerns. Bidwell DISCussIDN, p. i 611Increase in 'road traffic and .human activity �,�aulz�, a n � a. levels over the quiet crcase noise ambient levelsn C7 natural setting. fat• The proposed project involves,acre min'parcel sizes larger than the one - category Which coversdaboutt90pAo�icultural_Residential Land use p g �► appropriate P the prOPOTty. However aao1T much larger Would be a ro riate de ends. on the a criteria- which are subject to ante�c,rotata on rata on o C "conditional Ariate in .light of General, Plan policies Will be tphroughden public hearing process gbI The development could affect Wildlife habitat use of surrounding areas by the introduction of nose, traffic, humans and their dome animals: Caltrans stir Caltrans comments that the project a the goals of the State's Urban Strategy, aPPears to be inconsistent With immediately adjacent to urban development w}ientexpandingdbe�Xondzs existing urban and suburban areas. ofga,b.. Some amount of natural resou7'Les Mould_be used for eons �►f roads and residences. traction road$ ,Cor heath 'Upon completion, the use of non-renewabie +yell r c orator ating) a} r conditioning and appliance operation, as auld occur at a sustained level. 11, 12: The residential area would significantly increase the o . ration density in the, Doe Mill Ride area, p p��_ and growth-an.ducIng it fac litateldevelopment ofecedent properties; resulting in. an increasF in the population growth rate Of this area. to satisfy the demand for additional housing. The Bureau of .hand Management believes that continued development this area Will eventually have a significant impact an'th lands; They i,zrther. encourage ,a rezone of the - e public orderlyand proper gxot,rta�., project area to enable l a,tK,d: The 'proposed 330-335 units could generate approxima 2500 2700 neii daily trips on Hi hWa 32. telt' under 2000 trips/day.g �' Present traffic counts are Caltrans is concerned about traffic impact, to Highway 32 and Santos 1 a T, warranted at ghat intersection With�thencostcharnborneabion t�r�ttld be 4 unless the County is: able to 'share in ,tile cost. They requested needed roadway improv eme !ts q., t as to the construction -related a.n acts irate right-of-way xthi�_ the Stade ri ht-o�etay be studied g The Public ,16arks Department states that 'if'or a 7`0.7FaJ' and radii T vegetation recto of this se and deiisit} grauel rgads are anadectuate'�. A cc route from the southerly end should be re ui.red:, ect elation project' area Wit!iin Sectio, q They note the a Z'3 -Is not jrithin the existing mountain Recreational Area as designated on the map* !from the Sf-. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles could result turning'movements at Santos 'Jay .and. RIghway 32_. and from heayieretraf'fic on narrow local 4 al roads such as Doe Mill Road. I t i Bidwell DZSCIU�STaN P, 4 1.4a Some form of ensured firs protection will be ecessa;xy since this chaparral area is ane of high ;Ere.riangex. Provisions m,ar have to be made for an additional firetruck and adequate hater supplies, 14b: County sheriff or other police readillyr available for t`he residents; nw routes Or shift �teinopei,sonnel may be required to cover this large development, or the -residentsr=�sui 1 have to be content with a low level; of police protection. 14c: The Chico Unified School District indicates the proposed, subdivision is 12 miles . plus from the nearest elementary school (1 ar1cvi2w) and 3 miles plus from the nearest junior (Chico Junior and senior (Chico Senior) high schools. Bus transportation, woulo. be available unless District policy changes. Building a neiv school,, expansion of present school sites, and I busing of students are future alternate means of housing additional students. Any' expansion ft.inds must come i The increase y' a to - , in part, from the develop,�rs. 385 families would contribute about 193 chi 1 to the school district, dren xrossibly enough to necessitate school expansionns. i' i 14d: The use of parks and other recreational facilities will occur by Potential residents Of the project to an undetermined }ogre. the: Due to additional traffic on local unpaved or unimproved roads, of County may have to improve or maintain certain ones to riaint�in } safety, 14f: The provision of public services such as building j1lspecti.on and mosquito abatement will be more costlY to provide to this EYaut1 zn location, y, g The City of Chaco commented about the Cour s abs l,itY :o p� Q,,-ide services to the area. 'the levels; of service proposed and mech�7n sms to pats for those services wi.1l be addressed in the Specficlnn lea: Iicrensed amounts of gasoline would be used in cammutan„ to Chico; electricityand g gas would be used in significant =Amounts for home heating, cooling and app-liances. 15b: Substantially increased demand would be placed on t110 electrical months xa load increase ill surlmer ower distribution." y ' r�buta.on. s stem. especiallyas 16a,b: Telephone systems would h"re to be extended to t1e propox�tXr as would natural, gas, unless the residents, used electricity, s�l.ar power or bottled gas,; ME maintains .the power line ,cinch traverses part of the site., A 10 foot minimum setback from the centerline of the facilities i$ recommended for homes and wells. : .,Yf , A /. .. ,�.. .... _ .. (l Bidwell DISCUSSION, P.- 5 l6c: Refer to item 3h. 16e: Surface: runoff may be sufficiently increased: by impervious surfaces that at some point a stormwater drainage system may have to be installed; 1.7a,b r Potential malfunctioning of septic systems could create a health hazard in which ground and surface water could be exposed to wastetiater contamination. The possibility- of rattlesnakes and. rabid skunks in the vicinity would erose to people hazardsi p patenti:l health 10: The residential development could detract from scenic dualities of views frara Highway 32,, and may altor the open-space character of tho area, The Bureau of Land Management has expressed concern about the impacts on the scenic qualities of the canyon. Architectural design, compatible with the environs, is recommended. 21: An archaeological survey has been performed with clearance recommended since no significant archaeological sites were observed.. 22a: Most of the wildlife habitat would be eliminated by the proposal at full buildout. 22b The project would provide liotising opportunities in an area the General. Plan designates for eventual residential use at densities between 7 and. 40 acres. T.he ul timate density will need to be balanced with long-term goals; of the General Plan, such as discouraging: urban development isolated from existing development and urban centers unless such a need can be determined (Open Space Element) regulating development in i denti fied winter deer ranges to ' facilitate the Sur- vival of deer herds (Land Use Element) , and enc6u4%gi.ng adequate fire protection, services in all areas of population growth anti high recx eation use (Safety , Bement 22c: Project impacts which., though .individually limited in severity Or scope, add up to make the ,project a source of considerable impact particularly °when vietived together with adjoining proposed developments, ' impacts- eros i o,n mpactszerosion and stream sedimentation reduction. of ivldli fe habitat signflcant increase in Local population density - i:ncrlease in vehicular air pollutant emissions', gasoline use and traffic from; Chico commute earthquake ha,tards groundwater availability and supply energy consixmption - increased traffic; impact on on and off'-site roads, circulation pattern 1 - 2948 San Verh,.ria Way, Chico, California 95926 (916) 343 -9277 October 130 1981 GEOLOGY ANZ, ECOLOGIC 14AZAR98 OF ': W ARE,�i ALONG LITTLE CHICO CR CT. AND DCF,MILL RIDGE, BLgTE COUNTY, ,AUFORNTIA. 1NTRODCCTI, I Two irrP gularly-shapo1 parcels totalling about 1900 nacres are being considered mor low-density residential 'development. Water is to be developed on-site, and sewage disposal is •to be by individual styptic systuns. The parcels include. parts of Sect' ons 1, 2, 11 and 12, T22N, R2E Sections and &, 7, and 18, 22N, R3E,. The westerly I sore -'ria ll property includes. the canyon of Li t e Chico Creek, acid an isolated upland remnant to the west, The easterly 14a.ys property lies mostly on the up_lanc of ' Doe Mill Ridge. Approxi.,Mae property boundaries are shburn f on the attached, geological -snap. ; h si. e was ant ned an t October 3 and 4, 1981. TOPOGRAPHY l The, Igoe Mill Ri,dgo upland°is plat to gently, rolling., i.: Slopes typically at�rerar�e'less than ;5 ( per hundred Wit) its over much Of Surface; .,.t> the eaater.n margo a of t.ho Ridge, steep s100e9 t1p7 to -100° ark common, whereas slopes of 30 t&45%1lso :xo t'iio Ridge on the north; west, and south margins rl the proposed deV, .lopment situ, Topography n in.,the ivastorn parcel is More,irregolar. There are flat or gentry -sloping areas near Little Cbico Cre 1�k and onthe upland ramnant in SVI/4 Sec. 2. Elsewhere, slopes average rrom l-5 to 8.0°�. Despite the irregular terrain, none of , the Elevations range from 6201 to '780 ft along Little Chico Croek, and `rom 131,50 to 1:6401 ft on the upland ridcies. SOILS According to t'�je Soil Conservation w ervice (1S)67), the parcels are covereotl by soils of the Toomey -k entz _issoc .ation. IrooR`es soil, wh7.gh is doral inant on. the slopes of the sltef, is typica lly a brown. , slightly ha rd, cobbly loam. I J "t encs to be loss than 2 ft thick, but pockets of greater depth are pre4ent. clay content. is. variable. � y , � I ydon Page three October l� , acent waopes . ai - - ;� ' pied soil and, rock. debris that washes �.`n �'�om .bbl: ar s�►ndy d -r that � . e y it i.s a tan clay s eere it can, be seen, and shau.ld be ��pecc?d to ilxave � 1.aStic r 4 �uyl n places.. Ct is very �- high shri ny--Wlte.11r activity low permeabilityy ����� moderate to tai g erodibi.l ty �fi:;c IX3GX�x E P SGT CSI` Development Of the ancestral. �i.erra Nevada , ���1ich endue some riim; illox dears at o resulted in the formation of foldr�d wind 1 Z m r cis in canyon bot-t�aMS s s �rj o` r cc'k that now a r e e..F � stem i�ra x E ',auvted kms"' , 1, ... east and north o#. Paradise. The Foothills Fault Sy 4 in this s time, fter a lona interval of exos��the�t formed d:U g and sediments O� ocean encroached on the Paradise rea s regional uplift tend r , C�hlco Formation 'we, deposit Of (Lo`vej0y 'Egasa:l.t) ` anoth+ar ;song period cid erosion flow$ Oi la �SParadise. ti m e Be s ted Vest and 'LTcrtflWES� of yet more erO.sion: followed. Then, about . 3 milliori:.years ago, a thick s�uence. Of volcanic mud.lows and �ssocated volranir san ds and. conglomerates (Tuscan �"Ormatibr=) co�itered 3asaltc lava 'ate3 flowed award the Sacsaaitet�nto the region• (2.4 mi tl;i.on years �a] ley';al-on`� the future caiIrse of Deer geek ago) and ,coha sset P.idge (1. L million years ago) [Harwoos;� et ,al . during - °O-Ma - st eml, €irst developed The Foothills Fault Sy inactive until. a rent]y r,,*a8 relatively tion of the Sierra, PPS it is ew million Yea f JeP+'t� J-Jater Resources l9"79} . the lasAles ,y the Considerer to be fixe. source-of the eeism�c acfiva.� in . and Oroville including the �e ierrar. oothill.she W uahe. shear zone in the Fc�bthii LS Fst:lt 1:975 provlle ea�;thq ear Grove lie i s on treed with the ;hico cr�onoct pastern system n zorn;s the stra�q sahic% is a fold in Rfiuscn rocks that suggests Y CO . This margIn o tha �arr'art�t�to ia:tie yart�Yrues al,, the ectst.erft a t tae Fncithi 1,,1 s Eault system on £aat2 ils' of the Ilal.ley to--jrd ed Bluff ti ill-de fityW d bane bf small ults and Tract gyres .extend fa to near Rod Sluf f Atecent study of this Zono (14anloodet al, these conclusions: 11) Va Ltltinq occurred CA.Et or deposition 0'r the Tuscan Formation.', and offset rocks that have been rpdjo- metrically &1ted at 1.1 million ye0r$;, (2) The age of t.,j,(j 1r�0,st recent fault movement In the Zone is not known; (3) �-Iowovor, the existence of fault scarps I Meter high near Red :suggests that some fault movement "'undotib-Ledly took placer in 'the' Pll:st MillionYears"), and (4) Folding OJEthe C 11 hico monc�:IJLne and r-OrmatiOn of its many small faults Probably occurred 111 response to movement on larger but deeply -buried faults. C-001,C,GY Or THE S I T EP Three geological units,,, all go Inclined toward. the southwest, are exposed on the parcels (see geological r,13p) From oldest tlu yotingest they are: M I r 71 (1) Tan, sorra,54:1inies Saft.dy or pebbly, claystone and cla V LIV . _�.PO F01,MAtiol'i. This � Of i,"Ie 3.8 Soft and easUN-erocled unit, -tends to be cjovored by' rock and soil debrissh i�ra ed down onto I it from 4djacent slope�,. (2) Fractured,; black;1�j+;eejoy Basalt. Tbi8 Unit is hard and resistant, to erosion forms either steep bluffs cut, by a stream.. or else broad flat bunches eanches nPar 1,.ittltm_ Chico ure.c,.L-.. The j-oc clt, is h8l4wily fractured, but: nonetheless is relatively impiarmeajb:1,o, so that' small seeps,j springsi and boggy. 0 1� SPOt, FdrM at the bai3e, f th overlying et1Yittq, TiAscan, Formation. Tuscan Foz,mi-A.Iont co. ne I st, 1��ets of Of al ern, a Voicani-, -mud fl,:1W:ddbri$ (tuff broccia) ani Volcaft 'ic, sandstone and condlomerate. T tia mu E d,'laws ±014"'tiv,ely im permeable arid Intervening layers of Wlcaliitsediment arerelatiVoly permeab.Le. as results, tr6os and brush horizontal, stripes on caftyartiwing the pormoable ,0 VoIcanIC-sediw-.,nt layers predom'naEt In the lover part of the Tuscan Vormati.M., Whereas mQdflow layers are coni ant in the upper p er pa 1: ­ CM Iydbn iage fide October a The mud low', layers .are well cemented and hard, and thus usually form steep erosion7reWistant bluffs several to more than .50 ft high. intervening layers, of softer sediment tend to irorm gentler slopes -when eroded. The Chico Formation and Lovejoy Basalt are exposed on the site only, along, Little Chico Creek. Exposures in the adjacent canyons af butte and 5iq Chico Creeks indicate that the Chico Formation is present beneath the sit at elevatioris of 560 to i 6613 ft along a northwest--sotitheast line, Because of the gel tle southwestward inclination rn of the .rock units, the elevation of the Chico Formation on the site should be slightly higher tea the northeast. The Lovejoy Basalt upper surface is at a,•i ` eIevat: or acyf al:>ntxt 800 ft along Sig and Little Chico Creeks, buL the unit is not exposed along Butte Creek. it probably underlies all of the lson+-ball property and the western part of the Mays Property The depth on f-ae .sllte to ancient crysU,13.ine rocks o;i; tha Sierra Wevada is 'not known. tjowever , the Chico Formatio;l is ',. n y mi more #�ha� SCl:3 ft thick 3'r,,- � o er Cotte Creek can on about 7 north (flarwood >et al. 1981) , and so should be thicker th�.n that at the site. iqumerou,a lineaments are visible in air photos of the site. They consist of trees and brash aligned in straight; or slightly - curved" lines. These lineaments represent the surface grates of j the faults I and fractures described in the, section on regiidnal ., geology. Some of the 1%nealnent,8, mapper by Hartroodet al. (1961) are not evident on the 1.9°75 low-levet: black. -and -white air} photos; these are shown on 010 ge&iogical: map as dashed lines. SOverai l:neamentcTyet e e;aained in the Ewald wit-riout finding any positive evidence, suchas offset. strata , that .hey, are faults nonetheless, the followfiing 'evidence suggests, that some of them, at least,, probabi are faults: (1) "they li,e within the it - G dofinE�d zone of faults and fractt�ies described by Hzlr� od et. al. (1981)a (2) although not a.11 the lincaments examined by Rarwood et~ al. showed offsets of"adjacent rook layers, a- large percentage 'did, enough so that one would have to recognize widespread small-scale faulting as an essential feature of the zone of lir eamen s (3) Af least some of the recognized ' faults 'page six l.,ydon. i 'i October 13, 19$1 are relatively young (movement within the last million yearS) ; - uinc(4) Modern recorded earthquake aiythetzone Shows `Ywithin ilomet rs--s that brea)ung W rock— at atdepths of' afevkilometers-- san activity occurring 'intermittently' at the present time. J JYDIRO LOGY A hydrological assessment of the parcels will be made by ion. Anderson, so a few cfeneral remarks here will suffice. The Only permanent stream on the site is Little Chico Creek, but t the major cful.ches andtttan�r of the smaller ones can be expected to carry l.oW'r f ONFs of water intermittently during the a re4 y s ?aSon, t , Ancient, crystalline rocks o -_F the sierra, the Chico Formation) and the z.otey Basalt yield no or only siall flaws .of v,�ter to yells, chiefly from intersecting fractures or porm- eable layers of limited extent. Because the Chico Formation vraS ,deposited in, an, ocean, contained water might be saline or brack- ish although Tushing of any permeable layers by groundwater movement might. have replan -rd some of the original -salty porgy water with fresYi Waters , The Tuscan Forra.tion contains inter.layered permeable (sedi- sedi-_mentar ) AYid impermeable,, (mud'L low) layers, w1th the permeable mentary) ones being more abundant in the lowerpari o£ the unit. Because- the underlying Lovetjoy Basalt tends to be impermeable, water in the lowest part of the Tuscan usually will not leak, through the Lave joy, ?,ut Vrill be transmitted laterally until it intercepts canyon. walls, This general olaserrraton is borne out by the preserxce. of several. sma.11L Springs in the tower part of the Tuscan, w.ithi)n and outside the parcels, and by the fact that a VIell neer the pond in S1,4 1/4 Sec. 7 yields a substantial fl,0'4 of water froirk a: depth, of 703 ft (O. Hays, oral communication, October l"l) . the well ois at an elevation of about 1600 ,since ft, it penetrated to withi.r► l00 i=t of the projected sub urface elevation ,of the LLOVeiOY Basalt, or within 200+ fL of the Pro- jected. eloratio i of, the Chico Formation. ]' `r UV IlUii. Cjt[,VL- u.niform water -carrying pr(pperties, because of variations in grain Size, clay contest, and distribution of pore -filling g nu tura l cements. Therfor, e the io ter Yield ,o the Tuscan should i also be non-una.fozm.: iards not 1.;1P�•yr� dose ,a problem Subo irk erice . .,-..�..,..�....,._... RracY `types present on the parcels are of a type in Which tfXtraCti on of subsurface fluids 'fill not result in sub - sidenc{; (VideSpread lowering of the ground surface) This aonclusion is the same as that reached in the County General P,'Ian ;(ala, ]CIx-1, Butte County 977) . mom lydon page eight ;octobex: 13, �$l activi t is high in the Under natural conditions, erosion on, very � �r in the Lovejoy _ soft sediments of the Chico Form�iTus n Formation. The laver Basal, and la to moderate on " �. rack predaminatos ; is more art of the Tuscan, Wl'.., e sedi�r,eritary art TA upland susceptible to eros, an than is the upper p _ -aces on DoeMillF.d�e and in SW ;1/4 See. 2 have low erosion fur activity. ; ender conditions of dwrelopment act vitt', the relative n, Levels of erosion activi t s•hcLad remain the same, all areas *Xcept the LoveJoy should Xncrease. 4 erasion a xv ty can e nriti Dated by folla�,x� ng proper i � This includes tine of low # desion and cor'15tr rction practice. ing unci disposal cuts. proper :„rading and �idequate water-carry �.ecitures on r`-,ads, proTnP t neve eta tion of construction sites; and adequate :,compaction of fill material Vcs:I,canism. generali2ed analysis of volcanic hazards in the +i s that the site m"igl,t be �r 3.x'76) 3n[i1.t«a�`�' Tjnited Sta•teS (�iull.ine! uUX of a.. ,large" y �'h from J stzl,;, j ect µa to 2Ci c { tb 12 inches ), �” tion. Mould )fe la rig e eruption er�rption in the Lasser., Peak area . eztzst-ed �$ bctIt,, four times as much material as wa once drat erup The probability 19E30 ept"on of i�fy St.. Helens'. in the Ilay low, because' ect the site is; very the t suck, an event 41111 awl unuSua.l in itself,� that a large eruption, it would. r�uir. - -level winds. Aide with unusual due-nor,.h high-level sea slam%cant Clem Aja Sys rds ,that m�_c'ht ri? e 1. hr nk-swell behavi.ar of Tocim s soil is classed Ransi —e— s � That of clay soil opt as law �Sai1. Conservation mer' i e 196?) "the upland; ridges, the L. tl, Chico iormatiol Should l.e high. Un shrinkage crags scattered presence of soil. mounds and,, rarely, ;y-ail indicate that shri nk-swell actirrity is mod rsoetkiin that Moderate- in'. but tends to b on the Lovejoy is c{4ayey in places, s shrink--Swell caj acs ty is immaterial. ansive ,t�i_l inan cause damage to building foundations Expo I s. Mitigations that can �uti lity conneq�;ons,r and slab driveway 1 Lyoon page nine octbber 13 19i$l can be employed include chemical ' treatment of soil at building sites,_ .avoidance of slab foundations., placement of deep founda- tions below the soil level at which expansion occurs, and use of grading and landscaping practices designed to minimize shrink s,%rell activity: Sault displacement, There is no evidence of an, active fault on t'he site. However, as described in the section on geology, some of the lint visible on air photos are probably faults Y' further, although the age of the last fault activity in the l3.sleratnent zonf4 is not 'known, the possibility exists that it is recunt enough for the. lineaments to be viewed with some concern• mitigation that, can be employed to remove any possibility Of hazard from iaul:t displar;ement is simply not -P place inhabit- ed structures across ally of the 1`,Lnements. .dation waterqunlit Leach fields that ;ai1 commonly . Lam• result in ,degrading the duality of surface or subsurface water. The 31oi l Conservation service (1067) classes Toomes soil as having "severe limitation" in use for septic-tang filter fields. z severe-lLmitation rating means that the percolation rate i's slower than 76 minutes per inch, and the likely= occurrence of an overflow greater. than 48 hr induration is once in 6 years. These assumptions underlie -this rating. 12 inches or more-of earth ;cover over the leach lines lines are 4 inches or more in diameter; acid at least 2 inches of filtermaterial. Covers, t'I' lines, and "at leash .12 inches is 'below them. sit The poor ra tiAg given Toomes sol is probably due in pa -M to its shallow average depth and the fact that it tends to e mainly oti. Moderate to ste,iep slopes. 11o�+ever, where slopes are lois and soil thickness is above average the sevore� lmi tate: onrating migiit, not apply. on the- uplands, soi3 is shallo>,q fear I cl�:fiel.ds in scattered spots, butt in' jajost places depth appears toe adnate. 1°ermo .bi lit~y. is probab!V lois to modarate. moil on the boy"c oy 'rasa It is mostly too sha i toIv fox leach fi el.ds�;, and is underlain "7- Lydon,,page ten ; > October 13 , 1981 r; by a rock ,type that is either impermeableor, if fractured sufficiently, lacks absorptive capacity.. Soil derived from 'the Chico Formation probably is unsu-itable for leach fields because of its high c;Lay content. , Mitigations that r_an be used in soils that are only, m�irginal- ly suitable for leach fields include using greater length of leach ,pipe Llian_ otherwise would be done, excavation of the leach field t�_: a. groater depth than assumed by the Soil. Conservation Service criteria, and, if necessary, 'Llse of imported fill to improve filtration characteristics: Landslides and rockfalls;, The County General Plan rates the relative risk, rom. landslides on the site as "moderate". Examination caf low-level air photos, and coverage of most of the property on the ground, failed to reveal any evidence of la+nd-- sl,IdLtb_s. Even on the steeper parts of canyon 1falls, the strength of ruck units appears to be great enough to prevent slides from developing. Rockfalls do Occur, however:; A rockfall is the rapid fall, at least .partly through ai.r, of single or multiple blocks o rock. erosion -resistant, cliff= forming layers of mudflow debris in the 'Tuscan Formation are underlain bysofter more -erodible sedimentary laYers, As erosion of the sort material undercuts. the hard layers, material in small cliffs breaks avay along near -vertical fractures and tumbles dow-nh ll. In places., small boulder -sized pieces of mud; lov material are scattered over the surface of, the lower) gon,tly-sloping sedimentavy layers; such rock debris must 'havd fallen and then. rolled or slid to its present position, Large roc ,call Mocks stere noted a.. -I- two places west of Little Chico t:rtsek They are above the access road to the Drake property, a~3ou.t< 1,200 and 1700 ft southwest of its junction vi f-11 ; the Hays -property a,CCess road:. The northerly spot has two ,largt blocks (the laryosr . in about 10 x 12 1 $ ftp resting at . the down- hill code of a small flat b nch. . Vie "G ope leading tQ the, road ' below is moderato.1y stoop. judging from the growth of trees at Lydon. Page eleven October 13, 1981 this spat, the blocks_rtell many years aqo, fiom a layer of mud - flow material i0st uphill: The blocks are Stable now, but erasion Of the flat ;conch in future years Wk,,ht rause t1lom to rola do nbil . The southetrly Spot is occupied by a larg flab block, r stiri,t near thc� crust O a small. ridge. it appear,9 to, be stable i n its present POSition and the slopes.. dOwnhil fror it are a,s s t .not - C, ep as at the northerly blocks. edges of bl.uI fS in the LovelOy Da$a,lt shotild be regarded as gonerally unstabl,o with respect to rockfalls, because the rogk typica l,ly is crosscut by numerous small: fractures. I; 4iti--TatiorxS that can be used to reduce hazard from rockfall�u include -a (1) riot 'building dig el lings at the base or near the edge of blur Es 7.n tete 'TmsCan -and Love_ a _j Y, especially where erosion :has begun to undo4cut th,o blmff; and (?) avoiding areas -Joj4 - slope frolt "the large blocks described earlier, or beloif any other large blocks that might later be discoverea. Carthauake acti j, LPrimary. Of fect of a `_ n, earthqua�e is ground shaking, the horizontal and vertical vibration oz the gro'Und that can in rp ult damage to bu ild "I n 0-$3, Pipes, storage tanks, etc. -Secondary effects include li;gue:'action, l urehirq, Sl'Omping, and rockfalls. Liquefaction, trhich can be a ,problem in loose.,: granlllAr, saturated soil, refers to creation of a liqlid-lik+a condition in soil by cribration. .uichi.na_anc] Slumping, which are most severe in loose; granular" soil, refers, to formation of mounds, daipres:5ians, ;and large cracks by Fibra-; tion. Z3.L.'olf�.xru' Q rock that are on -the verge ..-. .oF go � falling art-, some_ t1wels steak n loose dvritiq an earthquake. Because the 1.00,90:, Sandy, clay7t ee typos s of Soy` joy; , d .�" �.l S:,o.tt subloct f3 3L�1YC ie"4 " 41 k Y L7rCw'�r° F t l` .%+ P, fi`Ir 2dYS4 }1r0*ei], �opnyt�a�_y.1s{+s9.yt{�� , �s 1:"ty��lc�cy� �a P "* . tel c 1caYtr°a '11torr.i. t.tent r j0�yc�e�otW�I 'rT'ryha M i.i J.i+.rarl 4.ou p�,�ll4v s.�4�.C..`4aw�. 4!\w"' A1'�J4 ��n+d G�,'Y��.�t,�Y`"4 .. _ y/ c / ( ��y }'tjn uyµ� y s • s hcIl.:r;iii'd +!,JCt the SiLe lC7C:kfeil.l iS P41CeS3 Vdtigation, E'ari;,}"=qtY k07illdl- ted t"ockfal.iS aro Lho Brame a,5 drscr c in tho -section On landslides and rocd i MEN .. .......... Lydpn Pa ge ti rclve ddtobor 13, 1981 ° `E ; !` �'hc� S it e�ri, t�y of r YC;ta«7C( sham, d epend,s Mainly on ��r� ,��� d � «�akaC rt to the cau rativc ealu'l alte, the strength of the ear~tfl(juake, o and the 'nat.uro Of the spy 2 �nr!�. rack at the a, ec ed' . i t The I�f.:i`er7G]th off' eart:hCtLYd�;�*a 1.5 eX'�'ess�'d as mclgnitud`e sic xtc� x�nd the se arty of d4magO in i:nhabi ted areas � ess-� d as intens'it.y (�jodif 1,ed Nexcall scale) a c�rai i xc nt earthquakes „ i thin about 27 mi of the site j pludo one o#• �f a a - ma gn itt l ; 5o,7 7 ra ea r S t r l ; ~a �{ q City ir7. 1940, s=s 1.6 north of Silo:ol.l Fark Oaf5t Cf Cbico in 1.966, and !4 5.7 41,t. PaILermn in 1975. Tn addition, sari: ,quakes "naviner an intensityiC ' ..r at their source (magnitude not rocord0d) Occurred in 1942 east o 4)ti.rlinq City and 1945 of Parad se (Real et al. bfinos and Geology 1978) . r (Paraphrasing dart o.= f�'he Mod 'fled Y"�tercall i scale.- '71: Weak Blast +r and 'uaux einforced adobe crack; vri ndorts pre�zk. '�� 1i tier oak masonry damn c cd s0tile cracks in good but tanrein�nrc- ed masonry, 'af Coad but unreinforced masonry damages; some darnagd to rein%orc structures -with good mortar and Workmanship, hoose panel �vj-a'lls thror.-:z out, Several smaller earthquakes wi thin t ml 0-C the site, mziinly to the oast, occur re4. fol jo,,, ing the 1975 oj:Ovi1.1e e�rtbgtYake (Marks and Lindh 1978). ;;;hie riot sagnizicant in terns o damage; tle indicate that mho zone Of lzracaments Within -which the site lies is arh area n� ongoing seismic aeti�rity, All interred fauit shpWXt on Ma-0 I of the �'ozantyenxa l lata is the srarre as the lineament that extends southwest from the Center' oc tho north line O-L- .roc. -.3. ` Because the �jitc 3ies within tho nortorn '�:tensitara o t?ao ` cathilissd.em, ® ,anr3 b0c" aklst. r, tem is get, er�'t 11o^ cc rasid reu r.�a �ablrP:' Producing ,a r" n: Producing g. a tuc e 6,5 earthgLjako tc 0,-Id •enc e xorzf r�a .: umero�as p��blioC st,ttci'i.cs is skfrr��aari��od • prizat� aad V. a.ri ,E ..xnr�s ��rYd �.��o1c�a .�ta��' 1�7��, i is roasanable plan ` ming Z.0expect tho site to be sub j cwt yt�� a ctXxtgtaitu��� carthquake Lydonpae thi.rteen�r 0tober 3.3- , 1981 With. its epicenter (a spot on the ground; 'imn;ecllatcly above the earthquake source) located at a di.gtance of less than -0 mi Studies correlating macjnitude, d'stance to ep; center , and , effect. at a site (gooro Ot al. 1978) show that such an earth- quake lQ mi from the situ could rs:alt in horizontal ground acceleration of o.2 to 0.A g (20 Lo 40 percent of the ,accelera- tion ow gravity). This corresponds very roughly to an intensity of V Il (Mays IM) This type of lateral motlon can be mitiqated in struCx:�ares' her foll -wing the design criteria of the Un,iform Building Code, which identifies all of northern California as being in. seismic None 3 ( earthquake intensities of VIII or higher anticipated) , Baore, D.M. , et al. , 1978 , Zs,tiit anon of ground motion parameters: U.S. Geol. Survey CIrc::ttl,ar .°.•5, 43 p. Butte 1.5,ounty, 1977, Final 3utte County General .Plan: County i4 anaing Deet . , unpublished; Sec. x t , Seismic safety ele- -' ont, 23 p;. iec • 111, Safety element., 23 .p• I Dept. of "iatw,r Resources, 1979,, The August 1, 1975, Oroville Earthquake investigations: Calif. Dept.., ;,later Resources Sull. 203-78, 669 P. ' Div, of mines and Geolgy, 1978, Earthquake z,a,talocue of Calif omia: ma etic-tap,- Compilation of data'U5',ed :In CoTgpiling ma.P by Real et al. 1978., f Div, of mines and Geology 0 taf f , 1979, Tochnical re -view of the s>oi8ntic safrety of the Auburn damsitet Calif. Div: mines; and Geology Spec. Pub. 54> 17 p. Harwood, D.S. ` et al. , 1981, Geologio mart, of the C"hito mono - cline and northeastern rt of the Sacramento Valley, Ca 1,i forni.a t U. S . Geol. Sczrvoy aP 1-1238 , scale l : 6? , 500 . Trays, wJ1,:;, 1980, Procedures for estimatinq earthquake 'ground mrStior�s: �».. Gea1. >atzreyrrof. A,"aper 11;4, 77 p. marks, .:�I. , ahci Lindh; .� ,, 1978, Rogi.onal 1q, icity of the Sierran foothilis in the yicinitY of tlrovil.le, Californla.:' �ta11. aOi6molactical: Soc.: of 'mer. 3 vol. 68, P. 1.103a-1115. Ki-illineazzx,, . , 9766 Preliminary overview, nap of volcan rw hazards In the 48 conterminous ��nited �tatGeol. Survey,,a 'yYF iscalo, 1:7,500,UOQ, p - r 786,