HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-50 DRAKE/ISOM SPECIFIC PLAN FILE #2 2 OF 5,��`
. b .
� I �
..
� ��C.
'�', .�.
��!
'Y
,�{�
�+ .,
�. 1
�,
_
�
y'i �'.� �
�
1.
� ..
�
,:r.
Lm
.a:���� �•r t' �
ry I'
li G� 1
,Iii
T '.
A
4 I+.7f R
*. y 7 'A
Yk
V 4 C,ry
Y
4if `422',.i
n
'
DRAKE OMES:k
ry j
4a
Y
STORM IDRA7NAGE: EVALUATr
1 ON
,..
OF THE PROPOSEPj
CAN1(ON PARK' EST ATES
p
4,�r+{F4
y �d, A t7r' .f 4xY1 4 R 4:,
.F A,
_ Iti'•��i M !:r'i i I 'r*`✓ ,y. 1 y C
5
'.,A �..GX. y zd' .• ,.. YF �jK a5 � St Miry."1...�� {s p 1phyTsy%� x �.'� ti✓-
t' r. A
:, u t,A csf�l� `�1 :y 1y )'- yr4r� j"•-� r,••
^ tA' 'A '1( N ✓l,l .f f 1 A . 1S!"� .. y � � 1 M
/A r f Y 1 '15'r.. .y
® i�:A 1 ! 7i t•,n ��� y W. Q If ,P 1. , X.�
i j H5a d� 1'�iRfd�,M f 11 R5 �. Yt I ! ry,
S
f t�v' �Y' r A.J ,'Nr d
fit A
cif '1 p.
4i�S l;! + GA�n �, Mk '•'s ^i �llf Y,
_f
,r
r�r F A5 ff�4Q ni v ." I A M u n Y Y.
MY 4 y �. t Y ! 7 ;� ✓
/ 1 i, ..,. � �Lr•/i W a ; y`5"I l i' Y } � i'S.'r r AF !' d' A J 1 i+
J1 '41 Gaff i% ! 51 �' 7'f 1 ✓''i A A14 1 ��'d iv ,
"J:�:.
Lm
.a:���� �•r t' �
ry I'
li G� 1
Y
'ANDERSON. & l
�Vx7J f ENGTIJEER4
TCO,°�;CAI,iF'ORNI
�� a INiMaty T7yr ,fit t� MMk ate y ���J' 4r�ktAy lr +;. "yX'W'�„t.y".'y,
♦b Mw A7 � �.M" t + e 47. � hk �n Hn .� I
tii 1 +
a
1"y'�lif r'e sYW 1 � `1!4 "!..
hl4rrype4f
.ptM*ts,�ia44?, ..:�'�+x�;h`f�is akC;1a, K
t
F �' m SFYw 6 yy P i 7 , Ts
4 r 7 }�uiR�k sA�1
19" "
r+ 1 A� `'u'<r•$r �`SY��t od+ ka�1"
d y%.'�ia 4l7 kS Aja �I 'S 4 yl 15°
t1 �q A
flti Jr1VWeVi
PART 1. EFFECT OF DEVELOPMENT ON RUNOFF
I. INTRODUCTION
Canyon Park Estates is al proposed residential development
on a sire of approximately 1,050 acres located in Little
Chico Creek canyon east of Chico. it is pro poe.ed to:develope
a
maximum Of ' 109 homesites, grouped in
areas where the, topo-
graphy is favorable, and to leave
the balance o
its native f the condition, _ land in
The only portions of the site whic will be changed, which
g
could affect the amount of storh;
m water runoff,
which , are the areas
will, be developed into ,roadways and homesites.
®
The purpose of this report is to determine the change in
runoff
which will result from the proposed development,
rather than
thetua volumef runoff water. The report,
1. will, therefore,
address the affect of the
proposed development on the "C►'
factor used in
competing runoff,.. which is the percentage of
precipitation
which runs oft: the site during a design storm
,period,
ExIS.T1NG RUNOr'F ,
The percentage of precipitation which tuns off
a par, of
land is affect:1 1ed by the slope, permeability and
toughnessof ',the
land "r#6cq, and by the amount
and type o'f vegetation `reso
present,.
The. Butte County Department of Public Works has
developed
standard criteria for estimating the percentage
o.ik runoff, which
was adopted as County Standard 0-5,
Using the Standard D-5 criteria, runoff coefficients,
("C").
46
been estimated for the steep, rocky portions of
grave
the site
for the more gentle slopes on the ridge tops and
and
in the
bottom., The ,estimated Values of "C"
canyon
are:
Steep
Gentle
Areas
slope
p
Slo es
0.32
Permeability
0.22
0.17
Vegetation
0.10
Surface
0.10
0.1:5
0.1:2
, vt Factor
0.744
0.56
The total area of the site is approximately 1,;050
acres,
of which
a.s.
a Y tributary to Little Chico
tppbutara�area�.a40
Creek. Of the
Y approximately 890 acres
nare classified
steep" and 15.0��0
as
acres as, gentle slopes.'
The composite ,runoff coefficient for the site area
tributary
to Little Chico Creek is:
890 ;x 0.74 - 658.6
150 x 0.56 =' 8:4.0
742.6
,
O
Composite (C,l, 742 6/10;.40 0:; 71
AW 26
s
>I IMPROVED ARSAS
Gaunty Standard D-;5 also specifies "`C" factors for
improved
areas, as follows:-
®
Roof ' Surfaces
0.95
Paved Areas,Patios, etc.
0.90
Landscaped areas
0.25
In order to determine the relative portions of the improved
areas to which these coefficients should be applied,
a_typical
hotnesite plan` was developed, and is .included as EXhiuit A, The
composite "C" factor for a typical homesite. is:
Roof Area 31000 S F. @ .'95=
2,850
Driveway,- Patio 3,59`0 S. F. @ .90=
3,23,1
Landscaping 10,200 a. F. @ .25=
2,550
®
16,790
8,631
Composite "C" -=, 8631/16790 = 0.51
Y
The proposed 109 homesites will have. an imprOVed area Of ap-
Prokimately 42 acres. The access' roadways will have
a ,paved
area of 10.7 acres, of'which, 5.5 acres are in the "Gentle Sl,oper''
areas and 5.2 acres are in the ''Steep" areas.
The composite ,C111 factor for the site after development is, them=
fore
Rd, ads 10.7 Adax.es @ .96-
9.63
Steep Area 884.8 Acres @ ,74=
654.75.
Gent1"e Slope 7;02.5 Acres @ .55=
57,4q
Homesites 4"2 Acres @ :51=
21.42
k040.
7443.20
cortpos%te "C" 743.2/1.040 - 0,71
A». 27
„
I '
This composite "`C” factor for the improved, site is the same
as for the unimproved site.
It is important to recognize that the elements from which the
"C" factors are computed are based upon judgment.; that site
areas and conditions are not uniform, and that all runoff '!
computations are of only approximate accuracy.
Within the accuracy limits of the criteria and methods used.
for drainage calculations, there will be no change in the
quantity of runoff from the site after development.
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1, From the foregoing computations, it is concluded that
the proposed project development will not increase the
amount of storm water runoff from the site.
2. It is recommended that runoff water which collects along
roadways be discharged at carefully selected, location
to prevent erosion.
3. it is recommended that runoff from the homesites be
broadly ;dispersed to adjoining unimproved areas to
prevent erosive velocities and to utilize the attenuation
and filtration which overland flow Will provide.
PART 2. ACCESS ROAD DRAINAGE
Z: PU12�'OSE
The:,,acdess road trom Nuinbodt Road to the bottom o':f Little Chico
Creel: canyon crosses 'several drainage channels, of varyin'gr size,
which I carry` concentrated storm`water flows. The purpose of this
Part 2 ]s to estimate the. desig n flow at each channel and to
recommend culvert sizes.
A-29
J
PROCEDURE
The drainage area tributary to each culvert ,location
determined from a topographic map, and the runoff
was
by the Rational Formula. The rainfall intenslt
Was computed
Y, coefficients,
and culvert sizes were determined from County Standards
D"2z D-4 and, D-5:
The tributary areas are shown on the topographic
map
Exhibit. B:
marked
xr2. RECOMMENDED CULVERTS
Listed below are the drainage area,,,estimated flow
and to-
commended culvert size for each of the drai nage areas
exhibit no
shown on
1�
Area Area Q
No,, (A�}Culveri
Size
l• _ 2.17
3.7
2' 7.04
18
®
12.E
5, 54
24
9:'5
4, 4.9021
5,. 8.4
13.58
ll
�. 23.20
�
7,
M79
1 8
18,4
11.47
19.61
9:
39
11
l .715 ].8
10:
' 79.00
4,8
Cu]verts of the listed sizes should"be installed in
the eXis:
channels, ar at, the low p'oS,nt$ o ;the drainage areas
to transmit
the, runoff water across the road. Car. should be ta}cen to
the, outlet ends o the cul.ver s on: durable mat
locate'
or to
provide .energycissipatox% to
pre�tht erosion.
Aw 3 0
M
rII
LL --A
I�.."F>...�.' �r-r^t-�--�___„�'«•' �/�!1"4��dL�- �1 D' L )� r,,, (yam n"' ,.9r'
• -•-'` _ '�'" --"�. �--'''� . ,. � -'� ,�,.� ~ ; ,/`•.�1�%! T ^,r... (,moi ,4`• r--�,.�
•."\�+• ��..•„"-`•`L c..`., ., V.,.-•.:- • . .,.
1 '- . •'., ' " � l
_; 4 �,ti,�._.� .;-••.. �.:.;,._� �"'---mar '•� ., ..-. 44, '``•+ .•"�''``4. ��w � r-�-- ` �� �t`. r, ><
Y � �- �"`'-'••+.. ....>-.,.:.' �...:..•': t Y ,w J' -GW1 - ,� �: ice.,. \, .�� � `4.,.,� � �4� / „»• ,._.,� r
�y
�tl~;.r ', a �, �.r,. �', .., i _.,+ Y--'� :4•:,. -.`.' •s.,., `a�. � ^-+:�'-�,`•^Ga.,�t�, `�... ^• .o, •.r 'w �t' � 1„' .`•M1, 1 1 ..
.-. •v, '• ...•: ,_...-.,;,;... ..' ^ .. _-., .G , -- • . '.:- x +�, r - `tis y �4,�"'«-'1.4--^w.`"x !�.,"•ur
r.-* ., 4. r ,.�� ..-.. .-, . .. •� �,•... • . \..-•._ �,�� �,�r ' v{ = • `?`Tk � .e�, r'!`qtr -,•-� �
�-✓�- - ,.. �,.. •.- r« r •5z i .,rte ^ j- yy `
, , l•` -n. n. '/• '�r._�.:✓f . .", :/ a7- �i it, • . •'�.' :�.,+T^ 'moi'•` '� `., - '.
..r
„ w ,. �•": r rte. .:.
_.. „r^-'•�'i, „ - /�4..��t r. ..�.., �. .y Win_ r. 1, ,J..}} ....,,,_,. a i;,` � - ,. • ''«, .� -'., ..,, .ice z���-^^ 'ice •« � ;.:tq :."«41.. .L.�"-'"•-. +...,`
\�
..« •��,+, 4. I?' •,.,, -�-�. f: r. ,,,�•..•..... •,... i r. F�».! ,- �'. a,_:., \.♦.,'+.,, �, •�-, _—.-.---' ,,� +, •..,,••� 1'v^:\ _ `'«"'r1,4.i v`•�-i ••4"ti.:.. ,.
, "\.�.1..::-.`.... ' C3 „i'-... -«..^... , t ,. . ,• _ ,,. � ... a / ! 7 .✓ - . . ; -..-, s.` ,.. .,. "�.. x,. � `.'tel. �„`c,_: _ 41 / _ •,�•.
•. :,��4.t-. v....J 1t ..w.. :1l4 t .. , .x � .'a.. , ,;: .! - ., �,. •\, ♦ �,. ... - ... ::,'^•�..',�. y r..ry 4� '9.v,,' 4'•+.4 •` „"_+..
r�4.-__-`,..i- '. r.� .'•' -..:mss; .: .. :.^-•"11 r -. , ;,. - ,: r. ,.*-, / ,r r, .w r- . h .., \� •,-_._ _, :7-•,,.,... .4 ,,_ ,. ..1 •••-'-, .. �-L. i
.-...«.,_-:'.__-�,,.�-��,.,-_........./'_. ... .:, ..—, r .:' ,, .., ,,,., ,,...!'.,. „ ,. _�. �i. .�,,.'---- .. .. r. X44 .:,. '�. ;'�".,.. ,"` .•..` +��-..�� -•..�
\ � 4. J. �x J .. M M •.//I \ fy •rw.. ,..,. 1 r. - • , w�. -�.. h .'!w••• ...`�' \��� »4. .• .... �'•y,�• ��. \ { \ _�:-�\�.�.} �A.� ' �a+,� �•'.. '
,` •,� .. rf. ,it �-' s n/' n. -:a' ., 1 -' - l• _ .: �( !. �.:..,,, � Y ._ `: �.,� i � .. �:,:." r;••: _. - 4 4� t+:. �.. - r.y.
.., a .♦.r. ,,� ♦, -.,�; , 1` ,1. .'•: r', i ,.h. �''�r. y.'�«`"'�4 .c, -,• ..r•:m r•--•\•1,•.,,1..> y, - .,.,,r••� 'tee-:.,.-
n•� 1 , ... i ...• .� - '. a'r' . L .. rq :..,, . r r r. " 4"'•.«...._ - .. - ��`��. e ...._' , `„ +.,....,,...•• ... �"�. �: � ' _ .—+-, ..
,.. •.,....n ...', �;' .. . .�. <.w, . ' i �i1'. r ♦ . L 9 i _: _-... ,w. ._«.:.......�- +•_\ . '-.,,,....� i• -.r v., :: i.y '!i'4." :--....-+t,ra,r..�l�`+'.. WwiU i. `� r �'.
`4. :'♦ .tri «•�., ,,.4r.. ... t.,r
5 ..::. rv. ., (,. .'. r w ....«.L•ir .. , r. ,. .•, 1*, ._.. „-4,... .. - r�., \ ?i +, , �. 1. •+��-�.w.:�"' ''� ` ,:� qCQ'
!.,'\ .. .. ,o ...•' :: y."♦" :! r - w+'. r. t •. -. 1 ! , � ., *.. /' d w � . � T �� �, .,t �a.._ . 3r.--✓.' : � . � � _�.-. *, _>^.--+ i � �-______..._..,�. �-..,,, �. r,
: 4«.w',y4�. ...: .. .,a.� 1 ,. � ! -.- ,. �. �r•�, ,,., ,-ss'�'r. .. *r'.. / •� �� �"h; ....—�f.. ..,, ! r �•----'�"w •;'.'�4•,�-• w. ,''.
�; '•*,.w ,_n N• y...•^ _ . .: � , 4 ., °�'-.._..rte' \ ... .__ _ ., 1 :'\*,a, � \ .,.._ \ /1 1 '-4•.. ,_. r
„. ,tea -.xy ,..»,;,,.. a , '�,:. x > t, ,. r. „ `�r� •w.e "��z k,.. .__,..•'�� ' �+7�y�\, . ,.: ."„4.\'„-x-....•-\ _ 1 \ "•'�`4•,.- - 1. a,..
9" ::: F. 4w... 1\ y r' �.a,., ,: •'F"'' - \ ��, 4 ,,-', 4w ,. !.e✓ -
i k. .I'. . 5 . .1 � , ,.: Y" r. � ,4. Y w. ..,,...moi,, � •!•\ •a •u.: ti'•V.N, �x. \' a f •. _.. ,-._ ny.,w.,. {^.
,,.: s"•,L ::'4�ey ., r� :• nx �,a . / : �1.. --. ,'. i'. •, ! „ .,.A ! r 9 f 5 `" '�, •.., , ♦. ,... wx 1 � � , .t. �,�,�_ Y' f
>� „ • : r r. : + lyt v " ! � . � ; > �'�. . ' ..- ..»- \fir ��� .".,,h••4w.. �,. i. ,1, 1 -. •,lr+e„ f
♦ r•'•'...••-•4"+....r:I r. ,ter._ 3.) f"'r _ r. 1 .:. .' / -. .: `. 1., �. ., 1 .., � ':"�_ 5'C1y„- .•w.� � yam...,_.,,
`•+, W ✓^ r .CS., r., a. •, .�.. � •4 " 4,a-'�.1"-�'�, t !w�`"••�.. •. ,, 3 1 � .. `r rl .. r•�% ,
;y, » .�..-r" t „r ♦• .. ,4 S ":i _\ ` - .,.i r � ',r.•- '",., 9 `" � \ 1'\ • .. t'�i . .�"^'�.. r '� r.".-._ .: -•i./� .., •'��'� `.f�
' r Q" ,.. 'r ' ♦x. r .e. .« .. �..i••,-..`., , .,f,' ., ... ... »-.. /� .. ! .,.,�`�*r,,. �a�, �r._ .` 4 '•. IJ � - r,:. •\ � l ,; i
.-4�,,�'� -. ,.. :.cl � • '.✓ '� sx:..� 4. c, .,.,.. ..!'� �� h � ... 5.�. �... ,, \V��,,. •'a?_ -.,fir
, S. '.. ,7r �^..' Xy _2.r � r. .v a ""a. r.�y �.. «,.....�.--•„"'�..,.. ��, r �, ... .,,f �•s._s.j� pp 9' "`. I / ,.
�'. r w4,,`'4„ (i,.: ,..,..�-.•""'�" xy !h : -r.., \,-, ',. "ixi,k -^9 ! /. I
y.xrn" dTs �..r ;r. .+ . �'' x.w..-••y. .•v .... .,,-:.+-�,.,�;. ,. . , :� 1 r1 ;.:: r'L x. �. 7 � � ,,-?,4y���aN:��xl•:..;:'ti5 f V !/ 1
4••.-�_..r ': / J:.. ir"'r' . t *' et 4 . � s,.lw � ►,,... , � .:. '. r�`4.•w ♦ a .,, ,� .�. i . /719(1
! y(s �,:wr' apt v r,. ' 1 : � 1 .,�: ,.. .. �. 4x..�.. •h ^, .. u„ y� ,.. � .. 1. 'f� �'1 ,.
`r.sr+,r. � :rte ,rt•,a. y:. w,r v'♦"' 1 �,,,,�. +�, )r ,,,,,.,. y .: r: .•"5+.i. � '•.. l�I : / !
rte, � ,..c r �. '"-,,,,r.i•„*-...::. ., .. ,. ,.. t� :: .. O:
,
... _y � x .w .. .+:` tr. ':. ,' „ Y .. r. •.... ..Y y. , • 1: I �ME
..\+„, . /., x'.".'!,r•wi..Mr'� :.
4 . '. ,. (.+a -::. ..n r a+n Y+ . ... +nr'.�nt' A.t•s '.� �.wi `. 1' �1 Y n ,.� i r.a� > a . ni
,.: ,... r4 .•a- ` .. y'"''� « ...yrf ✓' -4.. ... r.. .._ 1.,f .... .•:.' ♦ .. `.. , • ar te:
•r. l� . r.,. . , ,, n� . , .: ,....r.� �,., ,a C _.W.. �. � ..x * • r 4::�..... ... ' t1 � : � ,� !til,
w CANYON PARK ESTATES
ACCESS ROAD ®RAI NAGE
EXNIBI' °'Bu
A-31
A-;3 8
STATE OF CALIFORNIA --+THE RESOURCES AGENCY- GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Covernot
DCPARTWENT OF FISH AND GAME
REGION 2
Com' 1
1701 NIMBUS ROAD, SUITE A
ye
a r
RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA 95370
(916) 355-7030
July 19, 1984
Mr. Al, Beck
Eco Analysts
114 West Seventh Avenue
Chico, CA 95929
Dear A1:
In response to your request, the Department has reviewed; the maps
for the Canyon Park Estates Development in Butte
County. The plan
identified as Figure 4 Canyon Park Estates _Specific an reflects
the development plan agreed upon at our previous meetings. ,AA copy
of this plan is attached.
It is our understanding that all remaining lands will be
premanently preserved as open space for maintenance of Wildlife
habitat, that restrictions to preserve wildlife will be made
conditions of the CC&R's or t;.hrough other permanent means, and
that
no activities incompatible with preservation of wildlife
habitat. and wildlife use will be allowed in the undeveloped areas.
Incorporation of these features adequately addresses our concerns
regarding the plan, and we thank
you for your cooperation. If the
Department can be of further assistance, please contact aerry
Mehsch, Environmental Sertices Supervisor, telephone (916)
355 70So :
sincerely,
Paul T. J6nset7,
` Regional Manager:
Attachment
r�-.�-�..Y,y.-�1"�-•n,.w»• ..+..r,.,,�.,.-•- +,"--'^��,y�+�/. �. 1' •fi �,+ .,y I4�'z'.; S- •''R�t�•+ J �rRY, � � ?, ♦ •►. ^ '. IL
•«•fir !A`� (. (w�'' � �iT �l l �hlr�'1i1:1 �j� 4 ,I t;1� � s �t r ��" •+. 'i,.iy Q,` r,�t ►r •1
., J yry�f
I\{� `Sa .,t.' •, �' 1+ •� ` ' 1•••/ + r. 1` 4 N' '`t+'%s IIe,1^).,� +,�. AS�1e• • t • -.'�` i•• •'.�,4 r; ie' .'Cr,, �a.�4 r: ►�•` ° • 1 �, ' • •:. 1� .` •. • •. �T /,. 4 1[ri+i' • t "1 I •, 1'AY • � �'; A �• ) / .1 %�•['. /
t , A 4• 7+1, i
JP
°+ ,, .'4 j 1 , r Y C"• t 11 �J ' a 1�1� 4,. ,.1 �' M 11, :"•'►
' t 1 ", p:y r, �!i, t I .� « i e,ilN1 1 , .: , '• A, .t ,
t1 \ •�, �.„tl 1 i „� r. +• •1 • a '�4.�.r�• a� "r � t�<� I .ji}„
oi
u;a. ,f1 , S•�' 1,• + �. Y'Crt flr , a t;1� r• �.1� a+r -,l + 4 r F�3.1
- •, ' - . 1, �.� •7 II �1' � t � elf �r\;�•,���i �,•�.v. { I• � y1� y •�� t.`. 1}� •� 4x14
'+.. n `may/ •. ref
,
�1. ` 6,,.laf.�4 •;, � ''' t11 I:c \+t 1 / �vs".,y(� �i!.' J {.�'i; r �.j �
• �• �.�. a J r'% Y1'
+
Y' . �•. t� ,r• 1' ly{',Y3.• IM.► e,..! 1 r✓ •,.
r'
w • . • - •' ' e "'eJt /I {�7 �'4' `�C_ Lr�..r ,,,�a t,.,` a 1 ':�+,(a /.9M r t.� ;a • 11 .li , r`•. {�t
+ ...•,1 1 .•Y1� 4.M. 1 .,,t !l, '�'� re' i�J• a �t l•'lr .. ' �'• -i• fi .�`,�vto
1.'�Y,•, L�.
1• � •4 ale 1 I \ 1 ! , A �� } �+ w 14 + 1 , / • �\ � •,,.
li<.• _� i r•! ..� �, • ;1 rY• .� .�f G .. t4°. Ir J �}• -.I4 �4a yy
04 ,,/1 �- �` L1 r;1,,•�,:•'st/'a !. '•t i111','. rV C'1 I •iy..1 4 4�cyyf A' •+t' / Il, li e.` F't'
1. S' r'7({• •f• �. t + . li ry4. k i•�y • ,y � 1 b i � � � , r ,.( w� •
•
t.. �iy�r���� r' -�' ,� �dU.'t �?•fA'�. �.5� .r +- rrie•tt I + .i � '1 s �+ • • 1 111•; r/.. �1�."
'
°�%!. 1:;. •, , ,
•
-, ` •4 t C % S •` ,y: 1:;! •�...,+ :. A", 1 i,�l ,.i �• r .�' ! ! r° tiif1 1/.� �4 r i, r� �fi'/'I 1 ,r'��
♦\ 4p�. �:• Y� ,,0�, r��'�'.iluvi �f13 ~I �%''�•�`'i11!" • t� \�•, r.�,t •/t �• r�+♦ .•}. ' :J,/ •' '. r' J.�r . � IY•; �j.'Ir. M'S
•►; �- 1•, i #•t is lift ° .1 I�il�••..y `� � .r.t '+ f.,, v',rwl�'"'; /� �•t r � , � r(, . t�,�a;�� Y1/,.
aft, 4bb J
•. ,�., ,�, • LL.tl/ iA► 1` `I `i , rr r.. .,+ ,�•I4.:,��, a ,r
-4k,r.. / r l ++[� r1r ,' •, a_ • i. 1 i- • 4 + I 3h f r i�'
•- . �/f i f I i / ,/J ,� !al'I� f f f • t . t� 4y , . 1/ r •! (: r• 1t, 1' •+ y�1 t�1
1 r!' iblr 1 t •' 1 • f 1 �'f .P 4 ,r- t Y�, h J'�i • S/r/"1{ si
•.,' 4. 7w.+ J7] et 1% t`' ' t 1'4i Y M'� 1 1�4 , i. 1 ..y' i�� f,.•. 1aC ry�.l,A;I/ i �,Y,1 '1+r oi:(r
1 /�.•, J, ' '�� i{{ t 1 it, " •r, r„ �. .1.,. / /w}•�, 1 4 .. 'r S•, '.• r �/',,A.fitt<,�14 F��, r.. ,, 'i.y�!/�«Y!'.e y�, /" �y. '"
• • / /i' t' 1♦� 1 •: � :.I 1 1 , r. h ' ^ •.•Yr; - , ., 1(,•p, +9 {Y�r + i:1Y t S'1?'�I('.? /' a.!� �rll'
/.r i 1rt`i. •S 1J,� '}• rM.„e - j {',1 i;,^� 4 ♦ - a t�6'.(r••�% �r"P 1.�f ; ..
••y �.� 1 t +r' , i� ii d-`,(.• e' 1.1 0 r1.1+' ' 4 y •�. ,` ' +{;.:. I!
7777
•
\/j`�! . ♦ r,-t ^'t, T ,, r �, 7{'.. .1y4y' i•4 « V Oat, tir• Hv i 1� .l •(, //yti.•4• r p 4
,+:., ^..:. Y��y�.�Z •: �%` tt l..•.. +r. .I .r,• :i ltill
Nr•'y, rrrY•rt P"i rt�: t•. `1.�j1�f•,�, +'..t.., . iia ; a l-,
w
fy`
1 1
rr, i 1 • Y t� ./ s� r• � r
ibi �\� � s1i ,S. •.`.r � '�,`, �,('.(; .tit, �.r�ryii 4, ' Mrt +
•L4•� ' ,$'- ( i''ft�l� 'tl--\t'd,'�j t,,�-1 .+,. b 3, t •i� t. 1 .t\;, t •'°
7 11 f•''� sr � `� � i o � � f a+., �•) .4r• le,, r r; � +
X17W' ? r'1'•
1 �4.�/ � \ 1 'r ! ' � `• � 7 4t e�
1y e 11 � 4.1••1 / vh �' u ,��+I'• ,r� " �'�
•F1e' � '
• .:_ •0, h.!(/C.'O � "� , \, '.-./ I1. �.. r , ...( a1r��, ,t r•,.� • r�rr 4Y�1 7 �Y., r 4 r`r'• �
1 k " iU•I.r �'+ l ��t • 1 'ail j t rI N' u<rJ' Ott i , ✓ n, r i r., , i
4. .+• •ti y1�t I 414' 4�'1 1 ttt�" '• :,(1,�t al ,A '!1. � , • • • .. 1+'.P
� �tr+lte••r, J Ir�Ir•,a '{••alt , '�•4i{ti +;�Ir/ ► t rr�✓+!°° �C! ttA. \,t; i';'.. °� +
,i.,., yen• i�, •. �, /• tp• .: 1 a 1 ( � � _.
•; t�u .4 1 tnju'F{Ir .t ,� j"1 1 + •. +•• • '' +
- '. f, Ir r/l °` • �, ri ri 1' iS f i4 >ni4•r % 7 ! t f4
y {I A :� f ItlriL�t 1 w r • ! �• p ► i !
w. y. r�r1 t4 � 4� r ��•11 ri' til,•S iai4 • y4 r: %� n(r. ..
.. .• �• a 71 FR, ;• /
yy
� '• •� � \� t '�V,jj lliu � � 1. r' y d � r � i i� r 'j' (
1 ' i ►iil + Iii vYl r ; � f ' 1 �: � : + f ,` ti
*^•� ! ri`�� al
+{.�LL.� ' % v •.wt 4. M +�'�°�Y 1 11r'': �'' •�a• 1: , �'��' �<,r 1 ' a.,l
1 ' �s��`"",�f�'�'i.�i ,•. 'yu;: •Ti • twjs, .J ' •*� ,lt+.y4r ti,{}.••+{--J /S ��y�14hS{'1 �'s• 1 '1.. ,v :i
({ ! ,tf.'1{ r"tb,r4r � �1 '•� 4Jir . �t ••.• � � � ��1 .''�i�•� ...it��i•'i't� �� �1•`�S-•'.ti•• � •• �• .r� + � ,,. '.i'• `
i
not
YEE
• 1, f •
,GUR 4� CANYON PARI STATE8.
Cg1,171C PLAN '
,
',, 46
A-47
MR
TABLE I
EXISTING 24-80U,R TRApFIC
VOLUMES
Peak.
State Route 32 Forest Avenue
2$0
3000,
State Route 32 Humboldt Road
360
2200r
Source: 1982 raf f iC Volumes on: Califors16 State
Hi4hWays,
"
CalTrans
K
,
•.
rim ... _..
k
S
1
TABLE II„
�.
PROPOSED LAND
USE AND TRIP
GENERATION_
FOR
CANYON PARC ESTATES
TYPE OF USE
TOTAL
N0, DAILY
DAILY PEAR
PEAR
ACRES-
UNITS TRIP
TRIPS' BOOR
HOUR
RATE
$
TRIPS
Canyop Park
Estates
1050
109 10
1050 12
131
Single Family
f
}
TJ1�M
jS
'1
8/84
TABLE III
DAILY
AND P. M PEAR HOUR
DISTRIBUTION
LOCATION, _
97%. SOUTH
3% NORTH
TOTAL
ON s -'Rtete?
�g
Canyon Park
1051
33
109`0
Estates
(127) - -
(4)
{13Ii`
24 --hour 1057
Peak Hour (12TH
TJhM
3%84
,r9
A-$2
TABLE IV
CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC
VOLUMES
BY AR EI /PROJECT ON ROUTE
32 CORRIDOR
1
Cumulative
Peak
Hour Towards
Dwelling
�rQat oiect nl]
Trips
�enetated
Chico
of ARTY
at 12t
Forest Ranch (existing)
26`4 /
2,200
Forest Ranch (additional) 100(1)
700`
348 /
2,900`
14 Male house 21,
1.47
366 /
31047
Parr --Terrill 12
84
376 /
3,131
St. Rte. 3.2 Rd, 107
749
466 %
3,880
Public Connection
IOther
Potential Lots(Not
Included
in 'Totals,)
Isom --Hall 11.0
770"
558 /
4,650
Bidwell Heights 385
.6 5
881; /
71,345
TOTAL
5,145
f(*Butte
County Planning Department estimat:es,
2/1984)
A
TJKM'
i
8/84!
A-53.
TABLE V
®.
PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
CAPACITY*
®►
PROJECTED
PROJECTED
EXIST.
DATrY VOL.
DAILY VOL.
LOS
LOE
�4 Id�CA'I'IOA1
RICAN a PR _
IV -GOBI a 1HPCT
g
S.R.32 at Forest Ave.**
300
4057
9,202
6000
9300
S.R.32 at Humboldt Road
2200
3257
8,402
6000
9300
Humboldt btwn S4R.32' and
Project Access Rd.
1090
1090
3300
6000'
Project
Access Rd. near Humboldt Rd.
=-
1090
1090
33<00
6000
* proximately 1 mile e o State Route
FP y /
99
P
*SOUkcei,
TOK.M
l0'
8,89
l�
V
,'
Aw54
•r.i •.r� ' �'
t ,
: r�, r• 1 I11 1, [. rr 1 J i 9 r,r 1 r a +1 =t p N!�!�� �•1 ;"• i % F•
i . �� i J_«Jf � � 1 "71y , ' • �y-f. l���c 1'j' `. t{
.. .. • ' '.. ,, r+� � •� � + 1 1.11 t {I Y V , rj+l,y A r.
., „r + �' It •�1 r' ,�1 � ; 1 ?,1� �et-Y � +,.`2`�J +� r 1 rr��
_ qq ��t,t t• f ��•
11 0 11 +y \i%�`Iri kl td S•.�.'•ff e �•t�tl •j1, I.. i'•(,
1 I •.S gi yil /(��`/�. .}f I '�'M ^ • �1; r. tr \ri '
t . �• �f r h ',• t{I!'� 't� `..* I 1 \ �� s�i 1j'�.a4ir., I } r+�', . •! ! , fi't:
it
1 . r I X.h �I,r jyL1 /tJ'`•• y1sti1,}(Y�. .�`•� 1..( i, 1'r`t,�'' ', i •., 'j.
•T t . 14 '+ ' 4"", ` i•1„r'/'' I+�a�1,T•,'ir .1^` �� +•r. �r�.✓,.r 1r. ,+
to, l+J , • i7 �r t :' i
L/�/ 1 ' r, ri• f\•. 7 ✓14•'�
; r ' � � , i t ' f !'f • . , 1 ' .l,i!i y 1 iA r, '. 1l' � it •.,1�� � 1 \ ,✓'
t• /%'�, •: ! r '•y '�.�' I •� l •.�,+itiir �:! r 1J,,, r„yf' ' �� . • ir'V'✓• '1 r�p ��
�F. , 1.�'✓' ,lid .f�+ ,�'�,� /�.�(••i'lie�, ''�� ,_,f,�, ; •f �.1,.�HI •`If .i,•u_ (} �...
101 / , 1 +N�t It. 'i •. '/''\T'
.,' fi•/l :id.. • Ir'�'t 1 S,r i ;�' l y . I ,,' Ir
Ul
' •.1 ,,J' IOF '•Iil+` +lr: r'^ � '�ii�. � , 5r•L�. �� i!•Ilk"-e' � ' %rtiw'!''7J}� r ''jMi l.i'� � �.i F
i•^ T �l jy',.".r Ji �� *� ' A . I t� i• �� `t
��� • %\ Ir '„4, . • ."• —' if f, .,' \ IyJ t . 1•Yi.!r,; tl 4-V�Yy�
: M� + +iil'v11T ,� i.' \ t •�• '.,tfr� h, + � , % ri , ,.,�{� i�. , iA , I . 1 r '
AAA ► ���1•+'W • v "I F^irr tr� r i � i,G �J�lfLJyc .ts. s�r
ICY' 1 ; 'f4 a.l'it 1191��'I r; �r• �1tt;1. ,
40
a : ,•/j \qua. \t It.\ ��' i �'j/t •ij�}i• ,'1 yrj'',.
,F•„. . 'r i f fttt , ' ,r1 r t "r” �' 1 • I✓f;! l
11•� I/ iiiN1��•lylr,
M • Y 1 a \ ! Irl
I • '
r
j•�
CANYON PARK ESTATES TRAFFIC STUDY
I -U 1, 3
PROJECT SITE
+
,A=. � 8
BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGG'VCx MINUTES
November 29, 193
PRESENT; John Mendonsa, Tom Reid, Steve Streeter
ALSO PRESENT; Diana Shuey, Jere Bolster, Al. Beck, Shirley Smithey,
Make Byrd, Robert Jeffries, Kelly Meagher, John Luvaas, Ronald Shute,
Gary Lippincott, John Botsford, Lowell Smith, Earl. Nelson, Mark Risso
A. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR CONSIDERATION
1,. Quail Can on Tentative Subdivision, AB 46-.35-04 and 23 and
-71-17 and 18 ptn. , 1.09 lots on the east side of Hwy. 32 at
Humboldt Rd. , ('hico area, Engineer: Rolls, Anderson and Rolls
Mr. Mendonsa said that the Spocific Plan went before the Board of
Supervisors and was approved. Regardless of the action today by this
agency, this item will goSupervisors for their approval.
Mr. Streeter said that the Specific Plan was tentatively approved by
the Board of Supervisors in April. They first approved then unapproved
the PA -C. Now this is a subdivision under the A-2 General and Scenic
Highways zoning. A supplement has been prepared to address sewage
disposal, and soma information Flag added about water supply. It was
sent to the state clearinghouse. Separate comments on 'waste discharge
came from the Water Quality. Control Board. The project will go forward
to the Board of Supervisors as a condition of the Specific Plan.
Mr. Streeter said he had an amendment to, the list of mitigation measure's
listed in the Planning Director's Report. It Was mentioned in the
responses, but did not get included in the ,list: It is a mosquito
abatement condition. A mitigation measure Will be added that, "All
pond design; and maintenance procedures to be reviewer: by the Butte County
Mosquito Abatement District." The sec.ond,question that come tip at the
Subdivision>Comittee on this was regarding the Office of Intergoyernmegtal -
Management Review. Mr. Streeter talked to Ron Bass, the Clearinghouse
co-ordinator,abou,t it. ` Mr. Bass said it would be sufficient for the proecL
to go to the; clearinghouse. That, particular office didn't really :exist
per se anymore. Any comments that dome' but, of the clearinghouse *,loulcd
be applicable and would satisfythe requirements of Section 2o44 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
174G OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
Proponents
Jere Bolster,; representing the deuelopers, asked if the. Advisory Aero y
would consider the environmental impact xeport and the supplement
would make reoomiendat16ns,on the:mitigation.measures►
lr be
-b? Mendonsa 'said this i.tean would / heard as if' it were not going t i the
r
Board, but it will go,to the Board:
A
BUTTE COUNTYADVISORY AGENCY MINUTES Page 2
November 29, 1982
Mr. Bolster said he had -no problems with any of the 16 Public Works
conditions except for #3, regarding the street section. The Specific
Plan which was adopted by the Board of Supervisors has different, road
standards, incorporated within it. Two road cross sections were proposed-
® one with 16 ft. of paving and one with 20 ft.: of paving (and should'ers).
That was adopted by the Board. The applicants would request; modification
for the road standard so that they can continue in accordance with.the
Specific Plan.
Mr Mendonsa said that the roadway section Mould be as per the Specific
i Plan that was approved by the Board of ;Supervisows.
Mr Bolster said that regarding item #32 in the list of conditions
included with the Planning Director's Report(Iof Nov;. 22y,.19$2), regarding
the sewage oxidation ponds, the Water Quality Control. Board suggested
that the ponds either be located outside or be protected With levees.
That broadens the condition a little bit. The applicant would like the
Nater Quality Control Board requirement to apply rather thah the
condition asnowwritten.
Mr. Streeter said that would be acceptable,
Mr. Bolster said that regarding the additional mitigation measure #34,
he has met with the school board and discussed overcrowding in the
area concerned ,in response to the school board's request that the
subdivi&ion not be approved because of the impact on the schools.:
The -applicant -ha '
he applicanthas. developed an alternate mitigation measure. (to that:
suggested by thel Pl.,a;nning Dept.) as foi.lows
"Building' permit'applications for residences in this subdivision shall
be subjec!, to any school mitigation fees established by an ordinance
onaeted prior tothe filing of such applications unless a Community
'acilities.Act, of 1982 District is created pursuant to California
® Government Code Section 53311, et4 sed,., covering the project area
:priox to,•th�: isauance,of.any mils '�
s building, per
Mr. A3olstoj Nsa & this! wouldWrovide ,e ,ec'han m
p ism �to process the ;subdivision
�and'�."at°"°°the sa te° t' mei stork= sto';m ttgatr ,:k�e .impact It'his 'subdivis on would
have on the school attendance area.. The firm of,Drake Homes,`tnajhe
too subdividers= -Isom acid Drake --are acknowledgLng' the problem which the
school difitrict faces andhave studied ways to mitigate the problem..;Tt
seemly moot feasible and, equitable to ,handle it district wide sot that all
lana dividers be effected equalJ.y. A community facilities assessment
district � should be established 'to provide the fees..; Tkze developers
support that endeavor which is presently before the,BdArd:and the.City
Couhdili In this.particular 'instance the mitigation measure listed .above
is requested td� repladiae that; suggested 'byµthe Planning Dept,, zt7'is
slightly different in that it allows for the Community facilities Acts,
which, vould b0 6n assessmentdistrict, It could be district wide; ox dust
over the, subdivision. 'The- tdhool, board representives are present at this:',
meeting and may wish 'to speak.
A 62'
Nov.. 2g iq$2
BUTTE COUNTY ADVIiGORY AGENCY 141NUTES Page 3
November 29; 1982
®
Mr. Bolster said that regarding mitigation measure #35, there is
apparently a diversion structure on Little Chico Creek. This takes
substantial flows that come out of the canyon area :and diverts them to
Butte Creek, s;o'although any development upstream may contribute to the
problem of flooding on Butte Creek, .it Would not effect Little Chico Creek.
®
Robert Jeffries, Superintendent of the Chico Unified School Districts,
said that Board of Education formally adopted a position indicating that
i
the letter forwarded to this Agency on Oct. 8, 1982, wherein the School
Board recommended that this subdivision not be approved, be rescinded;
That original position is being rescinded contingent upon the acceptanf*e
of the: mitigation ineasure which was read into the record by Mr. Bolster.
Opponents
Kel..ly Meagher, 98 Honey 'tun Rd., asked what the Advisory Agency"would
be doing today.
®
Mr. Mendonsa said that although he had not been able to talk.to County
Counsel about it, he understood that this project would be treated lake
a normal subdivision; but because of the Specific Plan approved by the
Board at an earlier date, this project will go to the Board for approval
after being heard by this ,Agency, because of one of the requirements in
the Specific Plan. Regardless of what this Agency does, the project will
go to the Board for.approval or whatever action may be taken.
Mr. Meagher said that,the 'Planning Director's Report referred to the
zanirg'And that it be brought in to conformance with; the Specific Plan.
Meagher wondered if this meant. that the Planning. Director was,
suggesting.thatfthere should be a rezone.
®has
been,
Mr, S'treetdr said thaq the policy has been for subdivisions un,land
z6ned as 'A -2 General the applicant is asked to apply for zoning 'izit4t
reflects.. the General.,,Plan, or in, this 'case', the ,Specific Plan. ' The
condition has; been added that, " The applicant to appy. for and diligently
Pursue zoning ,that conforms to the Specific Plan.",11,iat could be
Resource Conservation zoning for the :open space. There area number of
options that might° be appropriate forthe "smaller -parcels, ,aftd��ati]1'
meet the Specific Plan.
Mr. Meagher asked if the, Board should approve the tentative subdivision,
�
that condition would mean that there pro uld be: no action,
.. oii the project
until an applicetion.for rezone was fgrthcoming,.,,
Mr. Streeter said it is necessary for the applicant only to apply for
and pursue the zoning: The Board may or noti approve the rezoning}
Mr, Meagher'said that when the project was Cantron Park Rstates, the
Health Dept: had required that the project,meet,14ater- Quality Control
Standards, ,There. has ..been considerable work dole hy;the'appli' t, oni
the sewage disposal systema Mr. Meagher asked if 4�Iater•Quality gontrol
has given the applicant certain coxtditians to meet, and the.Applicant .has
met some of those$ or has more than dust tentative approrral been given!
...
� -63- 3 .
BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY MINUTES Page 1+
•
November 29,1982
Mr. Reid, said that the Water Quality Control Board has prepared the
tentative waste discharge requirements fcr the subdivision. These will
go out to the various agencies for comments. Generally, the 'ten.tati.ve
requirements are similar to the final ones« The Water Quajity Control
Board is in. the final stages of setting the final requirements. They
appear to be fairly standard.
Mr. -,Meagher asked if the 'applicant has been able to Met any of the
requirements.
Mr. Reid said that most of them have been met through the design.
If a problem is seen, the Water Quality Control: Bca d can set monitoring
conditions at any time. In that sense the conditions are not final.
This is true for any sewage treatment planta ;
Mr. Meagher said that the deer ,herdproblem continues to arise. llis
understanding of one;, of the letters from the Dept. of Fish and Game is
that contingent upon the approval. of Bidwell Heights, the mitigation
measures dealing with the deer herd corridor through this particular
project would be moot because of another barrier,being thrown up. lie "
wondered if the Planning ,Staff was considering that and considering
changing some of the- mitigation measures forthis project:regarding the '
deer herd,;
project have a on this ,
StThe'�De
t o�Fi, hthat ,bearing
andthe
Gameother
one. had "based the�;d.
Dept, " r commentg :on original,
,the
map. That had led to some confusion. That map avl.so-shioWed dlustexs but
did. not provide as Much access" to the creek.-ahhad 31,�O�units: "'They'
subsequently said that this particular project,, as designed, ` rottld
provide protection for wildlife'They were` concerned' about some of the other`
projects: This.projeet has,a density of one dwelling per 10 acres:' They
would norrba?.ly`recommend 40 acre parcels of cluster development. They
feel. that this proposal will provide 'They
p p p protection fox'the deer herd.
have'notIsaid that on the adjacent project"ment oned'above:
Mr. Meagher asked about the circulation, espec , -Liy the emergency access. f
Mr. Streeter aid_that there will, be two rQAdS to the north, irrbersectin W
With, 'Santos rive'and then to iiwy. �.' y
.39..g
Mr. Meagher said that If! Ida Wheeler. Len'Fultoh rind some property owners
discussed a study of this area, at"least through a eomulatl
fiscai aspect. Mr. Mail gave some inEor, tion on the property to the;. east,,
-„Por which he is in the processor doing an EIR•' Knowing`
that, and the action,on Bidwell Heights, he v.ondered if there would be
more than, Just emergency access between these various•pro jects.
,44r:: Mendotisa• said this was, discussed on the Bidwdil,'Heights=pro ect
whethert here should be jus;t'•emetgency aeced�§'or through •traffic circulation.
One ` of• the aspects of a FA - C ,is that of pxi vacy,^wiiicki: would not be "
benefited by a through road. ,Another problem fig that it is not known
what exactly 'will be proposed to the north .oxl the east.
BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY 'MINUTES Page 6
November 29,'1982
Luv.asthat this concern is hot happening for other public
services, such fire protection or sheriff's services, or any other
Public services which will be requireds especially for
projects of this
size. It has been asked that the county undertake a fiscal analysis for
the entire area --not for just this project. It is not fair for these
burdens to be placed upon the taxpayers in
the future. Mr. Luvaas requested
the Advisory Agency to ask for a comprehensive and cumulative study on
how much it would cost the county for public improvements, for on-going
services for all of ttje projects or which this project is a part. He
asked this Agency to ask the Board of Supervisors to
®
undertake such a
study before acting on this subdivision request. Once the door is open,
it will be too "late. In fact when the Board approued`the zoning for the
project, it seemed to Mr. Luvaas that they agreed that
a study needed to
be made, but that "'sometime" keeps going into the future and action i:s
being taken `now. Mr. Luvaas fears that putting- offthe study 'indefinitely
wiLl the
prevent county from getting a handle on the situation and will
come back to haunt the county, such as happened in Swedes
Flat. This requesu
is being reiterated, although the Board has done nothing about it. He
would like no action to be taken by this Agency until they have information
available that will satisfy them. that the taxpayers
will not have to pick
UP the bill later.
®
Mr. Luvaas said his second concern was on the cumulative environmental
impacts. The deer herd has been mentioned:
Supposedly this project
will not effect the deer herd, but yet the experts at the state kiave
said that they expect this project to be inducive of growth In the area-
to have a cumulative impact
on growth and to be the first of a nuzn�ier of
�� g `
projects,, and if that xs the case, this 'project •alon with "'the';otixers
will
'ha've,a~-devastating impact on the wildlife; `particularly they deex�he"rd.
"this
Yet project keeps getting iriewed `all�byitse'Lf :"because maizy
respects It is a well-plarined project, but itti will not"•be� all by it;self.
It is not being real.is.tic to view it as
a one -of -A -kind project. Ph?.
T,utraas requested that the cunulative impadts`be studied of this project
on"the entire area; not assuming that it would be the')on]y one;- unless
thxs;Agency would be
willing to`make that committ�ent �olthe public ,right
now-"tha4a 'there VOuld be riofurther 'approvgl: of `�zr�,, subdi r3s�ion'"��i,`t
xe
area. This committee of the Board would obvious commi.ttment. "
In"ghat "cafe : the cortrar must be assumed-thatthis t
Y'
ect3
Bit rotatlx 41iducin'g impact, that i.t will b6 th' fx3rst� o'P man,aand'tha't;
;.
'
the act
p sof this 'pxWee �Yone, will ribs be'`tha °,ekdlusive impact iaa `
the Area.,That
being; the. case, all imps cta" iri ttie area kiust b� looped
at fax this, project and each other prpjeet as it is
considered. For that
purpose; Mx. Luvaas requested that incorporated withian the-`ETR"i'or this
Project be included all the ;matexial received in the Way of public and
agency respon4e an the Bidwell Heights- LIR. Ir. Luvaas would espgcia> 11r .W
11,k4to be included in the ETR .fox thhi s subdivisionthe. leaer�i'rom. Ck
,
dept,., of Fish and Game that refers to the- oUtii1a'tive deva`stating'.impaFts
on the deer' �iesd is
which part of the ,Bidwell: He,tghts ETR as w las all "
other public comiaent on bhe+ Bi.dwe`xl Heights P- r., da,, Mdtual
.: , l,Y "`�I�r�. � Luvaas
j �
felt a new. BTR is needed for this pr, oject that iricbrporates`" all '!the, i.nf ox tion
itx"one
pcomprehensive readable document. ; Thur
.. &*6se "af the, aoabon h is for
information, not paper work, At least the tsthdx lnformr�tion should be
f�
attached, "buy`: pref'erabl:y, it should be readable,
Nava. 9
ri� _.8�.
Cr
BUTTE COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY *47NUTES
November 29, 1982 Page
Mr. Luvaas said that with all that information available, some rationale.
'would have to be found to justify development"on the scale that is
Proposed in the area. In his view$ it should be all or nothing --.either
not approve this first step, or open it up and develop the .county from
Chico to Paradise, since that is what isplantedat the moment. Those
cumulative impacts should be addressed.
FIVE ManugE RECESS
Mr. Mendonsa said he had checked with County Counsel and, he had
reiterated what he had said earlier --this project should be acted upon
as if it were coming only before this agency, -and there would be the
right of0ppeal, although the project would go to the Board regardless,
Mr. Luvaas said that his next point was regarding the road
There are at least two other project under way in, the area-SBidwell heights
and the Hall and Isom project, Also there is the 14=Mile house project.
A serious
mistake is beingmade both .from the public standpoint of
it being inefficient to plan one project at a time, but also from the
developer's standpoint. There is obviously some working together
on these projects, since there is some common ownershi.
Theare public knowledge of what cooperation is going on. There mSghtbes no
coordination of roads later, but ,properties may be sold off and the
county may never have a wayto
..,get access between the projects, Mr
Luvaas asked that the condition be added that, -if at some future point,
any adjacent property develops," there, be a.60 ft. aeeded`right-;of-way
between the properties. with reciprocal �x;ights+of access, and that such
a read be :publicly deeded and ��jubl.iCl maixitain d: The costo o
-: f -, Ding
that a1"so needs'' to be' considered A tl improVeuents • on-site should '.be
bY;the.,developer as Well as all; Offsite,;improvements which would 'Benefit
the developer. Imagination needs io be applied,to the task of _figuring
out what may come up later $Ind resolve that naw, so access problems Will
not plague the county later, Mr. Luvaas Mould like this project to have
access to any project on airy side •of`'it,. There are. Some old forest„ service
roads there already. It .should be required and not discussed only.
Mr.. Luvaas said that ,
regaxd3ng,;zoning,.he f�ltthat the public sheu]d
itha�re some assurance, that the Proper tyr�wotjldbe.poperZy zoned.,.;He felt
j., 3t, shciu'ld';be required that the,zoning,,°actually be changed', riot, that
it
jus4 be ,pursued.' w� A
Mx. Streeter said that at this time$ that td not the procedure.
f Mr. Luvaas thought that this committee shouldat leashmake, the t'ecoinraenclatoci
J
that such be done.
iia Mr. Meridonsa ,explained, that, the applicant must reasonably be able to meet
the conditions . An °applicant cannot .be ekpopted to meet a-odnd3.tion over
�which'he "k�as no control. ' ,That psi the reason .for the 'specif3c warding of
the °condition in, that manner.
Luvaas said there is a "Catch-22" situation from the public's point
of view. That is why this application should be 'ttirnoti down and the razone
obtained first. This committee should be able to ask 'for that.
BUTTE, COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY MMUTES Page $ '
November P-90 1982
Mr. Meagher asked if (wail Canyon is substantially the same project as
Canyon Park Estates.
Mr. Streeter said that was correct.
® X'ro onents'
Al Beck, the environmental consultant for (wail iCanyon tentative
subdivision, said that this project was designed to reduce the effects
on the deer herd. Some changes in the project were•iicorporated into
the supplement. The document is a subsequent as well. as a supplemental
d' EIR. The_chang'es relate to positioning of lots, to the water and
the sewage system. Some minor changes in design. have ocurred as a
result of the public hearing process and environmental review process,
that are included in the second document. That is why it is more than
a supplement.
® Mr. Beck said the deer•will still. have access through Little Chico
Creek -as long as �,he state maintains their roquircments. Access to
water was the main concern.. A'develo,per cannot be required to impose`
mitigations on another project. That is the county's obligation. If
this project sets such a precedent, then others should follow, with
A clustering to prevent impacts on the deer herdii If it does not set that
precedents then it can stand alone. The concern about access and emergency
Toads is a. critical one. Roads should be limited as much as possible' ;
to provide access to the property. This has been discussed with the
clrveloper, and Mr. Beck has recommended that 'dere only.1,' a ;emergency
access -to the nort,'i: One reason for, this', is that there shou l be "an
soiati6n ofprojects. Also; permanent roads da'`more; damage: to wildlife.
The%access is adequate and will lae mainiainea-by the"homebwnlers' association.
A public road would` incur public, eXpense.
Nix, Mendonsa asked if Mr. Beck knew if there would be >>`a reciprocal
agreement•"with the project 'tw the north.
Mr. Beck 'thought that in the, interests" of safety, emdxgency>access Vould
•be reciprocal; but Pie did £ not tkriow 'the details .of the project. "H6, , did
d,i.scuss•some protect ve',aspee a, of the deer` h�rcls. That ,and water;c�uali.ty
were train concerns.
xMr:''Beck's "recomrnericlatioii`s rthat'.the'roads,iie"maintained
but only as' eniergdita, access. it should be an all reathcr'road.
Mx. Bolster said,that,the access to the north wi:.11 not allcV through
traffic. The roads 'till: be 'r*vate through the subdivision and V111 be
utaintained'by the .home owners. Tt would not be appropriate as a county
road or jaunt project road. There may reciprocal access, but it woti?d'
only be for emergency use. Regarding; the fiscal impact of this devel:oplenb
on, the county --that, has 'been well,, documented by pa 'county„ study find ;a critique .
of 'that' study: The' ElR i'or Canyon l rk'Estates grid' S. iecifl.c Flra'n addresses
the "cumulative impact, and lists` appropriate a►it�igat5�on measures, wthich
are projects that must be instituted by th'e'Board of upervsors' acid 'not
on a project by project basisi ate does riot agree that this project should
provide access to ariy adjoining property.
Dov. 2qj 1982
BUTTE .COUNTY ADVISORY AGENCY MINUTES �; Mage 9
November 9% 1982
HERRING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC ANIS C r.INED TO THE ADVISORY AGENCY
Mr. Mendonsa said that in r Ing the fiscal economic impact report by
Recht Hausrath and Assoc ions of the Day Area, there was a statement
that reconstruction of the frontage Qn,Humboldt Rd. might be done by -
the County. That is definitely a misdonception, e,s the County will not
be doing that improvement.'
Mr. Streeter said that statement came about as a comparison, with;the
idea that theapplicant would fund it.
0
Mr. Reid said that things are pretty well settled, with the Water Quality
Control. Board. The tentative waste discharge-requirements are, out
for comments. The Health Dept. will probably concur with thoe requirements'
with one or two minor changes. The sewage treatment plant will be under a;
county service area, not a homeowners'. association.
0
Mr. Streeter said he had some concern about the new wording ora the
mitigation measure regarding schools.
Mr. Bolster submitted a copy of the proposed wording to the Advisory
Agency.
0
Mr. Streeter said, nothing further might come on the zoning, but it might
be well to have more time to consider the school mitiga'tion'measu e.
Fie wondered what Public Works thought ,about mutual access and a 60 ft.
right-of-way.
Mr. Mendonsa said that nothing is "know about What i{ill happeno.the north.
Mr. Streeter said that there are 965 acres with `110 ,125 or mo, a .dwelling
visits in the.. works, Notkiin ' is lcq.otan abb
g,, ut th;e; design . ox-, access .
Mr. Mendonsa said that he could not say;§ anything about that road
to the ' nortk until: something , is krioWri,th' out ,what.,will, bappen up there.
®
The Board has not said that they.Vould,l.ike to have a,,ddvelopment plan
for, the whole ridge instead of this ,p,ecemeal: Rsituatian, . ;.
.Mr. Streeter,asked `about the: right-of Fgy acquisi .on.,, , alze i
>Ttnwtouxd,,
an amendment to tt e Specific;,`pl�in�-to change. those�,roads. froth emergency. '
access roads:
Mr. Mendonsa asked if the Advisory Agency wanted to recommend to the
Board that they amend the Specific Plan and.regiziz�e the. acquisition.
of a, 60 ft..right ,of-way fora public road between tYxp properties.
Mrs Str eeter thought maybe it should be acquixed if not actually built.
0
Mr Mendonsa said it would be aimimpossible, to 4"'' re..r. gh.aof-way
at. a latex date. Ne did not really think it, should 'be grnteci stow. The
county does not want ;t now,
Mr Streeter'said ,tt Could be of but not accepted.
Nov:• 2g 1g82
r
BUTTS COUNTY ADVISORY' AGENCY MINUTES Page 10
November 291 1982
Mr. Mendonsa agreed that an offered of dedication could be required bu.t
it need not be accepted. Ile asked Mr. Bolster if the applicant would
be willing to offer A'60 ft,. right-of-way for dedication, but not to
be accepted. This would allow the county to possibly at some later date
accept the road if it were built to county standards. It would
�D avoid having to. get a grant from every, homeowner. This would be one
road to the north down the main road that goes out to Humboldt Road.
and.
Mr. Mendoasa indicated on the map to Mr. Bolster where this road
would be.
Mr. Bolster said that would have to be discussed with;#he applicants.
They want a private rodd system with no through access:. They want
to avoid the impacts associated. with traffic.
Mr. Streeter said he would like to propose a one Week conti