HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-50 REZONES 13 OF 22ra ;
Motion amended:
i
Re soluton'f�2-63 be adopted" and the Chairman authorized to. sign.
Supervisor Fulton stated he ,:had. ,a �.ot_Qt, pXob]em With, thioproject
e was concerned. about leap "fr'og "devela mens sy,ith the three proaect,i
rd,6riing
own the Zine.° Se did not €eel they had, ,addressed .the "fact 'o€ lYaba j i'tX
The people down» steam we`re gairig„to pay the Fptic;er 2�he €as'ca1 impact analysis
is conjector. This is the €irst ane •the .cowlty hasi deme. xe hada feeling
`ls
lar}ning T
'arA advocate a€ this project. ;-T1�e e, :sh'ould be c`oi cezns dor tf}e '
.
nv ronment and people that are already there. It, has not-been ml't'igatecY
properly and he was not sure it cou3d be.
Whoeler °stated onces the sewer s "stem is estahZis�her� i
dhalill
be monitorecmcn
ontinun.usl `, i
I €or :water quality. Thiswas not an urban
evelopment end:.not leap :£rogtxg.. �t is rura�e..deVeld3mente The project wilt
eturn to the Hoard for further consideration,. The regulationswill off set
;
any problems Mfr':occurrir�g:
�.
Supero sor Sazaceni > stated'"he C'+�.t t'h'e ilea] th D' epartinent :people
were capable i3€, monit�rzng the system. grid ail of'the impacts. khat, Was ;,ons;
o€ thef,artoX than
..was' mkEgated'
` _.Chairman Wheele,r:. stated` this was' the €first` time. pro�ectsttah
L
as this had been before'ethe'Board. Thoy heed to;look`at each major pro.',�ct
�
G
as it comes before them. They, cahi dt burdenone proj.ect.�
Supervisor polati comma ited 'bn qu'a� �.ty, and ,quantity :acid whether
it was a, fiscal• burqen, to, the- couh'tY. There' axe'conce.rns abort. the impacts
of raildl,x£e and ,rapazian� .:Everyt5ine she sees moxa maps th L,,.sho lnprte5: `
proposed developmeit.,in rthe,area) tey are 'tibt small and in, terrgs,r o€ the
area. She, was, not -sure , she` could 'Jastify' the impact, ii i were ,*or. the s
"ar.ea. �There�'are
`
whale ,proQer't rights`,�`circulation and fire concernS;�
'�
She tried to access her objections for the effects that will be started-
vs. the .mitigations measures that will be approved,. . -This shoulc be open,'N'.°
space and remain as�'suchi.((,.,..�
Superldsar t t'dley stated' she, fblt this was, 6nthe better
projects and rnitigatiori,measuxes'were better. She was ;concerned about the
land txusts,
vo.te,. on moti`on`s" i
A`lES: 5upevisoxa rioseleyr,Saracenitand Ghsirman theexer, �
*hs Stt'pertrisors Dolan 'and Fulton
Motion Barred.
R
�
BOAR1 OP 5UPB1tVISOAS MINUTES>
a
7777--
ie h f
�ComMents Gi �c;eaved ,a, the ;Ju1y <20:y ,1982 Bo.ar'd'riZeetin' :and:
1�1a:nning Department Responses. f
kNatei uality
i S y Y
A,d1tional concern was expressed about the; water nualit
u e x
of L� the Chico Creek near' the site and downstream as a x esul,t of,
H
Pct.. The,' location i^ rt I '
the pxvj. n ani design of the sewage disposal ponds
IS information not known tv the public at large. The water quality
downstream wells has also linen ,mentioned a number of times to
of.
Y. t
bP of concern to the Stilson Canyon residents.
--
An update of the selvage disposal, system for the project
-"
submitted by Anthony J. Landis of the Regional Water Quality
was
Control Board on July 20, 1982. In his report`; Dir. Landis indicates
side progress has been.mad.
Gonsid de in resolving some of the
previous questions raised about the sewage disposal system. NawoVer,
I
he concludesthat additional informationwill be needed ptiox to
a report of waste di>scharge begin considered complete. A copy of,
R
the input ,from N1r. Landis is attiached; a copy was handed out at the
July 20, 1982, 13oavd.of Supervisorsmeeting
The Environmental Health Division Of the Health Department
r r
test en ineere.. lapsor t
I1as received the la g p ale sewage disposal
system. We wi11 ask Lynn Hanhart or Tom Reid to post that infoxmatio'n
1,
far review by the Board 'and ;the public on July 22« Though',the
a,z formation is quite teeh.nical in nature, the opportunity to review,
what is currently arrailable mai be Helpful in responding to ,concerns'
r
of the Boad and the public:
ry , ,
r w,
fill ,
,}
,IF
•a
Y
G
A$z`indicate:d. "ax% .tlie lettort4 6f .J ex& Bolst'e�r b l�iaji'YY28).
1982 , their intenta.on is to prepare a supplement to, the EIP t+rlien
the selvage disposal system design is complete. The suppleme7t
then would be circulated through the State Clearinghouse pr'io'r
to"thE Regional Water Quality Control Board issuing `a waste lis-
charge permit. 'The timing of the additional sewage disposal
system information has been a continua. paint of contention.
Historically, the Count*' of Butte has allowed applicants
,
to obtain tentative approval without detailed ozigineering or plans
for some aspect of the project. In this casE,..t]o sewage disposal
system i8, one wh:lch is not Currently Utilized in, this County,
though it is utilized in other counties within California. Thr.
Landis indicates that, conceptually; the sewage disposal. system
is workable. However, he indicates there are some constraints at
I
this--location that need, to be further studio d to assure this
y
pasta cLT1ar system Will work, ideally, it would be ben.e.I al to
,
know, prior"to"action on the rezone and tentatilre subdivision; as
to .the feasibility o- this particular, sewage disposal system. In
this case, action by 'the Board to grant approval to the rezone,
at the sane time requesting the ra'ect to be referred bac
g p i k to
them prior to Advisory Agency<action on the tentative subdivision,
places the burden on the applicant and'the•;State Rogional Water
t '
(duality, Control Board Yto' resolve th.e sewago disposal. issue:
Condition 118 reads: "Provide community sewage collection, txeatntent
and disposal facilities that comply `with the Califarnia State
Regional Water Quality Control Board, :Code of 'Butte County,
California State and'Safety Code and other applicable codes and
regulations governing the design, canstructaon, and operation of
Canyon P'.ark "Es;tates
SCF1' ##801221:Y
Ole,.
APPENDIX 16
May 2.8, 7,982
I..Supplement
on Cumulative IM paets - June 22,.1987.
'II.
a. State Clearinghouse letters with letters from .the
Department of Conservation, the Department of Fish
and Game and`' Caltrans `- Division of Aeranauti.cs
U. Planning.Department responses to the three letters
from $tAte agencies
TIS.
Memo randuir;.fro m Anthony J. Landis, Regional Water
Quality Contxol Board, entitled "Up.date on Canyon
Park Estates Sewage bisposal System, Butte County"
July 16 1982 ,
TV0.
�i
Letter from E11is`C. Ro11s of Rolls, Anderson an
Rollsto the Regional Water Quality con Board
July 21, 1982
i
4
t
1
1
Fc 1161hing the above %format`;
ii N 9 .1 ,�_' ...
(] j A' list of projests"producing relates( ex tcmu'la`Cive- ar�pac'ts,
including those projects outside the control of the ageixcy:
A. 14 Mile House
.aYy'.
B: 'Parr -Terrill Rezone
a;
C. Un; -named 180m -Hall Project
E. Butte County Land Use Element 1979 A�
(2) A sumnaxy of, the expected enVironmental eii'eet:5 to be
B t _.. � i M . :p $ T s�
by those projects with specific reference to adcia-t onal
'produced
f Y y
.. 0 - +',1 I 1:i ° d'Y � tk� 97 '9t o i •�i '�'1 ,�i
inform tion statin; `where tkiat information 'is ava11able
A. l4 Mile douse 'A Log # 81.y I0�= 4 08 (Feb. 1982)
�w. Ai
This project is a clustered deveiopm�11,t of 21
residences on a 185 acre -parcel, lobated '2 'roi'le"s" �-
,sogth ,of `Forest-'Aan`ch.,"' �X.§' adjacont to
k H h}var 32'. 4
11Projec`t
: The Expec- ted Environmental Effects of "t4is
' L
are, (Page, 27 - E t,4)
.'le could be, subjected to eathcttalKe, groundshaking
2. Storm ,Wat�r,.Wgt}fid indrease
3 two: popul:atipris o,f, the rare 13a ICnotweed ;would
be threatened
4 Wildlifie habitat wnulcl be �reduc.'64' .nd �. �Cdcltictloin in
. , "ca.rryxxYg capacit�ry will. ={,occur , 4 ; .
_
Ttie hand " ie`e pattern,. and. dE��is .'ty; on'Ahe ;ptoject,,site
Would change. ,.
6. The visual nature of theo Wou] d ,ch'a�ne
7. Demand for public services and electrical energy would
increase bya minor increment,
-2-
fui f„. 77777
i:. 6 i.
4
M
i
I
3sk.'` TrL{SL e... 1.0� an 4Cr4�lAtON WJ1 /. �.W.u;V k.VR.1 {4-anf4y lr er
consumption would Yncire'ase,
d.° S,oine ,�vildli e, habitats would b`eF°xeciuced on site;
..a'k ,-d ;5.. D.emanda 'fax : publi e+.serviccs�rand w.s�leeb.xYcal
energy.wou;d' increase,
R
f
6. Residents would be exposed to potential public
heait i prob'-dims.
Biei`l� Heights �'''iA°�''Lo��# 8�'�-;'03{-X02-
wti2`'r `(Nd'arch082')
i
This project will contain 385 single family residen-
„..„ ti.l un]ts.,r. d 8ma11 neighborhood commercial ArOaj and
a recreational, (publ c) u'e� area, It , is Iodated on
;
a;x200 acre parcel (group of Patgels) seven miles
east of Chico. c,
:,m11'e Expected, Environmeri'�al'�F� ects.ark-;s (EiR -Page
7
rl;. Exposure to, seismic hazards..
2 . Wi1 dliie habitat' reductkon;
3. Traffic "increases on Highway 32 at Santos Way
Intersection,
4. _ Exposure to tare 'h&zatassr
5.. Increased service load on police and sire agencies;'
.. dS.
6., , T;neagy, u,se;
k 7. Expansive so„i ls'
Tlia� rtFi no tkiat.Gal.x'ans has estimated the capacity of
4.
way. 32 at. 15 yQ,00' vehig1.8 per dayi before 60 g.estior
bepomps a. ,'the E � a -Iso protects each uni t to generate
,factor.
7 vehic].,e trip ends/daya'on the average.
E:. Butte C6uhtyv Gen`era'l.! an Land JJO'O.A'tl *nt = 1.679 (E
in FYle, no number assigned)
d;-4-.
,
Projects ivi.th lots of less than 40 acres would`not create-
sn3Y.can..,rr}pa4s 3f;,tW,ioepare ticXusered,>"taccess to
th'e habi t� a;rid .r l paxi an+ Ycorr do +s y ��i s a n a i:e'd', and same
foam b dcsmestic°'`animEil control 119' 11A.corpor'ated `frit i the
, project, such 'alas' done `iri the "Canyon "Irk and 11° Mile
s..
Houso designs. Se-6, Verbaf estirnohy rrom� +Planning
1) rector re : D.a sciissa oris witfi Dearttnen of Fish and Came
a ,
1'exsQnnel-.,13Qard..R ,Superva,sorsr.Mee�t ng., °MaY , 5,. x, 82)
The Bidwell Heights pxoject is still undergoing project
review, and mitigations can be incorporated into the project.
Isom " Hall: has not been designed', but also could incor-
porate adequate mitagati.ons, The A-2, though �t could contain
400 parcels ,e;a ci ua,l�l;y ;con tai,ri 32 ,, "par,ce.,ls at present. it
the area is not. rezoned from the current ;A�-2 , the potenti aX
for wildlife habitat reduction is very signiXicant+
a'. A,
2. Erosion:
1h6-potential' i'cr erosion s :great', biit c'arik be mitigated
to a. level' i nsigzx 'Si:c nce with' pro eri to cTes'i g i', stan�
dard soli. protection°�' p�'actices and , eh1 dre; men't o. e' t�st ;n ;
I County building code requirements for grading permits.
3. T7-a•ffic on Highway. 32
At 7 trips/day/unit, a totals trip generation of 9100
ADIr would result. Added to ;Lbe! exigting; a e, vel of 2000 ADT,
a. `total of approximately' I.1,,000_,-. DTA would exist. Given that
Cal. TrAgs .,esUma-tes ;(co.nssr,vati#velY)F: ther;.capacit.y of Highway
32 to be 15-, 000- ADT, no signif icant impact to Highway 32
traffic is anticipated, although,,a slight'rerAuction in level
of service may occur at some intersections
v
'i) k. Y Br
Ask
developments nQn-contiguous'o'ti�
(i.e, h'er ,County' :bevel op-
inenstS)" such 'aa: Canyor''� ark. staxes�' and' �tiie{s �d,j'o 'ni{ng pro-
.� .. ' Ji
pos al's w�,i . cause even more severe constraints
Pimi.nuti6h of-police andlire° services ''c0ca°n be
k , r • . ,. J. E 7 1 >.': F r Y' r
�. avoided,' and, several:approaches are. "feasible', and probably
warranted, given the diversity of situations tYiroughotat the
County. Detailed study of this problem should begin
immediately, an in, the` meantime,' all projects shaui`d�;
; i
A, -Pr o.vide these services internFall `or.
1 X49
axticipate in Communt Sex'yice D'a,s txicts .
6. Fire Hazard
In addition to to provision of fire suppression, as
noted above, the, "high to ae�ctreme:" f;ir klazard ,ra,tirig i for
tfi"� ' area of the ,'County ' mandat'es� add�,txonal. dire prevention
te'chnigtfOs.,, Fa,illite° In-all,
"deve,l°opml.dn't' `would, indrease the pot;entx'al , for: Loss o.fV. lAife
and property. (See-, d-3.sot ssa on: poit, f i .e :prote,ction "in; the
Specifio Plan for Canyon Park 'Vstates for potential Tecta-
rixques) 4:
,
;1'- , y • - L } ? Y ill
'
l
Recommended Mitigation n
The County ist�Quld ,e�tapllsh ,a qui,.rement fdr clustered
devel,ament ;and ,use ,o of, ue�g4ea, b.}r ('ers,u r's.creria ng rcas, ,part
ofa .: w sdoth' �� , es de t 7 Z ane Int,
'4'.
5. ZrsedxfrDem{and. fAor;>ulalic;�ISe,rvi cey.s 1 ie,,icnt•
#(�pi.�i ,°ior
f1re protection are, eovered a.,n>F I";x'G�
Butte County has continued to provide a combination of
rural and urban service levels without regard tqIo.ca,t;ion-or
distance from existing areas being served. Otkier count le's
,,:discontinued; or l,it •r�a.ny aexvace a n more remote, areas im-
medkately ,;after tkio passage of Pxnp�?:$ 4ion.
oll
RecammendeC Mitiga.tizan ,, k
` 0• y
n ,
lista xsh�eii'�I � Com qty ..ae�,y�� oe ; ro��s.
a?u grJpt;cial
,-Ls ithn as ss Hants. made,, at the -.time ei .re: r
da s r;La w s m 4n
ten .ati�e .tract ,aper val ,,, Funfls ��^��=��,�u��ei�: a� "his,,QaxIy
stage= to i provide services or ei�uipmen at the tine the' demand
for service or equipment is createde4
2,,,Addit oto r i bu:il,d g s >a,nd,ard that t Aqui,,re buildings
p be marc, secure and rep oe St n,dpo 0, pLLa .ding security
_.
ordinances are ,aIrga4y.,Av,RA aple, ���1 ale .pia ng .-�uscd . Ln ,coma-
muoities throughout this °state.
i
County inspection service fee§ ,shop,4 -1be revised to
include mileage and travel time cost's fbr. °ire
delopmen'ts' mti`re
rCauhty oi' c e proyi d' ng,- that service
1_34
,, 9`. impact ree schedus,4 stio�u Abe;d�erueloped to °p`royide
service 1ev+�ls if '
requested, tie iee world depend upon, be
level of service requested (above the County's current capa,-
�bil;ity). an ,,.d stance, fr,P they �gency� ��rt�yiding se;�'vice.
: , , .
. xe Razard,t .4
,
„ e
�,F�re hazard , ncreases with-, d.eve :iopmer�t' in Moye . heavtly
vegetated ,rea anc� v�ith ,inc ea ec s ants E rom Y:Erse S at Ens .
�ti ,,
men, de 1ki�tigations g
:a
/
.-Estat�l�sh; a ,plan p'rovicp addi tanai i re,; stations
v1 fro,
ax upgrod eng• onee pa�sed.�on Ythek P, an �lanid .use
• wG�:neral>:
tei gn tiaxl 0I, ,.r.:
..
1
r
µ' 1 "u ` h 661t"dik441 V.4444iC1 f1 wS 4tl{(Cp. ;911111 g p i
td
n V i11r11.
' GOV"ERNoR's OFICt=
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH '
° 1 00,TENTH STAEST droYil�o, C dIj16r114
SACF4A'M`NTO 95674, '
r2omuND G, GROWN JF1,
GoVeRNOq
June 29' I '1982'
Stephen, 'A., . Streeter
ButteCounty'. ,P1 ann"i ng ,Department x
7 County Center .:Drive
Crovi lle, CA 959.65 ....:
SUBJEC`SCHU80122311 Canyon Park Esta, tosr ..i.
Dear Mr. Streeter k
State agencies have commented on your draft environmental impact report (see attached)
If you would like to discuss their concerns and recommendatio;ts, please contact the
staff from the appropriate agencies::
When preparing the final EIR, you must include all comments and responses (CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15146). The certified EIR must be considered in the decision
making process for the project. In addition, we urge you 'to respond directly to the
agencies" comments by writing to them, including the State Clearinghouse number on
all correspondence.
A recent Appellate Court decision in Cleary v. County of Stanislaus clari`f ied
requirements for retppdnding to review comments.: Specifically, the court i`ndicat
t addressed in detail, giving reasons why the specific commen
and suggestions were not accepted, The responses must show factors of overriding
importance which ;justify overriding thei suggestion. Responses to comments must not
be conclusory statements but must be supported by empirical or experi-mental data,
scientific authority or explanatory information of any kind, The court .further said
that the responses must be b good faith, reasoned analysis,
Section .15002(f) of the CBQA Guidelines requires; that a goveromental'agency take
certain actions if an EIR shows substaotial`advese environmental impacts could
result f om a project. These actions include changing-the project, imposing condi
ti ons on the, project, adopting plans or ordinances to avoid the; probl'am, eel ect i ng
an alternative to the project, or disapproving the project. In the event that ths?
project is approved without adequate mitigation of significant effects, the lead
agency must make written, tte�i fi n ng for each s'i gni fi cans:' er f ect (Sectio n 150138) and i t
must support its actions with a written statement of overriding doassiderations,folA
each unmitigated significant effect (Section 15089).
If the ;project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the ��otice of
Determination must be filedwith the Secretary for Resources, as well as with the
County`' Clerk.. Please contact Anna Pal':vos at ',9'51 445-0613 is you have amyl
questions.
Sincerely,
Charles D'randes
Deputy Di.reetor for project; Caordinatfion I1'. a..'
..: .�.rr. fan .Fp l".g.: f1WR
1"
Jul 19,82'
MEMORANDUM", u y
ON 'CANYON PARK i ACES SIBS, t
.UPDATE
BUTTS COUNTY
4 YX
6. Andergon Cootechnical Consultants, Inc., of Sacramento t��d a
stit.te i;►vSi<gati,on.:l T�iey, ndi.cAtpd,t'hat,ti?: ye material
could"fie" mixed and compacted
by sheep hoot and water. 7n Jwi:nch
�1 avers toform .the, ,hig
Levees, , f or oor�,;s 5 Mand 6 u �Tl'"ep�)�ted�
�e
` that eXcav,a ioP ,,wou l `
,d' ff i u,lct� i n„'>the. vol can c m�au zf�nota ,u�,,,� f 37.
., .
f y, ] 1. x
matori��al �o�'the,canyon walls. �f�fy r�eco��mended s�rfaoe dr"a1nage! 1� .,
d"the nds ands su Face cu.. off',dra errs $�f, toe
ditches at titan, pq ub r t ogee . :
blas, bserUed ��n the cyi banks.
SUMM�ARY
The eng�neeer�� made substantial progres- on the �I's�8r� pfl the se,�g�� .disposal
system; °but th`d repot^t of was`te discharge cannot be censidere,d"cpm, 1etr; until
the >above'information is ,submitted:
p
Y P..
k
''"'Area Engineer,-,. y$
AJL:ciS
cc:_ Mr, Torn'Ri;ed, "Butte COOty' F(ealth Pep artment
Mr. Steve Streeter,° 'C3gtte County P1'anning.' Depai7tm'06t' ,,%j�'
1 F,,� +. rte.. , i, ), p .': �u' •"'
v I
f
z
v
I
4,�
Y
n Ir
Inter-i
peparr�er�t�lA�m®
Board of Supervisors
FROM: Planning
sua�cr, �Cgnj�ar°'ar1tWTEs;tates;. pA�G Redone;, $lk 31 �:
0TE;; July 15, lD$2
x n 7Che- attached comments :were received from the State Clearinghouse.
-. ..
�a ;pax of the` second circulation of ,,the:>EIR.; The three responses
,., recszvedF .were from: Galzforn a Depa#,MOAt,, Cons.ervatian,, the California
Depax merit ,off F�s,I -rand,,-.Game, and the,; California Department of Trans-
p'ortation - Division -f Aeronau ics,:, Cur ,comments witn regards to
the three' letters are as follows:
6'..M1 ,.
1. Letter from Esther Maser, ft
Esther Conservation.
}► composed a ,xespons,e, to C tare concerns of
.Response; «e prev.ousl,
the Department of 'Conservation as indicated. The
.-.Planning, D.epartmont response. ,s, identfi.ed as item
0, in the, E. R. No furthe response
.. � . r xe rise 'a
V.b w of Appendxx,M1
is required ,
2. �ettexFullerton; Cali:fornr-a Depaxtmen't of Fish and
Game.
Response -, We haveprevians y, ece�rre�l verbal ,input from the
Depari:ment o,f„a,Fish .and. Game that the re�rrsed, develop-
menu plan was designed,, so as ,too ,min 'mx.ze ,impacts to
t migratory; wig] d1.ife . rho° or,r,ganal..rdeveiopment plan
r „° fox 11;0 homesites, was nowt, as desirable. After meeting
with four representatives of the Department Of -F1
sh
and Game on May 60 19$20 thply concluded that the
revx,sed de�relopment p3 art `fox :100:"homesites was accept-
The r, recommended mi°tj,.g jprin measure-
-wa l be considered
-Or ;,,adopt.ion. There-is-'alreadya mitigation measure
' to tain a sareambed alteration per Exam CalifoxniA r D.epar tinentf of, Fish and ,Game .fox creek crossings" which
would.a,ddxoss�,In part, the concerns aboutTneem Ligation
a 1
axdat:aon ponds in the- flood. plain area
.,
w measure prop®se;d fox, adoption hauld .,read "Locate
, 1 tie .setage .;oxo datr on ponds outsa�de the 100 yea7r flood
o Li tle Chaco Creek.''.
. P, plaan a.
v in, relation to,�the food
Location of
the sewage ponds,
pla1ri, as also a concern of the Galzfotnia State
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Final design; and
location of the ponds will be primarily wit,in'the
jurisaiction Of that agency. The 100 foot setback
in the flood plain may affect the two_mast westerly
sewage pondls, as shown on the development plan,
7 I . b:.
i
d 665 FIR STREET CHICQ, CALIrQANIA 65929 , T�LEPHQNE 916,845.1422 �bit�
�l oil a
July" 21. 1982 CIVIL ENGINLE9S
E California Regional 'WaterQuality
Control Board
Central Va11ey Aegiori
3201 S s-troe -
Sacramen,to, Ca. 95816
Attention l Tony Landaus
'Gentlemen
"
w
we h`
.ave received a copy of the memo from Tony Landis to Larry Na
dated. ,7uly 16, 1982, regarding the Canyon Park sewage disposal ,system.
We would like to offer t1ie following comms nts c
.. We mentioned phasing of the construction, since the
spray disposal area will .not beneeded far several
Years, and assumed that any deferred construction
{ Vill be guaranteed by the subdivision agreement and
regu:irad securities with the, County. If this
�`;
causes any delay in the issuance of the waste dis-
r'
charge requirements, please disregard any mention
of phasing.
k.'.
y
2. We encloso a Copy of somo overall truss-<sectjots through;
r"
thelower ponds, sho;vang the relati.onship t.o Littler chico
Creek. These sections are taken at the paint where the
A;
pond levee is closest to the overflow channel o� th,e crook,
�
3. Each pond transfer structure inolud.ea an overflow standpipe
Which regulates the level in the upstream, porl.ei. ; The byp`ass
e opened only to drain the pond fob clea�:,ing
orlMaintenance wvork.
The 8- inch .rsumpl� ; iri which the sp?x j:nkler pump is
installed is a sealed ,anit. TIP regulation of p1� aping
rate is necessary, The aiatomai is 5pr-Inkler lino valves
are normally $ no ma ;
y .lo od, and the suction line fibra the
irrigation ta`ilwater, .area is normal;l.y cl,o! cOa, so the
system will retain h,ydrea;;tatic.' head when not opeia.ting.
a
F
a'
ITEMS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Available Por Review At The
Planning P" De attment
County Center ]7rive, Oroville; CA 5595
1. Geotechnical Report for Canyon mark Estates Sewer Storage
ponds - Anderson Geotechnical Consultants, Tac.,"
June, 1982.
2. Review of Ei.stal Information: Canyon Park Estates - Recht,
Hausrath & Ass:ociates,
�
June' 281 1932.
3, mire protectioon Requirements for Quail.- Canyon Tentative
,qubet vision Map_ - California Department of Forestry
October, 1982,
4, Letter from Ed McLaughlin,, President Butte County Paan
Burea'u,,
November 8, 1982.
S. Tentative Waste Discharge Requirements for Canyon Park
Estates 1 California Regional Nater Quality Coiztrol hoard,
November 18, 1982,:
64 Planning .Director.;I's report for Quail Canyon Tentative
Subd:i.11isaon,
November 22, 1982.
7. 'Letter with advisory Agency Conditions,
December 10 1982.
R
i -'xis.. s.aa. .;akwi+.he+rol3.1b441ilKHi rwiM wiYJ1Y�.MiI1�'t'-:.. ••. -.t°i`dtl`:m51'37�lfitd"ndi'itlfu35+1.tii'4ibl9iN[�']dGt3�P1L^.^at`.0 ""'`-":9'�`Y4"IIJY'41Li3',1..�t:J:.4°:3.:.c1:oeiytY:Y:�'tdiu3:«:ri`JYs1d�`6J:.Y..bLewriwl.':.a«d4w.