Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-45A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 5 OF 7$, Page 2-8 change "not significant" to "potentially significant, ot- i n9 that the mitigationmeasures are infeasible. Y Page 2-11, the reference to the 10:0 -year storm should be clarified to read' "The 'minimum pipes site is, to accommodate` a 10 -year storm, however no flooding of, houses and no more than one-third of the road from the curb to centerline shall be inundated dur'ng " 100 -year storm." 8. Page 2-11 concerning the groundwater monitoring, in the event that subsequent groundwater' monitoring indicates than there is contamination, what would be the result? We would have permitted -_ development at a given density and then after the fact: gone i n .and required sewer. The preferred- alternative is to determine at what density the soil and grOUndwater will not be contaminated and proceed from there, 9. On Page 2-12, was the cost of the sewer extension based on the Zo l 1 s,, Anderson and Rolls figures? Supervisor dol art IndIc8tes that costs wbeing discussed 'between the City and the County would Indicate thataa sewerextension could cost as, much at $15 million. The dost'in the document of a $3-mllllon'trunk extension seems artificially low.` 10 'Page 2-14, the Board of Supervisors .on December 21 1986, approved an increase in the: schooi fees to s0:80'per square foot for _ residential -structures.- _ - 116 Page :2-1'7, why d i dn't the do l 1 ar per acre change ,under* the annual cost for scenario 1 and 21 12. Page 3.1-1, will the change in the project area affect the number 1. Page -3.1-2, change the table. 14 Page 3.1 -3, note qn the map: '"See Appendix 16.6 for revisions," 15. Page 8.1-6 and 3. 1 8, amend the discussion, to wit: "The Green l i tie pelic11 es do hot app 1 y I h the Be l l MU r area . See memo and 'mot 1 on 16. Page 3.1 r-1 O ii el i m I hate "and zori I ng des i gnat I oris on. 17. Page . i -11 , ch�atige the Green 1 i ne dl scuss I on, no f 1 rid I ngs ;w i I 1 be necessary d i'a. Page; 3.'1 -x'18, expand the d i scuss'l on on the I mp i emeritat i on of the 200 -foot setback to Indicate that It could only bo- applied to the perimeter of the expanded project area a`l'ong Bell and Muir Avenues. 19. page. 3.2-4, 3.2-7the Extension of —Lassen Avenue to Highway 32 is inconsistent with the adopted County Circulation E=lement. If the extension is a recommendation of the consultant It, would require ,an amendment in this document. 20. Page .3.2-16, first paragraph, have West Lassen and Henshaw Avenues been ;excluded? 21. Page 3.2-18, the suggestion that pedestrian crossings 'be considered is not very specific as to type or location. Discussions with Supervisor Dolan would indicate that the on1''y pedestrian crossing' which would be suitable to Jay Partridge School would require a constructed elevated walkway. The cost and feasibility of doing this may make the mitigation measure infeasible. 22. Page 3.3-3, note that three wefts have been tested In, the area as part of the Nitrate Action Plan 23. Page 3.3-4, the position statement from Supervisor Dolan ref ers`to the Brown and Caldwell plan, not the Rol Is, Anderson and Rolls study l jnl' 'erred In the document. 24. Page 3.3-b, the current standard of 'three dwel'11ng units per acre on septic 'systems within the Chico Urban Area is temporary, 25. Page. 3.4-1, end paragraph five with the statement 'that Bell Muir is outside of the Brown and Caldwell plans for sewerand drainage facilities - - 26. Page 3.4-3, change the second-to`-the iast sentence to read, "The draiMage plan will be Compatible wilt the isolis, Anderson and Rolls pl an j but will not supersede' It." 27. Page 3.4-5 fifth paragraph, change language to read, '"have adopted an ordinance." Last sentence, the Board has recently increased the fees> 26. Page 3.4-10, reflect the change in the fee schedule., 29. Page 4-1,second paragraph, elloiinate "'and zoniirg designations." 30. Page 4-2, the ;expanded project area is 430 acres, not 400. 81i Page 5-1, does' the revised fee schedule mitigate the impacts? As we discussed at the "December �2 Board hearing, I`have met 41th Supervisor Dolan to take her comments on the document. The Board authorized 'this meeting as a mechanism for the Supervisors" comments to be made and addressed. 1 am forwardi'n'' them to you for response; _, 5 1 Page 1-1, first paragraph, ;second sentence, ;please change to read: "The project area involves approximately 270acres within a larger 430-acre 'neighborhood bounded by GelI Road, ..'• 2. Page, 2-2, the f eas i b i 'i i ty of state and federal financing i s uncertain. Programs such as UDAG and EUA have been cuts the others ` will ;probably be cut in the future.. By policy, benefit assessment districts are only used when the issue is one of"public health.'A redevelopment area is not on the negotiation table with the City of Chico. 3. Page 2-3 add the following information Adoption of the project as proposed would require amendment to the f01low.'ing regional plans: the sewerage p'lanp the storm drainage plan, school needs studies, Chico Urban Area T.ransportaiton`Plan, Butte County Clrculati[on Element, LAPCo's Spheres of Influence, the Nitrate Action Plan, and the financing plans for all of the above. Approval of the project would constitute a departure from the adopted land use ,pian and reverse a policy which took ten years to achieve. 4. Page 2-4, clarify the 200-foot setback recommendation, and eliminate noise control and hours of operation limits on farmers. 5. page '2-5, the'buffier concept could only apply to Muir Avenue and is determined tc, be infeasible as a mitigation measure for the entire area. It is therefore recommended for elimination. b. Page 2-6, concerning the cost for roadway realign=ment, abandoning and acquiring of right-of-Way is much more complicated and costly than described. Por example, there, are existing structures in the way of some proposed realignments, such as Nord, kodeo and, Henshaw,, and the Grange Ha11. The 'rand acquired versus the land abandoned Is Inot equal in cost. There are legal procedures which are required to abandon right-of=-way. It is suggested that more internal circulation be developed, such as considering de:nd-end streets and the identification of one main toad to connect the neighborhood to Eaton This road would bisect the neighborhood and would require future designs of subdivisions to back up onto the road rather than have direct accessi These typet of recommendations would require an amendment to the Circulation Element. The most feasible road to connect to 'Eaton is Guynn 7. P60e„2-8, on the timing provislon, eliminate the provision than bopartment of Pub) It Works determines when the improvements are instaVied. There :are other, mechanisms for installing the i;mprovementsy :such as lot by lot with ireimbUrsemen't agreementsy areaw de distrlct, as pi"operty develops with payment of pro r6ta share to remalning improvements, when 509 of the properties have subdivided to the minimum acreagesy by Board ordlnance, etai if a could . do it a number of different ways to trigger i cnprovemerits, w,'a percentage figure is going to be_useci by forcing payment from the 6 undeveloped properties after 509 have developed, or, in addition, by requiring that area roads go on the Capital Improvement Prograrn after a certain percentage has developed. d. Page 2-8, the oitigation measure of pursuing state funding is impractical. We do this already, and Bell{Muir Roads would, not be considered a high-priority item. All roads will need private funding sources or the impact is ;not mitigated;: 9. It would be appropriate to consider another east-west road like the to improve circulation Lassen Avenue extension p 10. Page 2-9, the, bike ;impacts and conflicts of bikes and vehicles are s 1 gn i fi cant . We need better bike paths) and these- should be defined. 11. Pedestrian crossing rat Jay Partridge, as noted previously! would be an expensive undertaking and is therefore not feasible, 12. Page 2-10i mitigat on 'measures on a site-by-s'ito basis won't mitigate overall problems. Individual drainage Solutions such as dry wells and drainage trenches have been prohibited by the Nitrate Action Plan, la. Page 2-11, the solution to nl trate contamination is the 1nsta'11ation of sewers:Wydrogeo1og1c data should be uti1i Z.ed to set development densities which will"not cause nitrate problems;. _-_ - TI'-r t s avo i ds the s i tuat l on of_ development, ,mon i for i 1,g, then . i nsta'l l at i on of sewers after the ;fact. 14,, Page 2-12,, the project Will require an amendment to the Nitrate Action. Plan. 15. Page 2-12, the City may not permit a new trunk line to the plant4 zf the property is to sewer) then it would have to be with the concurrence of the City of Chico in accordance with the Brown and Caldwell plan. Therefore, the property would have to become part of the Brown and Caldwell study area. The financing to make these changes In the plan 1s unknown. 16. Page 3'.1-11i the discussion on urban development trends and patterns should have been forwarded into the summery as a significant impact needing mitibAt, ny 17. Page :4-8, .another Project alternative is the incorporation of the s Be11 -Mu ir properties into the West East Avenue land use study now :r I process i '1 B. to read, Memd from SuperN mage 1.6.11 retitle t 1 e the document " r t sor` { Bolan to Board of Supervisors OutlMing an' Implementation Program for= the W trate Act l on Plan," . i' w _ > r, I'm not sure whether it would be under Chapter `l1 or Chapter 12, but the persons commenting on the document through the public hearing are as follows: process Dr. Al Beck Joe Burrell Board of Supervisors Planning Commission Ray Schoenfeld Matthew Webber Doris Shell Lee "Turner Marsha Wiemer eisyne Turner Robert O 1 seri I have in a copy Please r i if any of of the minutes of the hearing process to date. these ,31 comrients are unclear or you need furtherdirections._ Sincerely, S.A. KIRCHER Director of Planning Laura 't Tuttle -, Assoc 9 aLa Pi annex LMT/sus i 8 CT-ITEPADMIN I.S`T'RA'rrV8 PFFI'CE COUNTY Ofz 13tj-j-p1? o�UTlFoo 25 COUNTY CENTEIq UVt C)I4Nfi1 y?iJfe z-a f3l (015) 5311,4631 0 e c�U:15y MEMBERS Of= THE 80ARD HAWL A. MONTURt Rar.>7 AD INISoL4 C3 oCo.Planning�:Cln JAN.EDOLAN $..HIQF.A6k1131 aLiidilVE bFl^1C[ti � HILDA WHFtLcR OCT G d 1986 Eo J,McLAUGHt.tf; - October 17, 1986 LEN FULTON Orovilte, CalHOMIA Donna Mooberry 2777 Alamo Chico, CA 9592.6 and Joe Burrell, et a1 2947 Nord AVenue Chico, CA 95,926 Dear Mrs-'Mooberry and Mr. Burrell: Re General Plan Amendment File 84-45A The notice which was published in the news was mailed to paper and the notice which you and adjacent property owners regarding a hearing on October 21, 1986 at 3:30 p.m, for the above matter was in error. The notice reflected that a negativ. declaration regarding environmental -impact would be considered rather than an environmental impact report. According to County Counsel,this hear the meeting of 'the ing must be renoticed, At Board of Supervisors on October 21, the Board will be a0.ked to set a new hearing date of November 4, 1986 at 3:3O Vffii After the Board sets `a new hearing, a corrected notice gill 'be published and mailed to adjacent property owners, We regret any inconvenience 'this may have carused. Tf you have any questions reardi g ng this matter, please call (916) 53'4--X1371. Very tr, 1 yours, - n tt A 1s Chief pdmintstrative Officer , /rt c.' Planning Department REZONEREPORT APPLICANT: Donna Mooberry/Joe Burrell OWN E R Various REQ Amendment from Orchard & Field Crops to Agricultural REQUEST.' S T . General Plan Residential LOCATION- On both sides of ;fair Avenue, south of Bell :Road,. west of Alamo Avenue, north and east of the Southern Pacific Railroad and north of East Avenue, Chico ------------------- DATE ACTION REQUESTED 2/27/84 AP Nos, Various PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS: Find that the requirements of CEQA have been comp e e an c A. Environmental impact Report was prepared, but not certified ass3-ecomre tno ing _ a an p p Amendment is not consistent with `iie'' 07.� cies of the B• zn tat t e ro ose enera lad Butte County General Plan zn its entirety in that the p i e rops; t e r� ect wouresent land use is uses orchard and p J Aveave a detrimental impact to agrieultural uses and the agricultural economy in the Chico Urban area,- the project would pr c e 8 oar pastern o ur an eve omote an.illogical opment; more speci ic'in ormation is Heade on the improvement s;_andards including drainage, sewer, road improvements and a layout of f p ants; a compre enszve an ora > sm rovem p improvements is needed in order to fnake a .3ndin that the roject_complies with the Butte—County Gene11l Plan; a specific plan Is daces y g_ _._ P are evenpment patterns'; aniI-`—' sar Lo a out ut PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION; C'; Deny the proposed General Plan Amendment from Orchard and Field Crops to Agricultural. Reg c7en ,za or a area now n as a uzr ocat in Hort west c, s t a Y i Bell Muir EIR incorporated by reference (Mooberxy/$urrell)nd re speczfzc- _.. a defined xn the VOTE 4 1 AyES Commissioners Peabody, Lyrich, Lambert, and Walter NOES Chairman. Vo -cruse ABSENT: No one ABSTAIN; NO one ., p, DATE OC' LAST N' AWIG WITH PLANNING COMMISSION ,i September 24, 1986 t BUTTE COUNTY.PLANNING CO NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMISSION HEARING Notice is her -'-``ING that Y given by the Butte Count Public hearings Will be Y Plannin in the Butte Count field on Wednesda g C°mmssion istration Center y Board of supervisors+ Y, June 25 1986 regarding the r ,,25 County Center Drive Room, County Admin. q A 01, atznq items at the . Oroville fo.lowin , California g times: IT, ENS ON t3HlCH A REGANDiNG ENEa NEGAT,TV$ DECLARAT IRONt1E2JTAL IMPACTEN ION PREPARED 9:00 a.m Butte County Planning Amendment Pram Dow Dens t _ssion - Geheral Plan tial on Prf from Residential, to Y zoned C-� Commer- west side of Nord Avenin 1 located as the $'mately 150 feet (Hig�hwa south- West Y 32j ewart Avenue north of its intersectionrpt2i 28 Chico, CF'i;l�dentS.fied as AP 43-24-1- No. 86-45) 27 and, 9:00 a.m. Paragon Property Management a second dwell,,, Use Permit to lot area on and a variance to the allow property zoned U required at the southwest corner of «est 10th Avenue �Unalassified) located Mars Wa Y, identified as Ap 43-09-2-02 entre and r Chico. ITEM ON WHICH A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HA BEEN PREPARED 10:45 a.m, Donna Moobc Arlendmen-t tram Orchard an , yet al. z`rytjOO $uzrell tur d Field Cto General Plan al Residential on ps to A property ` goneci gricul:- amore miriimun� parcels A-5 (Agricul sides of t�zuir Avenue ) locate on AlamO Avenue south Of'Bell both Railtaad > north and east of the Rr:ad, west Of Southern Pacific East Avenue, Chico. m a arld :riart�'1 of Thi above.. and 8IR aree� I ed applications l.e and and maps , Office of the Butte County Negative Decl for Public viewing orations $rive y Plannin gat the Plan ► Oraville, California q Department Amendment ` -tf You challenge County Center ,issues in court, YOU ,may be li g t;he above you or In else limited to r General in this notice raised at the wising Only those_ Flannin ' or in written comes o public hear n g Commission p ndenc de g descrbet mental IMIAp ct Reports or prior to, the livered to the libraries. Ports are �'ubllc hea, , also le at collo e q Environ- avalab g and County BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING C ssI)N $. w KIRCHER, DIRECTOR )N Op PLANNING � �: PU$1,ISHED IIY i2 r 9 �m THE C �1 p Et�tTERpR18t- R RD ON THURSDAY, ECO , , z , 0 , PLANNING COMMISSION 7 COUNTY CENTER OWE - OROYICtE, CAUFORNtA 95965.3397 PHONE 534.4601 ,toe Burrell August 23 1985 2947' Mord Avenue Chico, Ca 95926 and Donna Mooberry f 2777 Alamo Chico, CA. 95926 Dear his. Mooberry and,Mr, Burrell: _ As we discussed at our August 12 meeting, regarding pursuing the Environmental Impact 'Report (EIR) being prepared by a consultant,; it will be necessary that .fees be paid to the County in accordance With:Resolution '85-130. These frees cover the cost to the County for both the Contract and EIR administration.. The Resolution adopted by our Board of Supervisors provided for admin istvation fees for request for proposals (RFP) preparation,. But inas� much as your ptoject had. previously had the RFP completed and reviewed .__ by staff, the fees wi l be reduced accordingly. I am enclosing A copy of Resolution 85-130, which includes a "cost g"i g e to your project accounti.n items 3 through 5 would be pp ` bla lica rl for a total of 066 , 75. An additinal EIR administrAtion fee depositinthe amount of $225.00, is required:. The Resolution protides 'for the potential of refund or for additional fees to be paid on this deposit: These fees; axe in additionto the $84+0.00 for Earth Metricsis intorp orated to prepare the draft EIR.' 'in accordance, with Resolution 85-09 and 85-130 the applicant shall deposit the total amouot of the compensation of the consultAftt And the contract and EIR administration fees to the County: The total deposit Mould be $9;531.76 j quest -Should you have any xo hR ` ns, please contact this office- 8inc rely I. -IIA, Kircher , r' Inter-De pnrfi�i emorandom xa; supervisor Hilda Wheeler ButfeCo. Planning CQTM FOOM supervisor Tane Dolan , AUG 3 ? 1984 ��e arc Proposal for .. e''a 1 guar Aiea`F Ororills, California DAT5. August 240 1981 i The Bell-i`luir area, 456+ acre A-5 zoning district (bounded NES' by Properties fronting on I�fu� r Ave.-Belk. Rd. W Crest of Bay-Cussic) Henshaw Ave►, and H the S-R zoning just subject of much debate the last four rs' 32j: has been the years. The area has been zoned A-5' sine e `e mid-60,s and with a couple Of except onsl {Eisenhauer rezone blip on Bell Rd. and Foreman homeste segregation on Rodeo Ave, created smaller than 5-.acre iar� 15 ) there have been no neer parcels than ed smaller years. However, many smaller Parcels were inexistence prior to the effective date Of the zoning (some created legally, some not) )• The focus of amendment the argument has been the 198proposed Chico Area General Plan proct;ss. ;wring the 2+ years debate on that plan, at leai't 3 proposals were set .forth and interminally discussed: 7l mace area in agricultural General Paan (GP) designation and weave zoning as A-5 2 place area �,n Agx` cud Coral-.Res,deritat GP designation and re-zone it to a 1-acre minimum zoning; 3) place the area in a Study ,Area and hire necessary consultant„ Planners) to develop a drainage and traffic plan and analyze other} impacts before changing the zoning. This _g.a mechanism to nage Proposal included -pro-= study, p' `n area pay Lor this ropert ownore In September 1982, the Board of Supervisors a ?december 7,983 `hc„ approved rn tia this- area in tome Unspecified urbanaGPPdamt2nd t t Ithataba some pit ified zoning, (S.ince the Board did not specify, CE' A reguiressan:c_ analysis of the ##worst case" possible which could be high desit,y residential.) Ih 7,984 a presumed to be representing 27C1'acres o area was ' property owner petition presented proposing a GP do8ig= nation of Agricultural 7ZF s den nal and a toning Of I-ao><e minimum, „+ y� An 7�rR has been deemed necessar to both the Briard-initiated and property owner petitions, This is important to paint out as softie people nexus belief that this area has been studied eo le hold the ergo ��hen it hash t � si The Board has several choices to ztiaket I Continue to argue this matter without bringing clarity Or closure. This is really what wo o ve beef doing ~ince SeptemY�er 1982. 2 Allow the Board-initiated amendment to Mannbtn , This would meathe Departmentpwilled in the usual can in light cif establiahed get tilt as they przor� t5 es, This is a slow process k., e r Supervisor P isor Hilda Wheeler August 24, 1984 page 2 8•DroP the Board-initiated amendment and cultural designation and still zoned A-5. leave a ea in agr - 4„ Allow the property owner proposal, to manner.' This would mean the Proceed in the usual an EIR and When that can dime hwrite or hire someone to earings ares write, 5. Define the scheduled area proposed zor GP and to e GP designation and zoniing is n change, s ,� r drainage and traffic,, is Proposed, developi cif 'that the procedure a plan for handlincr burse t allcted an state la parcel charge, and set he count have Propert o uP. share ,for Y for the cost of the plan and' cnmers reim- improvements as they deVelo paY'ther pro ra�:a 8, select p� a consultant to application, r prepare an EIR for the pro equine the e and--initiated owner analyzed as an alternative and re petition to pay these costs. quare those signing the 'This ,Is what the de toning recommended and We tabled J'u]y 17 Partment I recorupend #5'. Since could be said�th, a drainago plan is ahead This choice does not answer ,'as been started, albeitxtiderwa�' it answer What to do with the existpnecsmeal. Paying their share of necessr Us further along than 1 2 S' improvements but �t g mall lot controversy, x certainly gets > �, 4 or 8 ih settling the Bel 1-Muir Z-7I1C1s-t say' that m r . - from Ebro ert Y "first choice 'would be #3. p Y owners in the area to ,leave thir�gseas would say that there would be tremendous support they much: support who travej ,g, Esplanade they are. 1 and Tv. Eastrt for that from all strop � pp Strong desire on the part of many Ave.. 14bWeVer, recognize a worth) to have the fl _ proper ty ok}ners ppor-unity to divide theirproperty, (rty,y 270 acres I re+'�t�hunena . #5 .=ter these reasons: 1 It is fai id cons° to honor the request o property owners for us o ^ + Consider ch angiZoning the GP and ning to the area. 2• It l unfair to burden the taxpayers with the cost legally required EIB, planning analysis; etc of the honor this zequest. necessary to 1. Since it, has been a Ion established, a conservative potiey of Eutte County to havepdeve5o fiscally pax their obi tra ' and an ina yj it would seem a ver pment projects to development inthision of l Poor reversal, of polio public resources to subsici 4i. We, as ropresentatives of the tof at leastf the drainage and pt�af�icnioract' must suck answers impacts that will he SupervisorHilda Wheeler Nugust 24,-1984 t page 2 created if this area develop; into smaller parcels:. Everyone who has empressed desire given verbal support to develop his/her propertyhas to paying ment costs, and improvernents, their "aarshare of develop- o p -meat CC., Bettye liireher Nina tam rt Board members 1 o • tElliif]1: cmhems2.3,' id �1, 3 !d tiie IiETIdAtI'�x ' SPeGll o • liE om- Carnitela pems'1, 2, 3, and 4, Add Sour address Gt Ute' "HET(►pj�,� tt1Y (CUNSitLT S'UST!lASTEFj pill SPXq (M r81f9rSt)t s , �, 16rtp tc�vlc0 b rugUed (c�sctk aAel (SUNSULT �°OSTdAA3TEA' fl FI lE Etre boa M9 se+ fs (cF,ta5e% SArmbar�id�ir�.�yy,..,,�,�� y`A. ap"tj • a W1717 IDwhoda,�(O�U4y ! a Wi�1IdYO VW11014y .. iW:1iW..._. ^I �r 1QJ �/y�.w�..� yl "�'db wmm' d4 .& est ct do".. r M Y1 rr.)ti+ �r �t n eabr _ as 1 TOTAL_ awrrnxE ADMMStD- To, TOTAL 1�,, Donna bio ob e rry Joe Burred l' 27 Alamo Ates 247Nbrd Ave. �. lYff Ol ,&�iVICE ArhME flL7ipf,l flEGISTM�INS11tO 4. M OF SEIiYI " A87lC1E Nl►IIBFA " L7 s Cllr `dam P22611p�1,' «,, o a E A S P226.1,1081 � i � ! � °°� CCSC►ttbQ ... tea eDrsls x(gnohtre d eddrosaee o► � �� SIGIUITM ��oi �At,'tMa�fxedp,i I l tie �eMmtl tM ttrtfdp dttaai0ed fIBNAiURE '�Atl�tSS4i � , QATE OF-0EiiYk7iY w OF QiUVEAV ' � J "` � , • � � � � Aa ,j�) burr Oa N q�ef� �j d .� •^•+�•�.KL ii AOORM "t+�vy�sa O 'wliOR£$JEF J ADOliESS ((tdj S 4 (/NwcS TO IDELIM7A tti�lMloYf,E!i •:x p 7" MUM Tkl omm B�CIl�1S� YJ , �, Aiiw�k 18 Nil �4IX lib �e1�3JAN?3 � _ .tel A i All LAND 0f NATURAL WEALTHAN r1t -t J f 'e PLANNUNG C0 M14ISSION rt1Uta7Y GCa;7edqiV% jROVILL�. CAUPoRtjlI,y5,b Ma.Y 17 198 Donna htoobcrry 2777 Alamo Ave: Chico, CA 95>926 a .. RE; General Flan Amendment AP Various 3. Log 84,-02-27-03 r gear Als. 'Mooberry We have cOmPleted the initial stud f impacts related to ) Potential, environmontal your proposed GeneraI Plan Amendment from Mie p Agricultural Residential located in Orchard and Field Cro s to ricin Bell-i•}uir are; iiorthtvest Chico. studis °f our evalutit On are e nlaznede n�ntJe encl}osea) }e ` restil y checkYi s't A �, rr initial y Appendix p and in emoxandum: Because of Potentzaliy significant enlraxt�nnterital a,mpacts paxti cularlY g:rotath inducement and cumulative effects, an itnP act report is required pursuant to the requirements of the California Enrironmental Quality. . Act and t}e But to, County levet Cu delines . You,.as the p rcant.—aro r �u red to submit, y nformati.on in re'e$K farm of, a.�. �: }" I,. R, JvIthin 200 day rojrt the date. o f th F p g tan E:I _R: Ys re uz:x°etl. Yost have t}ieeoprYon of1seoa t�afocusod E:I�}t: or back round information fou., , ter reticing Pre ari,ng,a supplement. t�� re uizt0 I-CO area. F I R. and rIw._ �. osis of i; osil nl tYie estimated - ----.- .r=. e t i� i t7 e s 5 2Ii P h i 1. o o M u ,, This cost may vaxy dopendng �inatheeoti eteriezin�bs toed} material stmt teed, `t'�te custom ar projects 1e of this type is, 600:00. y mxnamum detc�s�t .'or: lir}ien the Project is complored; wo mill refund any unused remainder or ball you for � excess Of those deposited, lily costs iri Prior to your ap157.ic4t.iort be.in > ittitia.tod a siinilar Pt�oject int 10 vici.nitythe i3o�The o� Supersisoj�s a j 2ication is tl.0scr: bed br'ef1 i; t tltq attached m public } 1' Y orandUm', $o'requ bout pt()jcci request qus craft MOVe fortlard aitd be heard `coneurvolitl est that tite public: appl,,catalternative in the ion be �deres.ed is ��project r y> P .226 1170 5 P 226110 516 RECEIPT FOR CS=RTi%IED MAIL FOR CERT iF[E© MAIL NO INSpRAtr%F'COYfjjt.,OE PROYIO£Q-- RECEIPT I�0INSURANCE COYERME ndq'DE01 NOT FOR I ERNA1 TS@A ` MAIL NOT FOR 1NTERNATIi'ItA! MAIL( ;. (se,e Reve(SIO SENT TO SENT TO tt Doiln phe`r � Joe. ,uxre11... �Ti��ca �+►Jb NC] A1ama Av.., e ,. �REE7'A�dOlJO _z9A7_..N_o:xd A�fe. ,_ ._ . 3D6 .27Z AT�iAGJC21P�4II� Jsa �Z 95926 'L— P�'a �TRT£ASJIP'ZJPi ChcU .CA g92bTA� s POSTAsE vEflTtF16 iFK us 6A fa� Cl �*4d ,' ^.' ti rYT}}"�":.i Wr mi_'e` f � 6A `tt`:jr-riIC 8 tM1r+'Yr Xik - tv.r�Y( ih.•_ C '.. h TOTAC.AIN aFttS Et i5tt billcOR ls7E 1 0brrTktAitKOR¢ATE e 1984 198 7. All MDT X F COIIr'!'Y- OF BUTTE ENVIRONMENTAL Clf]rC!%LV; ' KIRM (to e complete y Lear Agency 84 -02 -27 -pa I,c 84-01.;-13-0 11' Various l3Af UIN11 I , Name of prolr.oneat .��[Astbe�x�����x,�:�X....�n� Board. _off Supervisors L. Address of proponent and representative fi£ aPplis:able) hloo'�Erryf �urrelS Board. o{aSu rrvi.so� 2 77 Al�.mo/29 7 lord Ayo. 25 Counter Centex D�iti�e r _ 'le CA 959iS Chico CA 95926 tJrova 3. Project descrirtion 1 Pian �iIIl ! I . fANilATbfZY >+T? 1lTNG t�F SIGNIFICANCE a. Doesthe project have the potential to degrade the _ quality of the environment, substantially, reduc=e the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,, cause a fish or -wildlife g�opulation to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communitl„, reduce the nu nber or restrict the range of a rare or endangered planet sir animal or eliminate important examples of the ma�or periods of California history or prehisto rY7 b> Does thea project have the potential to achieve x t Of bang -term, short-term benefits to rht. detriment environmental ;goals (A short -terry.' impact on the environment is one which occurs lin a relatively brief period of tilne while long -tern, iApact-s will endure into the future, ales limited, pro�ebuth�1Fe impacts which are individu cumulatively considerable'' to project r[Iay' impact on two or moa e separate resourees� where the impa. t on each resour. ° is rel a:tireIY small, but where the effect Of the total of those Ximpacts on the environment is significant.) d, ftcaes the project have environmental effects which will ° cause substantial adverse effects ort human beings, either directly or indirectly? 13't l)li']lTyCTt'ptlTClti ('at') flu conpleted 'rays the Laud Agency'! fait the basis of this iriitia;l cva'luation i Cic t of C ,lI find the f roposed pro 1 tact CtCtUL11 int T have e a s igtt ` fec w ort the tuvironrsent, anon a k t.;e1Ci11E IntC1:ATtA'i"t UN will be T►reparetl. T I�taLL find that although 'th+a propose(I project could hart's: ti si knifil cant effect lit the eyivironntt nt, there will not be a si,gn.ificant effect in tlti, case 'because the 1•lIVIGA"PION h9lAStJRIS described on the tat t.jchecl. sheet have been added to the pro j ect � A Nt-OAr IVt? DECLARATION will be prepared, �KI/lit find the proposed project MAY have h sigiiif'icaint et eet bit the. envIronment, aria act ENVTROtiI+PNTAL IMPACT Rr,,POIIT is required, COUNTY OF BUTTE, PLAaNN114 ; D PARTr1ENT r Lau a i►' uttio Assistant Plftnitet It ietwel by u:. Y RCTs ENVIRONMENTAL C xp anatxons of all '"'yes" and 'maybe'' answers are required on attached sheet(s)) 1. EARTH Will the proposal Lesult in signi ficant: YES MAYBE NO a.. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic -truc tures? b, Disruptions) displacemen Ss , compaction or oltercovering of the soil? c,, Change in topography cr ground surface relief features`: d. Destruction, g 4 covering or modification of 211y unique geologic or physical features? �( e, Increase in wind or water erosion of soils'; ez cher on or off-site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion Which may modify the channel of a river or tream or the bed of ;:;'> ocean or any bay, i,tlet or lak ? g Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils —' outside designated urban areas? h. Exposure of peopl:fl or property to geologic ha4ards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud= _)4, slides, ground. .failure or similar hazards? 2 AIR. Will the ro o p p sal result in substantial: a,. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality The creation of object b' Thobjectionable odors, Slnol-e or, fumes? C,. Alteration of a, r movement, moisture, or temperature ,'or any change in climate locally or regionally? 3. WATER Will.the proposal result in substantial: a• Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? b: Changes in absorption rates, drai.ngge, patterns, or Nthe rate and amount of surface runoff? C. d for, off-site surface drainage improve- _ m6nts, including vegetation removal} c}tatnel_,' izat"lon- or culvert installation? d. Alterations to the course or ,El' of flood _._ � e,water g Changein the amount any of surface water in an W. water body? f. Discharge into surface Ovate is, o� in any v .. alteration of surface 14ater quality, including y but not limited to temperature, dissolved.' otygen or turbidity? g. Alte-ration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? h, Change in the quantityof, ground waters---- ". either through direct additions of w:thw drawals, or through interception of an aqui ler by cuts or excavations'? L Reduction: in the amount of water otherwise available for Public tater supplies? 3, exposure 'property of people 1e or to water " related hata- dssuch a$ flooding? YES MAYBE Nd � 4. PLANT LIFE; 1Ui11 the proposal result in Substantial: w. a. Change in the diversity of spe'ci.es, or nu;nber b of any species of plants (including trees, w shrub's, grass , Crops, and aquatic plants) ? b. Reduction of the numbers of anY unique, rare or endangered species of plants?_ . Introduction of nev species of slants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of'existin species? d. Reduction in acreage of an,,/, agricultural crop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: i Cnange in the diversity of species., or numbers of any species of animals (birds, hand animals including reptiles, fish and shell fish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered s of loflanimals c. Introduction fpe new species into �T art -area, or result in a. barrier to the mi ;ration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife Nabi tat' 6,4 NOISE, Will the proposal result in substantial. 5. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise . levels" 7. L'I'GHT AND GLARE, Will the proposal produce significant light and glare? 8,. LX110 USE. Will the proposal result in .a su s�staa'tial alteraltion of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES! jvill the jroposal 'result in substantia-11. a. indrease in the rate; of u,e of any natural resources? b. Repletion of any non-renewable natural resources. 10, RISi; OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of explosion, or the release of tiatard- aus substances includxng, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals P' or radiation) in the event of an accident er Upset +conditions? b, Possible interference with an emergoncy response > plan or emergency evacuation plan? 11. POPULATION, Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population:? 12 HOUSING. W ll the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand .Ear additional housing? � _.... YES r1AYBE 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION; Will the proposal result T-1 F. a. Gener�ition of'substantial additional vehicle mov e1en t ? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or X remand for new parking? C. Substantial impact on existing trans-,orta.t4lon systems? d . Significant alterations to present patterns Of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to ivaterborne,.rail or air. traffic;? — f. Increase i,n traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians° 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will.he proposal n��,e d n effect w upon or result in a need fns- near or altered rFd ag melital services,, . Fire protection _ b. Pdlice'protecti.on?, C . Schools?- d. parks or other recreational facilities? e. �fainte.nance of public facilities, including road.- ? f'. Other governmental serixices? 15. ENERGY, ENERGY, Will the proposal result'in: r. Use of substantial ahioun�ts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing w ces, .of energy, or require the the-opme`nt of new sources of energy? 15. t3'TThITrI S: Will the propsal result in a neea for new systems, or substantial alterations to the - follolving: a. Power or natural gas? b, Communications Systems c. Water: Sewer or septic Lank' e.. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? Y 'I'll, HUIM HtALT14. Will the proposal result xn ti a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (OXClUdiftg health)? mental h. B,-posure of people to potential health hat .a� ds 18 �rwr -_AESTruT y y �T•Cip�35a�4 �`��u�..t in �:h�", UD of any scenic vista or View open to the publics or will the proposal reSUI- in the creation of an aesthetically offensive ,site Open to public views � i YES MAYBE NO 19,, RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality_or quantity of existing recreational „ opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES. a: Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? bW Will the proposal result in adverse physical' —� or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? dM Will theproposal' restrict existing religious or s�xted uses u-ithin the potential impact 4 '. DISCUSSION lel ENVIRONMENTAL. EVALUATION AP Various January 1984 the Board of Supervisors initiated a Geners.l Plan Amendment from Orchard and Field Crops to " arbant' for a 400 acre or more area known as Bell -Muir:, Bounded by the Southern pacific Railroad tracks to the west, East Ave. and Henshaw to the south, Alamo Ave. to the east, and Bell and. Muir. Avenues to the north, This area has long been planted in orchards;: i _ �+ � _ a inde- In mid-February 19114 residents 'lig. Bell-l�tuz.r are ? r pendently applied. for a General Plan Amendment from Orchard . and, Field Craps 4o Agricultural Residontial, 1 acre minimums. The location of 'this General plan Amendment is essen€ially the same, but the bo ftdaries are irregular, encompassing more or less, 270 acres: The- project ,is 1 ocated on Class I and. II soils Vina Loam, Vina Eine Sandy Loam, and Farwell Loam, These soils are 'cap- able of'supQorting a wide variety of agricultural crops Nmany of the parcels are planted in orchards Forty sores is the preferred minimum parcel site,l hrot+tever, as small as 10 acres can be L viably, faTmed acid provide a sec- ondary income. A:�sumin;g 1 acre minimum parcels .from move or less 25 3 2 to ore o�. 4es's 312 3 lots could be created, and mote or less more at, , 2) 2 new homesites develo ed _ Telephone interview Bill Olsen 57/84 1 Part Advisor- 1Valiiut8; 3,400 lb,/ac x 40 at -, , ..40/lb = $54)400 (1,000 at, costs x 40 = $40,000) nett X1,4 400 moderate �.ncoand ( county average income). . 2 private application. s Board.. Application. 4 Build out is 2 units per parcel: :' As parcel sites decrease economies of scale Work to ptoor- tionally increase fatming costs J If variances are; granted, or boundary line modifications are approved, these figures could be 50 higher. Afore specifically- 261-522 homesites equals - 626 -1,252 persons 115-229 school children 6,260-1.2,520 daily vehicle trips 1 ;nein coiimunity Park (more or less 5 acres runoffpolice X52 cfs(seefChicosArea Land Use Plan) The very size a} nd intensity of the project dictates that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a supplimen,t to the Chico Area hand Use Plan ETR be prepared. In 1982 an E;CR was, prepared on the Chico Area nand Use Plan, which included these properties Regional setting, soils and other back ground information which would, also apply to this project are sufficiently covered, and should be referenced,u The E1R does not discuss circulation within the "Bell -Muir" area and recommends a holding zone of A-5 or A-10 until a specific plan is prepared to discuss circulation and drainage; (page 122), Bell -Mair, outside of the Shasta Union Drainage Assessment Dis tr:ut, has been idem.' dem. i.fied as lacking drainage facilities and ex- periences localized Flooding. (Page 8$) Development of Bell Muir would be contrary to the Land Use Element policy of restricting development in flood prone or axeas otherwise lacking drainage improvements It wA8 further recommended that a districts) be formed to fund all public improvements. while this project is located outside of the high nitrate area, the Division of Environmental. Eloalth states cainti.nued urbanization on septic tanks will undoubtedly increase ground water deteriora- tion: (ilemo of March 20, 1950 The Chico Unified School District has noticed Butte County that continued approval of development projects within the di stric t> absent a funding mechanism, constitutes an unmitigated sgnif - cant impact. This M may be prepared referencing the Chico Area. ':hand Use ETR for backg�, ound informant n, and focus On checklist items: drain, e n.exeased sedimenn i L ' tati,pn, surface and ground ].. ovorcoverin r of soil erosion waterualrt 9 y 5,11.412 i land use issues such as: justification and. need for Ceh,eral Plan Amendment impact on the already approved advolopment in the east including the Laxtensitre investment in public improvements -: _6 -BUTTE, C 0 534"460�y8t.itanaino�rttrt, I t .closed iz kli'ffT�,l irlil iy°i d3 G3 off` i Offilwe hates rv� li ".�sa�.'1x or g"°cn'-I,%"G bt d i. one A.�..niil'g sfol 4} c' - CSP-irv- 'P"_•o.y�: £� Don'Tta MOC?br'O'/Joe" Burrell, et al %sl'F1 I`3� tr'Iti E�}r:�ite .-e L ` ({ ,:1 �h%rd c`p, i Fie d Cro s tri �`crlk:il�.ttlrai s _ p�.'_5: a.le. ntiaa Belt' Efui r area. Log wT. am iLmking -a 61 1'o ;:"Y iir ke eavi..'=='« ntal ir;::%ct5 and will bio •-Y b:1:t'»T J2... .z , j i*.tli?. c kkc. lid r.Cy -arz4ic12,s3T.t l ,f'—i . �providp- tla'y rp t Clu'u :{ i wy 'ado'—"S 4lrw 1::»c^;a+. �r `: "'} p fie. di.. ' Gni oii'11Ci _s .. to el T k ten 0,� or iii 1� "vjr: area O,.', Z'�t".'ace p? � F° �u:�c�o-°�'�"�� �L :ci Zbi.°�.,a °' # 't'itar Fh.Lv 'p2"zp'J, Z� 11 -fts L_ by '..� V'.ye fto Ct 4L p4 re, i. CrP. LL u` s�� 5u�• bCe. � �%.e.. y i�a�weve�,�u-yiM44,s,'o evator_ 04 3y •is�ya.�r.ua'A c-Aea36*1�1.&G1ta w�.�l��� -�� �t� - x���� �r i'dck�����d �y t���! �-��1-�.�, �,u%� tcru-4��.e� t?:i t _.1..SUk�1 b:c%isrLr. �riA198 �tlls, Celifrxnla ` s % fllxltY C lT �lE C��t,l)l%(.l~, CALI���'�, E � , • a Wig Ca Manning Came, �" F 2 9 M°I# Al 3�2pP.O,. p4 Box A }>cc� h '95921 Oroville, (;d1iforntfl ! '" ' �- iia � �Y:kr /. �v data ou o. + 4�u as ,I"p\•.. L.�•C:.�u.��.'rl 1wi Xvurld-Metl' rOM (1, }t-Ird and 'Field CroPS to AaricuitLix4aX Log P t r ,i x :. ury 27-0 :Y z d aM a� t i t Et x a l4+ill i' 'i • r '1 f ;�v. „nL oY poa; ,iljle �-aviLtoa iota:. irpm-acts and VdIl be - ifS � �.�11a♦t�, +Y •/:J� 1 i y�y�♦c+M.r ,}, t Negativet'. j, �5, Mitigated, pfi ..rr1. ty G4�L i11 X15_. �'W r;.U`µ`.�.+Ma�, �.ikli. t,;;, s ks } e 4,4. "her Com'.. iiv�� t :. Cr4 .*r'il.� �yt. y'ga tive a.k it>i?�'n ..:x CJ ot—, Yi"= ���i�ir JIhJ, .r�.Yu 1. i': t...�a� a 41'p`a ;rA�L G..�?, i" 's1:� �.:i y i:`.tic�.� . ror i avii.°kit.i.,rj�.'S«�.".�ii}., or opi-rdon.5. it y s Ir area or l.'�:w'�^.e-t o1� exp,:'�a.� 1�.:'xat r V,'�. o,J � to either I r. � a �s 1 IL al ti � -I Y9 .c f3 CV'' "[�:: �•i ':,~r.l4�.E'?r .�" ..Ti'7 Z'�`..7-� wr...a'.%. p y .y'. - L 'S At,.i.0 �-3"3sit. A W 4Y Y;t� IthWi. c •,�•t�r�'C I.+v. � ."„� ..�'*.�,�a i'�y` r.1 a i4�a�i}u ul iF�wy 'C': a'! yyiy L`°. «rY ,C• `•� y..,'A :::�t� y, }.o .„. d'�:11.'ki r;�4:J14 Jys !r G':—a"j c: Sw 'r,V '�r .,�:. k�:tii4w' 4. } a.i�t� p+.�tJC� •. y The proposed General Pian amendment is not consistent with the i:ty of Chico General. Plan nog: with the yCamproMise plan" agreed t- _by the City.. ar c%J Ltc=.S-au-iw.y,-i r Ii 3 Y .9taitic�nt r� � l? $� r a Cv _ 1Si ,tn act t� ori serst�ces ihcludin sown e qig all s:io�m �% ��. ,,... T. 9a. �.,..� w �t... �a �- .� drainage , & Y y pacts upon other areas ie, roadrta S is thl '� and c:oUld havL:' aCjverse �.m "sµutenGGs�ara _ of A V1a xie r of Chico . eco mez� al ofthe profec 3 )yl/sdari� SSU- , ne ;Mathewsonr PlaLynihq Technician JI v'" Calif; Depottrnent of Forestry Butte County Fire pepa;tmenf Cooperative Fire Proloeyon BUTTE COUINTY Fr RE DEPARTMENT ff, DEVEL0PmFt41- i4AM[ FIRE PRO T CT, 1044 �'TAYDARDS REVIEW - D. Mooberr J. Barre, LOCATIOI4 ttt AP# 42-0 �Lo ; 84 Area , �, . _. .... _ g --? DATI 84. This pro„jett must +seot the rNriuirements in the a �s lnifar Building Code ,ar*cnded to Butte Count standards. In accordance with Section l.a,d�7 Improvement Standards (tire Standards) of tht, parcel! r ect are. equirements for this p a IBUSINE'SS CARD NERD the water r 'Applicable stand,vrds are r;hecked�, ! i 13.1 Requirement Glass 1, Csstto:G fire pro`tett, will A, water supply for � n ) 13.01-2 keou4On of be required. �- - -74jj._ ent Class i« A pressurizes water system with adequate nu^�bors af'hydrarrts is pre_ ferrel, but if this is not feasible, Orc Option will satisf t , the fvllowirs dor water, y .he fire department; requir^e- ew s ar.* .r~ tanks with a capag9tY of l OiIG 1 by access and 'ire•departrpent �dnn gallons or mo a. Rat n ground �'ng ection It,, re, squipped with direct all weather i C. A dr stemlplunheNtd vrith ak drat"ting tonnectirrn or drafting ac:ce y standpfipe 5 exceed' 1,0DD Beet in lerr tH, a a res fable seater^ source. There must 6e at ;east 1C,D0i1,ga11ons of water available .ands Such stand , ss, Or, or portions that P p sYster7 will not ly made to insure that the water stared is alwayy av'd r /+ Pray ilio r p re dwellings would require two separated, sources ( ) 0, -3 Re ufi'rerent r1ass 3, ns mtr,1 r ngs aeons are emenIndit r1a . A P essurr` ed cr unit file an. accessiblelfat Sources), for each 1C+ dwelt be o ti€e attached prelirrinar water system as under all weatrrer canditdns recorded on the final maims y raa required. 'tentative hy,,,,,t Number of hydrants required p' Final locations must be exactl andmaxiMua hydrant to hydrant spacing y indicated and z I'cur a mo ¢ and' requirements d ing'to Bute Cavi p feet* hydrant size Of 1 installed accord 527 a coal water age ncYt Y uplic Warks specification Mztigatian flows listed under other canditidns« d 13 b1-4 Reguirewent Class 4, , Required fir s are e flaw sYst. rn p le i meet ng the firerflor fire- erotec! . - a inns per ?rinu"t g fsre ff,e prsstec ,on. Pendent ppmpsy static water Stara a and dry standpipes ma s ired, Ti+� preferable sysxerr is hydrant thea i p If this is not feasible, a system involving hydrant galtasrerlmin the fire de ar , ent y be substituted, Such a The tzini,mu::r volur7e ofava i 1al,ie water flaw from such a. system i. subject to t�a The 3 made to insure the s stern provided is moan system must flow i ) 13,01-5 Re uIrem'at class S, water In storage must be _ tairrea to its design capatity, ailans, Pravisian*.:. srceis t a must beating water ,br .ire protection is available within T$1100 feet o ' A In lieu of cosi r the (fire department hydrant fund. Pay in�lieu fee i s of in, alli'1g a fire hydrants) the develo er ma into f ,he on $1,26 per frontage foot. Frontage is indicated :�y tiff+ red lt` �� pay Into is Final frontage calculation Is indict ` a e" n9ent� Hydrant i"und based catt`u�atia:n wil include bath sides of the street an-rrlulvdsn,Ye or the attached ma q sysEem for fire pr��tection must p' ApAraxirra.p fee «.� streets and recorded do final map., 1LLrdnthna Cal Required waterns. be installed and operatin prior Clther Condition g p ao building construction Resp0""% times for the first 3 fire an.ines P rs as fol lows.: 1. Station ffGCF18CF0 2. Station 3. Station thin rain �. utes In the zard a Element of the RUttr� County General ra, fire hazard art?a. lan, this Vajoct, area is classified as a WILLIAM C. TtIR count Fire Warden 4 � 1J Local watt+rr a Gy:� �. gency requirements for hydrants fray be more restrletive, 8attalrotr �Hief x.._ i 6l� U. c�� �r�t p� z COM WSION AA 7 COUNTY CENIEK DRIVEOPOVELL E, �A�iFOR PHONE: 534-4601 TO: County Public IVork,s DATE: February 28, 198 RP:: PR0.JMT R—EVjEI:j NO ENYIRX;Msil��iAL EVALUATION �. Donna '�Eoo}�-erx received or generated concerning �h�losed is oo�,lowin� Pro�ena� d4�.tz. our oi'i`i.c►* hY%joe BurxEX.1, et a7: General Flan Anendwent from orchard and. Field Crops to Agricultural {esxdent�a.1 Beit yMx,ea. Lob f'084-0Z-27-03 We are making an assessment ofossible environmental al irnpac ws andyri.1Z he prmrina an environmental document, either a Uega.tsve Decl.aratiort, i•j—j.; .1tive rec larauicn +cr -ui Ewtv,i ronten,tal Impact Report please provide any factual state ien ts, ideas for inves µigati on , Or op$ mans ' yt u cn.� of fLAr in yoa`ir area of f concern or expertise that relate to either physict4l, social, or economic impacts, thit thin project mny generate. gleE° re son, Wit;'i,3'n 14 days os ''fTr3 r"l��otJ�-noted date. If no ria..^aponse is generated by this inquiry, then it sha l be 'assumed that there are no u I?3ec'% -E2� 2 'xJl� it cel tui : Wa `vjAt`i-.jj c�Ze-po,-ential fto tlid -- C _ 4�a ai preciatc any assial-ance you can V ovide, Sincerely, .Dutfe Co. Plahh1ng Cotnm.. Planning Technician Ctrwills, C+�li�arn%i tIr fl tIIj;4 ^S x �7 i'!�'i Pi,�, �.l'J lL''i,='g1�S}itJAi r v'v 99 Ur �, l -'aria Advisor, Je.-ry Smith May 21, J 984 �OrWvilbn li rrr: OFFIC*-s ri"cclv.,d of f, +-a: LfFi Coacerrun -tnfi ft)II, w ..C, Doftin V005--r'ry/JO Bcrxrczll., Gc rar+r flan �•n ,.r«l ,:exit E r��n Orchard attrl Field Crops to .Agr.icuttUr4 1 Rcw id=>. - B l" �!Lvir area Loi; ". �l t.cx -, r., ra r s r tlf-^:S.�/xI'C?! r�'iLtlfx 1C� aiCt~r ciis�c WS�� be `tv �vL� rp a.� rtss :. ,-=nt or F �:w._ tiic ? i'j ;r x E:L .jcu,`:"r'ici f @7 ti: ' .� Lt Ls rL' rLCs'lt sura i'i F"? ! r`r;o1 CSX ? s i1V 2'�i".::-Lii+ii. ir4 c ""Jit. plod, 3roviei 2rry factum You C2 orf?C ]:i ;f'JLr. c'4r+? �iF f J'!Gc`T."% 0r an :P, •' � :-'�c �s� io OIL Y3f:t,l+U.jm'.�hSr3'! q (jr.^.vS 1� ira {r�tt tj" `ttl'+*, KS?`Q�Iv-1tit4"t2LT'#ts. hL In f'` C l '0 t iY.` ray' i. •Q?.' «�tY tk'S2t } L 1 this + ryu G."�:'A�t ,rY1 4=�:lt 4�+.'. �,"Z.0 are 1"'0 n��yX'y4ai. � y t[i,is ir;'iiliJ!'y } �� �t 1r al,�!�r%:+tM; £C4 :�.���(i�:��. �Liy.2'^w t1 :a 4S'.6:•ii X�^,�J?Lit� x�LC?! li1T":7YOU da"I $°02f`t. s L P14nft ng; 1F'CiEi: G �t1i _ � : � t>5 !d. 4 w` x� +• y � s` 1'rb �_ f ,(`Y: 1.11.`ca i. rK L.j .lc C4. ��..� i 4 h ►. IST S 'RIBUTION LIST FOR REVI REQUESTS Public Works IRRIGATION WATER ✓7-✓'County "'County Env. Health_ .ggs- . ridley Water 'Dist. 7 City of Biggs _-7— Butte Water Dist. -'-%✓'City of Chico "%- Durham Irr. Dist. -%- City-of Gridley -�, Oroville-Wyand. Irr. Dist. --- City of OrovillerParadise Irr. Dist. ---'Town of Paradise -7_ Richvale Irr. Dist. - County T a'b l e Mtn . I r r . Dist . __7_Thermal - tie Transporttion Dept. �ito Irr. Dist. r tf6M`MIC WATER RECREATION FACILITIES Berry Creek Water Co. Bloomer Mutual Water Co. ! ,-'thi^o Area Rec. & Park Dist., �- Durham Area Rec. & Mtn. Park Dist. -7� Brush Creek Estates _ T- Feather River Rec.' & Park Dist. -7— Butte Water District ._.,� Paradise 'Rec. & Park Dist. /,-'CA Water Service Co. (Chico -}%� Richvale .Rec. & Park Dist. - urban area & part of Orovill-e) State Parks & Ree; Dept. / Del Oro Water Co. State Fish &Game 'Dept: (Paradise Pines) / Feather Falls(Louisiana SCHOOL DISTRICTS Pacific)_ Biggs Unified / Forest Ranch Mutual 7y Butte Community College --7-" Gran Mutual Skansen Sub.,) Rlenwood F_ Butte County Sup. of Schools -7- Green Acres Dr.� hico) -" CA State University, Chico `7- ;Gridley Farm Labor Came -%v''`Chico Unified 7 Lake Madrone Water Dist, T Unified Magalia Co. Water 'Dist. ,Durham -%'-' Feather Falls 'Union / Merry Mtn. Mutual ,(Clipper -- Golden Feather Union Mills) -`Tr Gridley High % Mulberry Water (SF Chico)-- Gridley 'Union - -7 Northweeds Mutual ,Forest Ranch) `-T - Oroville Elementary 7- Ramirez Water = Orovi''le Union High `7- Springs of Living. IIIIters 7 Palermo Unified (Richardson Sprint)=,) `-7�- Palermo Union / Stirling City"- Pioneer Union (Diamond International`) -�7!" Thermalito U60 / Vitt: Mutual (Durham) COMMUN111YSERVICES SEWERS / Lime Saddle Comm. Sere, Dist. Richavle <a��i ary, disc: DRA114,, GE / N. Bur"bank Pub. utility hist. Creek Drainage Dist. (S. Oroville -& Kelly Ridge) `Butte ELECTRICAL POWER / Skattsen Sub. (ESA 21 ) Pacific Gas & Electric /. Sterling city Sewer* Maint. Dist. FIRE PROTECTION / Thermalfto Irr. Dist. (,GSA 26) E1 Medio Fire Protect,. Dist. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT / ✓'County Fire Department" / State Water Rtzourtes bopt. -- Stage division of Forestry 7 U.S. Forest Service MOSRUITO ABATEMENT ;DISTRICTS / U.S, Bureau of Land Management / Durham, Orovi'll e, or Butte 'County POLICE_ PROTECTION OTHER L / tate Highway Patrol i LL bounty Sheri f.f � _ Vi i. t < i BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that public hearings will .be held on Wednesday, June 25, 1986,. in the Butte -County Board of Supervisors' Room, County Admin istration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California regarding the following items at the following times: ITEMS ON WHICH .A NEGATIVE DECLARATION' REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED 9:00 a -m: ButteCounty Planning Commission General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commer cial on property zoned C-1 located on the south- west side of Nord Avenue (Highway- 32), approx- imately 150 feet north of its intersection wzith. Stewart Avenue, identified as AP .43-24-,1-27 and 28 Chaco (File No, 86-43) 5:00 aimParagonProperty Management Use Permit to allover dwelling Variance to the required lot area on,Property 'zoned U (Unclassified) located at the southwest corner of West 10th Avenue and Liars Way, .identified as AP 43-09-2-02, Chico. ITEM ON WHICH A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS.B'EEN PREPARED 10-45 a »m. Donna Mooberry/Joe Burrell , et al: - General Plan Amendment from Orchard and Field Crops to Agricu.l lural Residential on 'property zoned A-5 (Agricul- tural - 5 -acre minifnum parcels) located on both sides of Muir Avenue, south of Bell Road, wrest of Alamo Avenue north and east of the Southern Pacific' Railroad and north of East Avenue, Chico: The above- mtnt:x ned applications and maps, Negative becl arae ans and EIA are. on file and available for Public viewing at the offic,'of the Butte County Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville California nnyou challenge the above General: Plan Amendment in court; you may be limited to raisins; only those issues you, or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or int written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at, ;or prior to, the public hearing, Environ- mental .impact Rtsports are also available at college and County libraries BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIOi g.A. KIRCNER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING TO BE PWMI88ED' ,IN' TIJE C ICO _ENTERPRISE=REt'OR0 ON THURSDAY] JuN8 12, 1986, WO D Eft i, 411 "Box 402 It Rt 6 ox 400 S ..Chi C 95926 Chico, CA 95926 Ch co, 1� 9S'92C AP 42-0 -1�9- " AP'A2-03-39 i1P,4"42-0 '-22 M.D. ' iy.I,. Pattcrson W J.I.,` , '.A. K0111hush R.J.NN ,P. Mt, the' Rt 6, B <406 � Rt G ox 4U6 H Rt 6r 399 KChico; CA 3 02 , Chi o, A 95926 <CU"C95926 AP 42-03-22 AP 4 -0 0` AP 42-04 ' 3 Joshua dome Company Jack Ann Henderson;eta;l B. &�. Green Rt 6, Box 402 bI 950 a Presidio fit ox. 3995 Chico, CA 95926 5a Ra Fa 1; CA 94903 Chi CA 95926 p P 42-03 4 AP 42-03-43 AP 42-05-'001 J. w. 4cCA,ighlin ` L.V. 6 R.L. `Smith I�.h`. D1 jfa' $ .C. tts Rt x X10,2 G 724 Rebecca Ct. Rt 1 Box481 A Chico, 9,5926 Chico, Ch. .05926 ' Chico, CA 95�J26 A-0 29 AP 4 03- • ,X42-0J.V:,,��L.F.. Niazt`inez x L.ti:. F .J. Brogan ca Develp Cay R., }I X403 B Rt6 Bo 28Sbt Grand Ave. ChicoCA 95926 Chico, CA,� 95926 r CA 91765 z AP •-03; 0 AP 42-03-48 AP 42-05-006 T.►i. ..A, Johnson Br,i��n F, Judith Fsle,r Chico Grange 9486, Irc: Rt , `�c 405 A 23 W ttney Street Rt 1 Box 474 Chcxeo, 95926 Westport, CT 06580 Chico, CA 95926 .N AP\42-03-31 J.111. &K. rner f AP 42- 4- + AP `•42-05- 06 R. I: V. Carper HX. '`�U . Harter Rt 6, 402 iti` .,✓" , . Rt 6•, Bo 400 C . Rt 1 x 48sI}H Chia , ` ,A 95926 Chico, C' 95926 Chia, 95926 AP '2-0` -32 AP 42-05-007 V i x x a M. }i,1 a ix y • AP 4t-04-0 Rt f; ox 402'V C.A. F J.�t. Lindse :!I Chico 95926'Rt 6, ok399b Rt�;6�-79' ' G o,GA 95926 coy CA 95926 .. . AP `4i - 0 33 r AP 42-04-00 11 AP 42-05=008 �J 10 Bart Blair De t: e . old L. Taylor Rt 6 ox 402' V G:C.. tCoito AEfoirs }far y� Chia �JS926 � 130.6 koc eo Ave. ' Rtw 6, Bo. S99 It Chico; CA 95926 •Chico; 095926 1l" 42Y03-S4 Ptiln Cel,ada • AP 42-05' ` AP 42-04-12 ,�.�'. k diner 1.: Ri B 402 11 B61i 6. Mabel PU crer Itt 6 CI?.409 A 2,715 Rodeo Ave. C}txcb Cry 95926 Chico; CA 95926 Chio;o, CA 95926 ' AP 42-01)-3d AP 204-45 A . 42�OS� 15 Ann, Bark r { ''t ayn 6cum Rt 6; Bflk 402 K ,' Rt $opt 400 0 w dept. +ete ifairs Chico, 'CA 9542Co; CA 95926 Y, I .f Chiea; I1I �Sl. ,t t x 482 At 4, Fsox 4: c: co, CA 9592U Ct a, ri JS921� i;h:'►,c ,, �9lf AP 42-02 ul3 ► AF's -D2 -3S - Joc 13��r�co11, et al Homer L. Cuffcy � et alp, G>CA eu `-�e:r 294`1 Nord Aveaue 8/9 H. 1901 5t.Rt. 1481 �W Chico, CA 9,592E Ch co, A 9,592E cnicc� _ 26 AP4,2=G1-3:5 AP �i'1-G2-O.I�{,�t�'� �h Al' 42-02-37 Claursne ail Lillian C. ilershherger Uef Veterans,,Aflairs :327 14. incoln Rt 6P Box 403 k.D"j& Chico; GA,� 95926 Chico, CA 9592;6 Rt x -4:$1R ---.. 59 CA G ileo 9 26 co, 42-01 6 _ I A 2-0 16 AP 42--02-3L J.L. 1.L. lily mer T.M. J.H. Tresle♦J, M. � imi;zu RL -1 Box 48i D Itt.• B 4010 r Ch' o, A 95926 _ rco CA 5916 k �`�, Bo X15 B ChLca CA 9592b .A�,kc,s .`7 Ar 2 02-0" AP 2-0 0038 . R . Greenway n s,-. •..,a loo'erry, et al' rt.m. S.L.'Aalkofer95ve Ste. C y,o6 L ttes° R0,ad Ett ,` _Box 48'1E 4h9'tn P:�tyare, A 95969 CL' cn, b 959'?6 . ` V ^ ~ � • 4 ase n AP 42-01-68 AP 42-11'2-0' APV-jo Ra ft. & Nt. F. k5eideck R.1J. �. Sloan H.4'215 Detroit Ave, Rt 4, Big 409 `'" F �Gaklaud, CA 5,1619 i . Rt�+n92Chico, `' S92ii t Cit959Lu AP 42 2=603 MY 42- 2-21� 2? AF -0,'. -�04 , 043 V,�A enkins �lerna: a. F'r-, . Y. IrNC: 2bean �.," P. Dein 15 Rt 4, Box a Rt 4 9 s 24CA _.:. Chico; Ss �G t;lic592u 4 . r • a At? 42 C► •-0V AP42-02-023 � ..- r- 9Air 4 Helen h. ; t fiery, otal Eax -�, ' �tbe� nie Horn t•f�ix i y t. McKee kt., 4.180 41,2- B Rt 4 T3`�- ittr 4 too• 415,k Chico-," CA 5'926 `ca, to 95916 �--- `» '" 95926 �. K _ Chico, CA, , i. M.Y.» .+ wVn ♦ k x. w AP 42- 2••x06 4, 0 7,0��, ��7. AP 42-02-024 APX-O0 �1ary 5o s e a C ' � id :J i3.13,--��J. er I .rit rn.nRt 4. Ob a Jtt i x-4.�5Ch ►ire. chichi CA95926 l;it`cn4�� 9B +:G Cn95 26 AP 42 $ X32_ dz6 AV 42-02-51 Cocel a L f ins d +t t ti S4a1t`t P. L. F N.C. Caoper R;� .3, Bo c'17 L P.tS ytloX 7 1641 Oak ,ViSt:l Avo. Chico . A � 96926 � ,�' �• L� �u�nua� .992255 t Chico, CA 95926_ AP .42-t�2�-609 42-01-2'7,0 .yam-- AP 42-02-052 Vit --.D el en` res' t:.i".:yrtske A.A. l;aberCsat� Rt o Rt f4, Bcx 4L� A CA 95926 Ci �co, "CA 6� Chico, CA -rel .�� rYl .-t•'ay ick- 9,. <►i4 1. .enue 3365 Bell RO"ld °-� 95926 l hejjflower, CA 70706 Chico, CA 95926 AP 4202--055 AP 42-02-073 Al' 42-02-86 O:;V%l1e�o'rothy, Goldner V.1f. 6 L.L. Tracy M.S. K.M. 11ichols Rt 4 6x`'°4.14 n 2235 Ceres Avenue 3355 Bell Road Chi -:o, CA 9.59;26 Chico, CA 95926 Chico, CA 9.5.926 r AP 42-;ii%a� 059 !AP 42-IJ2-74 A 2-07.-8 -- res L,11. .,-14Ca�n. eroy t. trueer L Rt 6 ' Rt 1 13 x Af Rt 6, 402 F Gh-rco, CA 9592 Ch o CA 95926 Chac , CA 95926 91 y, a: AP 0?_ -601- errmaun , Kit -0 -75' homer -L. Guffe e t al G.A. 6 �' Reel of�r404 N 879 E. L. St., -; Rt 1, B;,. �� > Chico 9526 Chico, 95926 Chico,_ CA -959'26 Q AP 42-02-061 AP 42--02= 2 !'* Margaret J. Flynn S.b, 4/J, L. Fisher ! NJ,R. FSK Cagle Rt 4, Box 41r0 Rt Pox 415 P _ 1920 2 oleander .. Chico, CA 95926 Chico, CA 95926 '"4 Cf, AP 2.r.02..6 AP 42-02-77 AP 4 02- 43 e `! . e Lackey eitheiser N! in .,hivel PavLcl »oor r, Rt 5 x 4U4� RLQ 4, Box415 z 883 Q�,I n Street Chic 95926. Chico, CA 9592& Chemo y 9592,6 Asti r 42-02-Q64 Al' 2-02- S A 4� 02!9>4 L G. .V. ylathsen, est. Mary A all D5".E. �1ou�:hin 6 ads 404 A Rt 6 ox 404NI Rt Boit 404x3. Chi A 95926 Ch'' a,. CA 95926 ' Clc CA 95926 Rt a C AP 42 L 0265; AP' 42-079 AP '42-0 5 T.ht� F C lcllan R. , .r,hi. Btse.r Eli�1)1' l',. 1:$enitour Rt 1; ox K Rt,8ox404 fi 404 CA 959 6Chtc�CA 9592b i •9592`6 AP 42-02-068 AP 42-02-80,, 81 AP 42•-02-96 Dantel F. HaYO, Jx. J.11, tj NJ, C, Till (?ePt. tib eter�ans Affairs %. P.tl. Box llll69 "t 1601 5utoet Avenue ;• J k, W,A.bolloff 5ana Rv8a., CA 95406 Chico; t'iA 95926 t Rt 61 Box 400 G Chico, Cr1 95926 r L L �' . + 2_ AP `�•; �4 0 2 3 Te 11 Bxazell Sa 2tot, - DOVic R.R , i;o:c 16G6 At 6, x 404P ltt. f y�'st�A 4959y16 , iCl i CA 95926 Chic 952611, r A1' 4 2�,e� 99 0.42 -02: 70 A 42- 2. 83 Reed 404 7 r es ,, A;17. B r Mar tit►.Jt�ri 1 Ho 48a...R t ht. 6 Dox 404. j ► G(Il) At , r Ch; o, CA • 9596 G1t ` t5 CA 9 6 Chi''',�112i