Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-45B GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 OF 21-- , 1 The shallow zone :4ontains unconfined groundwater at depths less than 20 feet below ground surface in thick alluvial. material. The shallow zone receives � ; recharge directly for infiltration of precipitation, streamflow, domestic wastewater from leachfields, and urban runoff from drainage wells. Groundwater in the intermediate aquifer occurs at depths 20 to 56 feet below the ground surface in alder alluvium. The intermediate aquifer receives . age from recharge From streams incised in older alluvium through vertical lack overlying saturated alluvium and possible subsurface inflow from the Tuscan Formati on. The deep aquifer is located in the sand and gravel of the Tuscan Formation, which is confined by less permeable clay, tuff and mudflow layers. The deep aquifer, which yields large amounts oP groundwater to deep irrigation and municipal wells, receives recharge mainly from streams that drain the foothill area east of Chico (CDWR, 1984)• Since 1961, recharge of the local groundwater basin generally has exceeded local discharges in the Chico regions in contrast to other, localities in the 'I Sacramento Valley groundwater basin which have experienced an overdraft`. Groundwater table. -4 in the Chico area were lowered by an estimated 10 feet between 1912, and 1961 as a result of intensified agricul.i.ura] irrigation, but have since stabilized, or have risen.between two and six feet, (Butte County, 1982): WATER QUALITY. Specifie Vater quality data are not available for 'project area surface water or groundwater. Runoff From the subject parcels would be expected to contain minor amc,unts of sediment and contaminants characteristic of agricultural and urban development in the area. Groundwater in the deep aquifer is generally -Of good mineral -quality, p reflecting the excellent mineral quality of 'surface waters in creeks Which provide groundwater recharge: Poorer quality groundwater is found in parts of shallower aquifers with, nitrate concentrations exceeding drinking water 0 standards of 45 milligrams per liter (mg/l) (cm, 1984)• Nitrates are toxic to humanss particularly children less than three, to six months old. Each area of high n trate coerationsi two of Which are located 0.75 miles northeast and project area, underlies unseWered residential areas and also lies in the direction of groundwater flow from urban development drainage wells (as discussed below). The numerous individual disposal ' systemsi ,. 4ahih en, phosphorus and chloridesocreturn theshallow groundYdterwzones arewa maajorisource of the elevated nitrate concentrations. There are also more than 40 known drainage wells at off site locations that return to the shallrn* groundwater zone surface water runoff from areas of inadequate surface Crater drainage systems (dDWA, 1984) To resolve the existing nitrate problem in the Chico area and prevent additional 'nater, quality impairment of valuable groundwater resourced in the &T�dAlthe area�connectHtorthe :ended that (1) existing sewerage�severed residential areas in the obtem as soon as feasible, and (Chico 2) construction of additional drainage wells should be prohibited and all -icjsbing drainage wells should be eliminated,as soon as feasible, Other study recommeh&4-.ons pertain to appropriate..well Construction and monitoring of shallow aquifer grroundwater quality (00j 1984): 3;3_g r_ rThe City of 'Chico and Butte County have. adopted a Nitrate Action Plan for the Crea,ter Chico Urban Area (Butte County and City of Chico, 1985). The goal of the Nitrate Action Plan is to prevent further degradation and to minimize the existing nitrate problem in the groundwater. The primary objectives of the Nitrate Action Plan are to jointly develop a Sanitary Sewerage Plan and a Storm Drainage Plan for the Chico area.. rThe sewerage plan would include 'standards and requirements for Lsanitary sewerage facilities, land use designations and densities maximums for nonsewered sreas$t and a time schedule for requiring the elimination of septic tanks and connection to the sanitary sewerage system. The drainage plan would include standards for the elimination of all existing ,drainage wells and standards for the installation of temporary drainage facilities, such as leach r fields,. At present, the county and city are jointly studying master plans for both sewers and storm drains (see Section 3.4, Public Services and: Utilities). Ah feasibility study of providing sanitary sewer service- to tha north Chico area, including the project area, recommended installation of a trunk sewer which would aceommodat e potential urban development of the area. The trunk sewer, whioh would pass approximately 750 feet northwest of the project area, r would Connect the; project area to the sewage treatment 'plant in Chico. IMPACTS - rGeology. Residential development allowed as a result of the General Plan ;Amendment and amendment of the Chico Area Green Line World have no significant impacts on the geologic setting .of the project area. SOILS. Surficial soils located in the project area Mould not present significant development constraints to potential residential development resulting from the General Plan Amendment. Potential impacts due to the moderate shrink./swell potential, and moderate allowable 'soil pressure of the project area soils (the Vina Farwell and Conejo Berrendos associations) could r be reduced to i"nsignificant-levels with iimplementatibh of standard engineering design and construction methods. The loss of prime agriculture soils is discussed in Section 3.1 Land Use, Planning, and Applicable Plans and Policies. The Vina Farwell and Conejo Berrendos soils do not possess an erosion, hazard, due to the level nature of the project area. Potential construction related erosion occurring with distui-,bance of the soils could be reduced to insignificant levels with standard erosion control practices. Potential urban development on minimum one acre parcels would not involve unusual or extensive grading adi acts.o soil redistribution, furthar minimizing potential erosional Impacts. expected grading and soil redistribution would simply involve cuts for foundations and minor fill for landscape purposes, (See Section 3.1, Land Use, Planning, Applicable Plans and Policies, for 'a discussion of ' p p p t.) .potential agricultural impacts as a result of the reposed rojec SEISMICITY: The primary, potential seismia hazard to the project area is r ground n8 ng t pobability that the area would continue to experience ground shale As discussed in the Existing Setti there is a'hi probability � ins in the been predicted far the future:: Various intensities of ground shaking have. Chico area..: The intensity of ground steak;Lng would depend on a combination of ' 3A-6T the type of !favd.t, the distance to the earthquake epicenter, the magnitude of the earthquake, tie types of '`materials between the fault and the area, and the properties and thickness of the foundation materials at the site. Potential 1 ground shaking impacts to residential development ,and storm drain or sewer facilities could be reduced by standard engineering design and construction, in accordance With the Uniform Building Code and the Recommended Lateral Force Requirements prepared by the Structural. Engineers Association of California. The potential for liquefaction, a process by 'which water saturated, cohesionless (clay free) soils lose St :,ngth_and become liquid during earthquake induced ground shaking, is LAerate in the site area (Butte County, 1977). As discussed in the Existing Setting, the Chico area has no dooumented history of ;ground rupture or ground failure, including liquefaction, lateral spreading, lurching and differential settlement. With the adoption and utilization of standard, appropriate engineering design and construction methods which take into account all known seismic information, future ' residential, development in the project area would be consistent with the Butte County Seismic Safety Element (Butte County, 1977), and no significant seismic hazards would be expected. Hydrology DRAINAGE. Due to the level nature of the project area and proposed minimum one acre parcel sizes limiting construction, development of the area would not alter the overall natural drainage patterns. The potential development of the area would ir;arcase impervious surfaces (buildings, driveways, roadways) which Would result ii: a corresponding increase in the volume of runoff generated withiti the area. As discussed in the Existing Setting, a storm drainage study -has recommended the installation of collector_ ►,toren drain lines to accommodate future `developaeat in the area. See Section 3A, 'Public ;Services and Utilities# for a discussion of storm drainage improvements required for the projecr elo Gent of thearea With 'project 3s not located within the 100 year floodplain. Deincrease impervious surfaces would create a minor i se in the amount of runoff gauerated from the area. If storm drains are constructed to collect surface runoff, the minor additional runoff would not be expected to cause downstream flooding. If storm drains are not required with development,,minor localized sto`r-mvater ponding may continue to occur. Development of the area would be able to direct any localized stormwater ponding away ft-oa residenoes' and 'r oadways GROUNDWATER. By the year 2000, groundwater extraction in the Chico area is not expected to exceed the rate of recharge,; although reduced irrigated acreage will reduce the quantity of recharge (Butte County; 1962). Future developnent:n the project area would `replace portions of existing vacant parcelg with impervious surfaces, which would. represent an incremental reduction in groundwater infiltration (recharge) due to increased surface runoff. The reduced recharge would not be expected to result in an adverse' impaat to groundwatelr levels due to the limited construction on minimum ode acre parcels. Potential sources of water 'supply to future ddvel6pb6ht are addressed in Section 8A,o Public Services and Utilities. i �.3r5 WATER QUALITY. Development resulting from the proposed General Plan Amendment Would result, in minor increases in urban pollutant quantities in runoff ertilizer.s. Development would g�ehiede aroma traffic (hydrocarbons, rubber: i2'°n)' and generated by increased not from application of pe yeted introduce any all sourfacenwater quality impactstetherefore are arenot notalready adverse present. overall impacts discussion, ,adverse impacts and associated waLer quality s from sedimentation ark to be significant. As addressed previously int e not expected to be significant. As discussed in the Existing Setting, areas of nitrate concentrations above X15 4' aquifer in the project area. This mgll have been detected in the shallow individualized septic tank-� and degradation'hi� been due primarilyare approximately l!0 ;surface water runoff drainage wells. The city tuna county it ars jointly preparing sewer and drainage ,master `plans. At .the presevat,,- Service that unless the project area is annexed into the sanitary sewer ss -,tem beerequiredetoeuseosepticon'thetanks subject pa reels, at least temporarily, Would tanks and leaehf'ields for wastewater disposal acts. (Nunez;, 19$6). Consequently, Potentially adverse groundwater quality imp could. occur in the site area. Septic systems in recharge areas cot�;d result in potential public health impacts. Specific increases of nitrate concentrations,in ogroundwater cannot ess tank be projected at this time. The feasibility sibilitseand of fectileints,such pas: boil, and leaohfield systems are depend P oundwater, percolation rate;, soil depth, slope, the level �' seasonally high g' The septic system should be located in soils with and development density. stem. rates for the design hydraulic loading. of the system' adequate percolation The soil should be of sufficient -depth_ (seven or more feet o`uld bevadequate material and microorganisms in the wastewater. The slope to minimize over, saturation. if the groundwater vises to the lower surface of come saturated, the effluent would the contami.nateethe groundwaterldi the boil I,andbeffluent may acouffiulate on the ground surface, �,, a maximum number of soil absorption sgateMs which may operate successfully in a given area is dependent upon the ability of the soil to absorb septic tank ,effluent. To ensure adequate wastewater treaWent, minimum sizes disposal developed areas must be established to' control the density of an site is ot�ierloacli:ng of the soil. a h one acre.is systems. In general,, a standard minimum developed area 'size information recammendnd to prevent hydraul guggests that 0.5 to one acre contained +i n a Journal of Environment:.'_ Health of land for leachfield disr�sal s been determined to be reasonable for delines septic tanks in nitrate areas (Rei.di 196) These general B density not to satisfies the Nitrate` Action Plan which sets a dwelling u.t de,nn3 exceed three dwelling units per acre (Bunte County and City of 'Chico, 1,985) As stated previously; specific project related increases in nitrate concentrations t:annot be projected at this time.. Methods are available to estimate the potential degree of increase (Reid; 1sh u Studies et calculate the tential increases 'in nitrate concentrations should be completed once Po more information about potential development as well as base�i.ne groundwater conditions is available. The results ootild then be used to identify apprdpriate mitigation, if Groundwater quality monitoring'as outlined in the Nitrate Action. Plan should also be continued to detect 3.3-5 potential groundwater quality impacts and to identify and implement appropriate mitigation. In addition. in order to protect groundwater quality 7 the county and city should continL;e joint and minimise potential f�mpacta, development of sewer and drainagE master plans to include elimination of sanitary seater system, and to eliminate all septic tanks and connection to a drainages wells. eMITIGATION MEASURES feol�. Residential al development -of the project area is geotechnically � feasible. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential geologic and seismic impacts to insignificant levels. Specific engineering design and construotion techniques recommended by w needed .into the project - the soils engineer should be incorporated, as ne design. Building design should comply with seismic requirements of Mise current uniform Building Code and the Recommended Lateral Force Requirements prepared by the Structural Engineers A ssociation of California. Foundation supports and utilities should be designed to resist and' Withstand earthquake induced ground shaking, Standard construction methods and erosion control measures should be mpimented (including dry weather season grading, erosion control Plans, Inimite potential erosion impacts. in the aonstr�.t^tionearea)nt and devices to retain sediments. ivdrolo�Y• The following mitigation measures ripe recoamerided to reduce` impacts, t o insignificant levels. tenial hydrologic d the Cit of Chico should,continue to jointly develop andte Countyimplement �Niaticton PlanrM - drainageIt and sanitary ;sewers as Mandated in the If the use of individual septic tank and leachf field systems is r the systems should be, designed to satisfy county health necessary, standards -'and -the requirements Of the Nitrite Action Phan. Groundwater monitorings as outlined: in the Nitrate lection Plan; {ate miti' tion, if necessary. ets and should be continued to detect potential groundwater quality imOk to identify and implement appropt , Ba As more information about future development and dvbaseline groundwater quality conditions in the projeeAledlatibbS ct area should q y t� mitigation shoulddd- rbeedentfiedandsimpleme be completed of the po vied, if and approl � y�te . neeesbarya The following measure should be tonsidered to reduce surface water runoff and -incroase on site infiltration of stormwater, individual reviw of. subdivisions and semipervious site plans should pdrV on w measures to reduce on site runoff Msasures such as aa.'kWd` iys and parking lots should be cohsidered. 5,3-7 PUBLIC UTILITIES 3 ICSERVZC ES APJD_ EXISTING SETTING.: Public services s�eriffprovided protectione fireeprotectioncleducationser„ such as water supply, ancivroad maintenance. Most public services available to residents of incorporated areas, of the City of Chico, such as street weeping and regular. 'provded to unincorporated areas$ such as the project police patrols, are not vailable in area,. The following di'seussons,describe the primary services a the North Chico Urban. Area e Water Sup -ply., Water is supplied to the project area primarily through private wells. California Water Services Company (CWSC)i a private water utility, serves the southeast side of the project area with eight inch water mains at Cussick Avenue. All of Chico and its unincorporated areas receive water from hells; Some new development in the project ar�iat will. liinvolve nects additional CWSC is currently private wells rather than con looking at the purchase of a new well site near.Guynn Avenue (Grant, 19804 5e�ier Service. The project area is currently served by septic tanks. The nearest sewer main connecting the project area to the Chico Water Pollution ee of East Avenue and Control Plant is located on the neethnortt h of East Avenue.Itisuneertahat in only serve the area located 600 f Whether the portion of the project area north of the 600 foot limit can be served by gravity flow.. A ,Sewer Master Plan study currently is being conducted by Butte County and the section 3.3, Geology%Hydrol gco as required y),he city and county Nitrate Action Plan (see Sectio 3 3, Pollution Control Plant is currently operating below capacity - Howe I ver, apacity•However, thetachy already has been allocated for other _r areas of expected growth. Payment of three fees Would be required to 'obtain a connection to the city sewage collection and treatment system: (1) a water pollution control plant fee, `(2) a trunk. line capacity fee, and (3.) a main line extension fee. The rates may vary en between residential and nonresidential areas and fees may change according, to implementation of the Sewer Master Plan: In order to s water pollution control plant; the project area must be connect to the city' erty owners would be required to annexed to the City of Chico, or affected prop sign an annexation agreement. 'the annexation agreement 'waives the right to oppose future annexation actions (Reid, 1986; Nunez) 1986). Implementation of the dity and county Nitrate Action flan requires Butte County and the City of Chico to develop a Sanitary Sewerage Plan which will includes the area to be served and the standards and require" is for sanitary sewerage facilities; the aradensities sforenongeweredd by carea�;s"andlahtime designati6h of Land Use and maximum schedule for requiring the elimination of septic tank's and connedtthe to sanitary sewerequ system. Nitrate Action Plan indicates that the city and The county will develop a financing plan by January 1, 1986, and determine the availability of grants or low, interest loans for the extension of sewer, drainage ariajor Water facilities to unserved areas to minimize and avoid nitrate contamination of the groundwater. The Sewerage Master Plan and Finatdiug.plan have not been completed or ,approved at this time, 3 X4..1 rr i ect area. Butte County Gt�rm There are no storm drains area the onproWater Drainage• 'eet area and runoff has require s storm drains on losandy loam soil it thefproj acre Or as 100 year easily percolates into the The project area io not withinFEMA 1977)• not caused significant fleoding• either the loodplain, according to the National Flood Insurance Program f 1986). id by storm drain infrastructure generally is pa The cost of-st er Gell, property owner or. the develop with septic tanks as being the Since storm Water has been listed along 6 of sv most contributory and the most controllab and sourcethedrainageePlanhforlthete r e drainage plan wan ill incluee�ells;+ thenstandards Action Plan has required a sewerageinl greater Chico Urban Area. Th off site drainaB the elimination of all of the existing a Storm installation of temporary. drainage "facilities and leaInf1985, and a for the Rolls Anderson and Plan for constructiar the NorthaCh�o Arealbyies• ' financing P f Drainage study xas prepared 8 acres of land in the northwestern providedoa Ludy included 1,33 Rolls. This s area included the project area and P the Chico Urban Area. The study The storm drainage acts and related costsare shown in Figure 3.4-1• description of specific thi ect vicinity exceed improvements proposed within the proj art of the Nitrate Action The costs for these improvements andothers ideasia�pd in the study u� is $9 Master Plan st y $9,000,000. The Drainage Master Fl The Storm Drainage Plan will supersede the 1985 study• currently in prb6tess. Sheriff's Department providsae���fgeserVe Police Services• The Butte County Ten deputy 800 square miles), using a service for unineorpor- e, areas ofuus the northern half of Butte County (approximatelyThe average response time patrol system. The nearest stand -Hi is way59. The miles from thenalled beat P Park Avenue an B If project ar.�a at 475 E. prior of the service call• to the project area depends upon the p cath esergency response time could be less than five minutes... fora life an(d r more hours. The county as three o two patrol officers. A nonurgent call could take as long as with only the Butte sheriff's department is everely iven time serving 65,000 people. For minimum staffing; at any g. ,. Department would need to have 60 patrol officers based on a County Sheriffs Dep ed to n•i Presently, Butte County standard of one deputy Per 11000 pop 1986). The sheriff's Sheriff's Department has only pl officers (Grey, of Chico Police Department Patrol (Grey, 1986). Future service expansions are department hag a mutual aid agreement with the City and the California Highway anticipated if; appropriate funding is made available - r' on The But County, a County. Station X49 at e Butte eti Eire Department is responsible for tire Fire Prot_ a _ _ department protection within unincorporated areas station in the area. The Cohasset Rc"'A serVes thr 'Orin t d firefig ' °r_ per Department a Frontier Circle and he winter and an additional has one Fire P With o p t additional operates wit The Butte Coiu< y q ersonnel: The paid fire€ighter in the summer: a o dispatched edStation,assist Paul P he twelve eer firefighters Who are radio dispatched to42 one of t volunt roximatel� 40 vol'thin 2 haS an Chico area has app The serViee area of Station 41,000 feet of a wpdida stations in the county, of Class 5 when w Insurance Set 'Vice (ISOj rating firbeyond 1,000 feet e hydrant and Class 9 3, .'4-2 Fire department service levels nationally are rated on a scale. of 1 to 10 (best to worst) in an effort to determine the cost of fire insurance for property owners. Any area not having fire hydrants is automatically rated a 9 on the scale. if the fire department can provide a water tender, that classification could be reduced, to an 8. The county fire department is currently unable to serve the project area because of the lack of fire hydrants in the area. A new fire station, adequately meeting fire protection standards (Ho. 43), is planned near the project area at the intersection of East Avenue and State Route 32. The new service area is called the hest Chico Fire Station Benefit Area and a mitigation fee of 75 dollars per parcel collected from new parcel divisions to help support the cost of the new fire station. This station is estimated to r cosh $400,000, with, personnel costs ,of approximately.$140_,000 to $150,000 annually. Response time to the project area is estimated to be, three to five minutes (Hawkins, 1986; Tiller, 1986!). Schools. The Chico Unified School District serves the City of Chico and its unincorporated areas. The school district has 11 medium `sized elementary schools and three small rural schools offering kindergarten through sixth grade education. The school distrie.t employs 400 teachers, 250 staff persons, and 55 administrative or certified nonteaching personnel (Greater Chico Chamber of Commerce, 1986)• The district- also operates two junior high schools and two high schools., These four schools are currently operating below planned capacity; however, several elementary schools are currently operating above planned capacity. Relocatables (movable classrooms) are used throughout the district at elementary schools and it is anticipated that 60 relooatables Will be used in the next five years to help meet the demand for pritaary education (Matthevs, 1986). With the current and projected demands for educational facilities, as'a result of approved `but not yet built subdivisions, the elementary schools could not accommodate the expected 1,500 o t 2000 additional elementary students (Mathews, 1986) el Real bow- Elementary School serves the project area and students are bused to its location approximately three miles away on east 5th Avenue, Neal Dost School currently has 411 students enrolled and has a capacity of 485 students. Bidwell Junior High School serves the project area and presently has a total is and a capacity of 1,170. Bidwell is located at Sunset and Third of 9Avenue napproximately three miles from the project area. Chico High School, located at Lincoln and West Esplanade Drive, is r approximately two mikes from the project area: With an enrollment ,1 of 103, Chico High School has not yet reached its planned capacity or 1,693 students. Future schools are planned in the;Chico area 'and one school is being considered is the p j y thews, 1986) pr ect area, but land has not et been purchased (Ma Other schools that serve the Chico area and Butte County are Butte Community College ,and California State University,_ Chico: Roa � y a roads in the project area. The d Maintenance. Butte maintains th ening and upgrading, but, at this-.. tim©ethey are considered adegiatets inthe pIioj6ct areA are ntoemeeed tfexisting demand. The county will y maintain roads built 'withiin a subdivision if the roads are built to county standards. County road maintenance is funded by the gasoline tax (Edell, 1986). �.'G�4 r _ Libraries. The Butte County Library at East 1st Avenue in Chico serves all of the Chico area. The recently constructed building designedto accommodateexpected local housing, da ing growth pastnty Library is the 2000. Funds to support the library come mainly from the Butte County General... Fund. Services such as the library have been adversely affected by recent budget cuts. Currently, the library is`underotocked and understaffed with operatingreduced from past years (Terry, 1986); Hospitals. Tiro hospitals currently serve the.Chico area. Enloe Hospital, a privatelyL operated nonprofit facility located at 5th Avenue and Esplanade, is within five miles of the project area. Enloe Hospital has approximately 220 beds and is used close to capacity (,estimated at 90 percent) (Calar.co, 1966)• The second hospital serving the Chico area is the privately awned Chico Community Hospital,-also located within five miles of the project area. This hospital has approximately 85 beds and currently is not used to capacity (estimated at 60 percent or lower) (Calarco, 1986) Parks ane Recreation. City maintained Bidwell Park serves the City of Chico and its unincorporated areas. Bidwell Park covers over 2,400 acres and extends ;fron California State University, Chico in the center of the city, at Bidwelwelll Bidwell River Park and on for ten miles to the east into the foothills. Park is west of Chico along the Sacramento River and consists of P 180 acres of unimproved state owned and maintained .land (.treater Chaco Camber of Commence,, 1986 ) Chico Area Recreation and Park District (CARD) operates a community park located southeast of downtown near State Route 99 and 20th Street'. All elementary schools. have been designated a# recreation areas. Other recreation- areas include:' the East Side Little "LtMUP aek at Southgate; off State Route 99,Chapman y , �^� + (Hes, 9 Streets. All recrtionareasareheavileaReCeused�at thi.1 16th and B 986), Butte County is currently writing a Natural Resources $,-ml �tcreati.on Element to be added to its General Plan. _A, discussion Of park e ,;i, ion requirements and in lieu fees will be presented in the document (' 1986:). IMP CTS. Theproposed Project would incr.,,.a the dw,' and for public services and utilities': This increased demand would be difficult to serve due to the illogical pattern of parcels involved bi the proposed project; particularly With respect to water, sewer and stor-M drainage facilities: The following disoussiona 'describe the impacts of the project on the provision of public services and utility availability. Water 50011, Development allc0ed under the ,proposed project would require up to 86,400 gallons of water per day; assuming 2101additional dwelling units and a 'demand of 320 gallons per day per unit (Earth Metrics znoorpora,ted, 1986). The Cs,lifornia Hater Services Company (CtiSC) Antioi'pates no difficulty in equire thiath ling of area: However,, the expvidioln water for this additions meet f one additional well. ex anricin of water service would r growth �e prb ece �andards of the Hater from the additional well would continue Nitrate Action Plan (Grant, 1986). Residents of the project area may choose to drill their own wells', which would reduce the demand for water services from the COC (Grant:, 1980 Sewer Service. An estimated 77,160 gallons per day of sewage generation from the 270 new residences allowed by the proposed project is based on 90, percent of projected water use. Since the project area currently is not served by sewage collection lines and the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant, wastewater fkiom; project related development could be disposed of through the use of septic tanks. However, the addition of septic tanks in the project area could contribute to the ongoing nitrate contamination of area groundwater. The city and county Nitrate Action Plan requires local agencies to analyze the, appropriateness of allowing additional septic tank systems in the Chico area. This analysis is currently being done by the city and county as part of the Sewerage mister Plan .now under preparation. if the Sewerage Master Plan concludes that the addition of septic tank systems in the project area.would contribute to the existing nitrate problem, then the project area could be :connected to sewer mains serving the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant. The Nitl°at.e Action Plan recognizes that sewage treatment by the water pollution control, plant, instead of by septic tank systems, is one method of reducing nitrate contamination of the groundwater: Detailed impacts related to providing seater service to the project area, such as the potential inavailability of treatment plant capacity and costs associated with extension of the sewer trunk lines, cannot be determined until the Sewerage Master Plan is completed (MeLeRy 1986)' If the sewerage plan indicates that an extension of a sewer trunk line into e project ect area is necessary and feasible, considerable capital cost and subsequent environmental impacts, such as growth inducement would need to be evaluated and mitigated.In addition, the installation of sewer service to those parcels involved in the proposed project and the exclusion of the remaining parcels would lie awkward and illogical (see Section 3,,µl, Land Use, Planning, Applicable Plans and Policies). Annexation or an ag~eement to annex is required by the City, o. Chico if the area is to be served by the city sewer system which serves the region. Impacts of annexation,such as the change of f` public services, is not the subject of responsibility" for the provision o this lin vironmental Impadt ieport. These impacts and others Will be evaluated, as necessary, as part of any future annexation application processed by the City of Chico 'and the Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission. residentia Storm Drainage;. New l development in the project area would Increase impervious surface area .ran buildings and roadways; which Would result in a corresponding iussed undersExistinBrSoff and the demand for drainage capacity. As disc ting, 'Butte County and the City of Chico are developing a storm drainage plan for; the Greater Chico Area, as :required by the Xiti46tib Action eelpment of one �dewa�.kspZas�Wellvas�storm' dra3.ns.acre paroelii The iieprov�aou].d eats require o,ix b, gutter and 22 Per lineal Foot of frontage;. The cost ,'to improve the project. d�,:Loper wouldcost ect. ar~ea dbuldi bo Oroach 01000,000 (�:,deily 1986). i Police Servic Would req uir 6 staff mai vehicles es. The proposed. project would acid. $��5 the demand far Butte, to be County Sheriffs Department services and �! added to the department (0.65 deputies based on the tttwzdard of one deputy per 1,o00 papulation) . The associated costs foe this addition cf ervicevehieles be a total of $28,6.00 per yoc(Grey, 6) Increases i., s��Etj also will be ,required due to cumulative jtpadts generated by fut1111 projects (Grey, 1986): Fire Protection. The proposed pro ect would increase the demand for fire j lackof fire hydrants in the protection services in the projectFire project area reduces the firefigiating capabilities of the Butte County Department. Anew fire station (No. 43) is planned for a site near the e years i project area and could, be co ouldt started mpletneeded �towbetfullyestaffed to accommodate the immediately. This station 42 would increased demand for fire pr,Leetion services. In addition, Company r need expansion in the interim. The ivemtorten individualsidditional CnutmulAtive ded to protect the project area would be f development in the Chico area also could require increases in staff and equipment in this fu'Wr,e (Hawkins., 1986; Tiller, 1986) per Schools. The proposed project could 8enerate 0.'43 students (grades K-12) Neal dwelling unit, resulting in an increase of 716 students (Mathews, 1986). 84 Low Elementary School, which would serve the project area, is currently at percent of its capacity and is expected at reach ercenteof its plannednext capacity Bidwell Junior High School is presently P and it is anticipated that the schoo can meet the projected growth. Chico Senior High School currently is Usedetthe8additionalpbreent f:residenits t alagrowthiin ty its is expected to be able to accommodate enrollment area: The increased number of students generatedobySthoolrobat e s projeot, therefore, is likely to da�ignificantly not likely to affect Bidwell Junior High School or Chico 14igh School (Mathews, 1986.) The proposed project would haus a cumulative underimpact Existing setting,ithehschooland As discussed its unincorporated areas:, 60 relocatables to accommodate the future district anticipates the use of gNwth within the next f11 ive years. The district is also examining the _ potential schools to accommodate growth (Mr,thews, 1986).. the Road Maintenance and Hospital SeallCeinereaseltheedemandnt ofor roadwed rmair,enance prop project would increment y.or and hospital services. These impacts would not be considerad individ6 dem nd cumulatively siPnificant due totherelatively low increase in servieP demand alarco,, 1986): y expected b these services (Edell, C uld incrementally Libraries. Development allowed under the proposed project wo increase the demand :for library services which are already operating below .. e emental ing hours). atunderstaffed, reduced operat adequimpact isetculativelysi, this in r Parks and.Reereation. Development under the proposed project would Although incrementally increase the demand forparks and recreation services. the project related incremental impact works and beeconsi Bred s beJgnificant, the cumulative increases in demand for p considered significant and would add to the need foin lieu fees for new r. projects. MIT' rse ON MEASURE$ The following'measu res are recommended to mitigate the adverse public service impacts identified in this sEation. 3.4.7 ti Water Services - One new well will be required in the project area as a result of site development. All Cal Water requirements shall be met. See mitigation measures for nitrate contamination impacts (NS). Sewer Services Butte County and the City of Chico .should require that new development follow the recommendations of the Sewerage Plan now being prepared;. Butte, County and the City of Chico :should evaluateh.e potentialfor adverse +environmental impacts associated. with: a setter trunk line extension, including impacts related to annexation, if development of the project area requires sewer service. Septic tank systems in the project area should be designed to meet the standards and requirements of the Nitrate Action Plan and sewerage study. Storm Drainage Butte County and the City of Chico should implement the Vindings of the Drainage Master Plan study to provide drainage in the project area. Police Services Butte County should consider cumulative demands for police services and develop an appropriate funding • mechanism such as :ur assessment district to maintain future 'level of service standards in the future. (The feasibility of this mitigati,in measure is questionable because--recent efforts by the county to raise revenues for this purpose have been denied by voters. as,,essmentdistrzet td-payueforvelo ers of the form an County q p project area to the incremental impact ($28,600 per year) on police services created by the proposed General. Plan Amendment, Fire Protection Services. Butte County will collect 15 dollars per new parcel in the West Chico Fire Station Benefit Area to acquire ,runds to build-a net+ fire station to serve, the project ae6a., Station #3 is Odeationa Butte County should seekadditional Volunteers to staff Station � until A pressurized water 'system should be installed in the project area to conform to the Butte Coutity Fire Department requirements: Hydrants;should be plaeod in appropriate locations according to county " standards defined on page 52 o' the Butte County "Improvement Standards for Subd"visionsi Parcel 'Maps, and Site Improvements>; Pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Butte County Code". 1 Sabo Is Butte County Will collect builder fees to use for support of the Chico Unified Sebool District. The ordinance allowing the,fees to be collected has ;a five year time frame due to a sunset clause. In November, 1984, Butte County failed in its attempt to establish an assessment district to generateadditional funds for new elementary schools that are needed for the Chico area (Tuttle, 1986). Roadmaintenance Butte County p should implement the Circulation Element Policy to develop a system of off site development fees and/or development agreements for road construction and maintenance, to allow project area roadways to be Widened and upgraded as future development occurs. The standards defined in the Butte County Circulation Element (page 35) and in the Butte County docume=nt entitled "Improvement Standards for Subdivisions, Parcel Maps and Site Improvements, Pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Butte County Code" should be required for the roads in the project area to reduce maintenance.- The applicable standards involve road types R3 3A and SRS -1, depending on specific development proposals.` These improvements would mot be required for the proposed General Plan Amendments, but would be required when subdivisions or development is proposed. Libraries Butte County should develop a countywide assessment district to maintain acceptable library service levels (materials, staff and operating hours'. an P sd Rere t c a ion ark - Butte County should develop an "in lieu" fee program as part of the ongoing development of a Natural, Resources and Recreation Elemeht for the county General Flan: e r 3.4- it 4. ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives to the proposod project are considered in the follci(d'ing analysis; the No Project Alternative and the Expanded Project Area Alternative.: The follmiing discussion compares the im pacts of these WO alternatives with the ppoposed project impacts discussed in Section 3 of this report 4.1 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE The No Project Alternative involves maintainine,41 the project site's existing + General Plan Lanni Use and Zoning designations. Only a. limited amount of future development (less than 20 residences)could be added in the project area as a result of this alternative. No variation of the Chico Area Greenline-would occur._ Under. this alternative, most of the environmental impacts of the proposed project Would not occur, would be substantially reduced, or would be deloyad. The No Project Alternative may not be a long term alternative becaus^ the project area is defined as ,a "study area" in relation to the Chico Area Greenline. This designation indicates that this area is more likely to be involved in an amendment to the Greenlne than other areas. Many other growth inducing impacts, such as the Eaton Road Extension, development along State Route 32 and increasing urban density in western Chico, may . encourage a future amendment to the Chico Area Greenline and tae General flan Land Use designations for this area. The following discussion summarizes impacts of the No Project Alternative by issue. LAND USE. PLA;ZNING. APPLICABLE PLANS _AND POLICIES. The No Project Alternative would maintain existing urban/agricultural land use conflicts in the t projec area, but would not increase these conflicts or subjeot new or larger parcel e, beyond the project area to the west, to adverse land use eonditiofis. The demand for residential; land f)e 'development would be shifted to properties The' owth inducing impact of thent with city auci t which is consists General Plan l3,cea g4' currently untytp anni within a Chico Thea Greenline, ind Amendment and relocation o,: the Chico Ae,� Greenline would be avoided,_ pnh6fieial housing supply impacts would be lost Additional traffic Vro TRAF,�TC. uld be generated, by only about 20 residential units rather than the ;e(O allowed under the proposed project. Levels of r servicebe similar to those at intersections in northern Chie�� would identified in the CATS for the year 2000. LOGY1HYbROLOGY Potential soil and sem runoff and impacts minimized With GEO would � and urban the No Project Alternative. Stormwater infiltration pollutant ,level's would be less than with the proposed project. PUBLIC MVICES,(UTILITIES. impact related to additt.onal demand for public services from new residents would be minimized: The feasibility of a seater extension ..into thero sot area would be reduced'. Existing` nitrate sources P j within the project area would remain as contributors to the Water quality problem in north Chico � .2 EXPANDED PROJL•'CT AREA ALTERNATIVE The Expanded Projcae Area is within theQ1400 acruld e area delineated inve a General plan Figure including all of the parcels w reel sizes, in This alternative also would provide for one acre mi mum s (60 more e allowing approximately 330 new residences lt� native, the significance of most under the proposed project). Under this al of the environmental impacts ideadditionaltified for residences a3.lowede proposed eby third be increased as a result of the, 60 ,,he proposed project. alternative (beyond the 270 new residences allowed by The following discussion clarifies the differences between the impacts of the. proposed project and this alternative. ect ea L USE PLANNING APPLICABLE PLANS AN, rnaPOL1Cland useThe ExpandedIcompatibilityjbetween Alternative would allow for improved int urban and agricultural uses by allowing, the removal of agricultural asthe the ea. The pattern of land use designations pject would bo considered use of morerlogical. and stable than under the proposed project. expanded development potential would .further disrupt the city's However, the exp and county's intention to guide development to other areas in Chiceoand be ' Prom prime ,agricultural lands. Beneficial housing supply increased with the potential for additional units. of T'RAFPIC AND CIRCULATION. The increased development potentiald the Expands, Project Area eraa a would increase�'th i est. Measures to mitigate 0 0 _j the r P e significance of the incremental impact of trips generated by p cennventional intersections and impacts and related funding for realigning CIDa11 difference between portant for constructing; improvement defined in the CATS Would become etween the two and urgent. However, due to the relatively on incremental alt�:rnativea, this "alternative Would not be significantcion an identified em the CATS Level, but would add to the cumulative traf. is imps for the year 20010 • d GEOLOGY .AND HYDROLOGY' Soils an seismic impacts would not be substantially Px number df units at 'an equivalent density (one different with s high thin alternative would add unit/acre) As compared, to the proposed projeet, and would s contribute mere urban more impervious 'surfaces (increasing riuie, P) pollutants to local waters. 47BLIC t;ERVICES AND UTILITIES. The additihnancre eenheaX omits allowed under the Expanded Project Area eas Ajternative wool the probability that connection to the City of Chico's sewer unline would oH deberrQtherheed ofor a minimize nitrate contamination it projectstudy is trunk eztebsioh cannot be addidetetional residential Uniined Until the tsallowed Under pthe ed The primary impact ea Alternative wo foe public old � � increased demand fe fire, Expanded Project ' in sewage treatment, water,_polid , services and utilities. drainage and sewage 'treatment schools, lstorm ;drainage faailitiea, road maintenance, libraries, parks and recreation facilities and: hospitals. Storm with this ` and extensive is However, the costs could be distributed to an�oau7dr�ber of systems Mould be expo to be somewhat more costly alternative 'increase expected of a sewer trunk extensio dwe]ling units: The f density of develdome"nt in,the area. The inoreu�ental with a, higher overall d Y under d rit+jeHoweVer foe many differences between the demand under the propose this alternative would not be considered signi refection, schools, ,public services, such as fire protection, sheriff p libeariee and pedes; any 'additional demand would be considered cumulatively significant a-2< _ sig. .- 6 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS, According to the California Environmental Quality Act, a project is considered to be growth inducing if the project could directly or indirectly foster economic growth or population growth. Extensions of urban services or transportation facilities into previously unserved or underserved aroas,. and other projects which remove obstacles to growth or gen:-rate substantial eco a .. economic or �P loym.,nt activity would be considered growth inducing. The proposed project would indirectly foster economic growth and population growth in the Chico area in several ways: (1) by increasing density to allow up to 270 new residences to be developed in the project area; (2) by amending e the Chico Area Greenline to remove constraint to land development in prime agricultural areas; (3) by reducing the city's and 'county's oommitment to encouraging development in other areas of the city; (4) by encouraging the City of Chico to extend"'urban°services into a previously unserved area (via the Nitrate Action Plan, and sewer service requirements Which oould initiate on); and (5) by providing short term construction employment and business y construction of new annexat aetvit with installation of iUfrastructure and residences.: Increased development density would be growth inducing since it would allow additional people to live in the Chico Urban Area. The people would incrementally increase the demand for consumer goods and services which Would encourage secondary growth, such as new businesses. Modification of the Greenline could be an indicatorthat the existing constraints on development created''by the Greenline and efforts to direct development in other areas are not firm city/county commitments, Which would encourage corners of similarly situated property to generate pressure on decision makers to among the Greenlee: Extension of urban services through infrastructure improvements and extensions of urban service boundaries (annexation) is clearly growth inducing, since similarlysituated properties would become more viable for urban uss. P tion industry would be i;egiporary,and likely limited to, businesses and workerson the cixlready Established in +;,he Chico "ea. The growth Inducing impacts of the Project Would be considered significantly adverse, 'I 4. IJ UMiJLATIVE IMPACTS Cumulativ,a impacts are mpaahs�hact3a��sociatedindividually with pastincrementally present minorl,. but wbicYk, when combined with P approved projects and other reasonable anticipated future projects; accumulate l proportions? The California Environmental Quality Act to more -substantia (CEQA) states that cumulative impacts shall be discussed' wh�.n they are significant and that theiofussion theirsoceurreneei CEQAshall describe hvetity of e also states that the impacts and the likelihood discussion does not need to provide as great',detail as is provided for the; project alone. The discussion is to be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness. - The Draft E'tR discusses cumulhicheismanCadoptcdutilizing planningthe document pertaining Transportation Study (OATS) to future development of the Chien Urban Area. The basis from which the (CATS) projections are made are two scenarios which contemplate development by the year,2000 and development by buildout of the Chico General Plan Land Use The CATS study is incorporated by referenee'in section 3.2 of this Map•tY big nific"ant cumulative impacts are report. Mitigation measures for presented in. Section 3• CNQA states that mitigation measures for cumulative impacts may involve only adoption of ordinances or regulations rather thanthe impositionsof conditions on a project'by project basis. following cumulative impacts are discussed in Section 3 of the Draft EIR The Loss of prime agricultural land to urban development and additional adverse land Use ts` compatibiltY �.mpac ' Changes in ;planned land uses An Changes related weakening of the city's and use planning policy which encourages ievelopmentin other areas of Chico (growth inducement). n, Additional traffic aril "related impacts such as Oise and air quality, degrhdation in the North Chico area. Increases in urban pollutant leVtl and nitrates in soils and water in the Porth Chico .area* Ince6ases in the demand for public services including sewage treatment, dater, poline, fire; schools, road maintenance, parks'y recreation �, faciSitie s, libraries and hospitals 7 1 REFERENCES: PERSONS ANDPIIBLICATIONS CONSULTED Brooks, Walt, Sheriff -Coroner, Butte County Sheriffs Office, telephone fcommunication (1986) Butte, County of, Circulation Elementth.: ;o_ General Plan (1.984) � a Butte County of, Com zehensile Zoning ,Ordinance, Number 1750 (1984) , -,--�Q Butte, County of, nviroDmaental Review Guidelines (1984) Butte, County oP2 f the Gener&1 Plan (1984) Butte County of and City of NtrateActi Chico, oD .Plan. Greater _.Chico Urban Area (1985). Butte ' County of -Safety Element_ of the General .Plaza (1977) Butte, County of, Seismic Safety Element of the Gener� al: Phan (1977) m. Futta, County of, Planning Department, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Chico Area Land -Use. Plan An Amendment to the Bu+tte County General Plan (1382): t Calareo, Nino, Director of, Health Education, Butte County Public Health, telephone communication (1986). i California, State of, Department :of Transportation, 8th Progress :Re�p?rt on - Trip Ends Generation 'Research Counts (1973)• Calj.fornia, State of, Department of Water Resources, Ground 'Water Basins in, California (1980). California, State of, 'Department of Water Resources, study of Nitrates .in the Ground Water of the'.Chico Area. Eutte County (1984). Chico City 6fO Chico Gene's: Plan (1985) Chico, City of, Enviroiramental Reviett :Guidelines (1985) Chico; City o£, 'Title 18. Subciiy signs; (1985 ) Chico, City .of, Title_1g^Land Tl3e Regulations (1985) Derrick, 'Fi lliam Transportation Coordinator, City of 'Chico, telephone, communication (1985)► ;.aced, Draft and 71hiilEnvironmental Impact _:Report for the Pi oposednCentt9 Chico Redeyelotaaaent Pro�eet (1985) Eartr Metrics Incorporated, Draft Environmenta].Impact Report for: the North �_ r.eement (1985) . Vele .Playa Area Annexation prezone #91 and Davelotxnent Ag 11 -1 Edell, StuartiAssociate Civil Engineer, Butte County Public Works Department, t, telephone communication (1985),• z Grant, Gene, District Manager, California Water Services Cowpany, telephone communication. (1986) Grey; C.Wain, Butte County Sheriff's Department, telephone communication (1986). 86). Y , telephone Hawkins, John, Division Chief, Butte Count Fire Department communication (19, Hughes, Jerry, Chico Area`Recreation and Park District, telephone communication (1986) JHK &Associates, "Chico Urban Area Transportation Study" pee r Chico Planning Department, personal and Lando, coin, Planuiag L'j,-cv�uc-, telephone communication (198+ and. 1985). Ben, Director of Elementary 'Education, Chico Unified School District, Mathews, B telephone communication McLeFio , Ron, Engineers Butte County, telephone communication (1986). Cit of Caico Public Works, telephone Nunez, Bab, Director of Public. Works, Y communications (1.986) Pal:meri,'.Edwin Associate Planner, (ity of Chico, telephone and personal communicaS:ion (1986) Pierce, Elwin, Assistant Design Engineer, Butte County, Public Work, telephone dor smunicaton (1986) Reid, Tom, Supervising +T_anitoran, Butte County Department of Environmental Health, telephone communication (1986): Rolls j Anderson and RollsButte County North Chico Area Storm 'Drainage Study � (1985): Rolls, Anderson and Rolls, County of Butte Feasibility Study for Sanitary �. Sewer. Service to the North Chico Area (1980 Sellers, Cliff; Planning Director, City'of Chico, telephone communication (1986). Shattucks, Dale, Administrative Assistant for Community Services; City of Chico, telephone communication (1986). • Terry,. Josephine, Director, Butte County Library, tdlephoie communication.' Tiller, e:k Di, Batallion Chiefi, Butte County Fire Department, telephone 'communication (1986) r Tuttle, Laura, Associate Planner, Butte County Planning Department, personal, telephone and written communication (1985 and 1986). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,, Report and Soil-B,o (1976) U.S, Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey (1929)• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Insj.ranee (1977)• Administration, Flood Hazard Boundary Map, Butte County, California i 1 r _ _ t 11=3 APPENDICES 13.1 Initial Study 13.2 Letters in Response to Notice of Preparation List, of parcels Involved in the General Plan Amendment 13.3 13.4 Applicable Zoning Regulations (A-5, SR-1)' 13. 5 Green Chico Area line Policy 13-1 APPEgD!Y, 13.1 INITIAL STUDY AI,f`�liN]ll X COUNTY OF- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM eDlcyl 84-02-27-03 (to a complete y Lead Ag Loi; i, 84-01-13-02 AP Various B'ACK__GROO NT - n. gclaxd, o.f Supexv`1.saxs I ,, Name o f Proponent �QS!��X. _ y �. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable) MoOber Bur e11 $pq_ _d , 0f SUD-e..LY X�_. ... ve 27?7____ Alam Ave. OroCe CA-9S9-b5UMI�y Cc 1�� Chico, CA 95926- 3, rrojL.ct deseription ,_Gj1ora1_P1an...Amendment. , �tANllATORI Fltr'IlINCS (ll� ��SIt+1vtIFICANC}. NO ect have the potential to degrade the n. Does the prof s substrtntially reduce quality of the environment the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause d fish or wildlife population to drop below self- st�stainf ng lev+els; threaten to e1 itninate a plant he animal community, reduce the number or testr ct the range of a rare or endaor ngered plant or majorperiods eliminate important examples of the Inaj pY of California history or prehistaty=3 ro ect have the potential to riachievc h. Uses the p Jdetriment of short-term bent.'flts to Ahs}Ilttrmimpactttontthe� environment 1 goals? envilonmentais one which occurs in a relatively rd Of lont1-term eimpacts will *- brI pf time w /e e.ndure'Into the future: �. impacts which are individu Uoes the project have oily limited, but Cumulatively considerable? (A pely roject may impact on two or more separate resources where the ide wh�ra theeefhietSoCrtheltotalaofVthose small, but - impacts on the enviranttlent is feffects.whit ro'ect'haver environmental d , 11oos the p l ti � will causesubstantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectlyl t i l ._ 1t�T1l�lihATTON (To be compIet'ell bj" the 1,end Agency) (11, the basis Of this initial evalltat on. _ , _ 1effect iect COULD NOT ha,eAign !/Wt- rind the proposed, pro, JhOLAAIwili bep prepared' on the environment; and a NF 1 JWt; f7 nd that a gh the proposed pro j et tnot Cauld have a $ ednotil . t ant C!'#ect, ori the end"ironMenhf there AT1oN ttbASURES de-ttribeant 1 tltota effect in this case because t p ro ect. A NEGAtIVI''i the attached sheet have been added to the p jt i l be prepared. s re tired. 1tECL ARATitlh r,t1 project MAY have a 919n1flC.+nt ofequi ed i/hi find the proposed + r,anti an hhi'l T liOlrrti.l`'i'AL ti`IpAi~T F�1pOR'I i s required. t'ed tite cnvi ronment,; t rOIINTY (IF �i T�l' , P1:ANN NG Tt i�nlz°rrii Ni ti :haiir Suttle Ass istant planner R0 i ewotl hitt 13:14 Iv.-',, ENVIRONMENTALIM' :TS �° .answers are required Y est and "maybe xp anatlons a. - YES MAYBE N0 sheets)) on attached Will the proposal result in significant: 1. EARTHo ox in changes in �( `ons a, Unstable earth conditi� ge000ic substructures? compaction or ions, displacements, b_. Dis'rupz soil? overcavering of the in topography c ground surface c. Change relief features? or modification of any d. Destruction s, physical features? unique geolobic or p y of soils, e„ Increase in 'wind or w�ter erosion off --site, either on or f, Chanees in deposition or erosion of beach deposition sands, or changes in siltation', . hich may *n od ify the channel of Or or erosicn bed q% the ocean river or stream or the a any bay; inlet or lake? soils Loss of prime agriculturally productive_ outside designated urban areas'? to geologic ro E�xty h Ensure of people or P P� iAsTides, mud- hatards such as earthquakes, filar, hazards?_ slides ground failure or similar, tantAIR. 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in sub or deto. Air emissions air duality?ble odors, smoke of 'obJectiona b: The creation or fumes? moisture, or, • c: Alteration of air movemen in or any temperature, change locally or regionally. osal result in substantial: Will the pron7or 3. WATER: hanges in currents, or the course he of water movements in either direction ? marine or fresh Waters'. patterns, tes ; drainage bi in aandramountrof surface runoff? oranhesratedrainageimprove- e. Need for off-site surface removal; channel - ,:, including - ments menu i-zatiion•oI culvert installation-? course dr flow of flood d. Alterations to the waters" in the amount of su; face tater in any, e Change water body,' or iia any f. Discharge into surface waters; 'water qualityt including alteration of surface emerature, dissolved limited to tp but not ozygen Or' turbidity ? of the direction or rate of flow ' Alteration bf ground Waters? Of ground Waters; Change in the quantity either through direct additi'iong oof an draWxls, or through intercepton aquifer by cuts or exca"^tions in the amount Water supplies?erwisej Reduction available'jot public or pro er'iy to Water J R'cposUre of people hazards such as fooding? related 13.;1,,- _. - , l XES, mAYBE No " 4. PLANT" LIFE. 141 the proposal result in,..�santia, a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, r shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants shrubs', _.. b. Reduction of the numbers of an, unique, rare or endangered species of ,plants? C. Introduction of new species of Ylar.ts into an r area, or in a barrier to the normal -replenish- ment oa existin. species? d. Re6ucti.an in acreage of any agricultural crop? S. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal re:;ult in substantial a. Change in the diversity Of species, or nwsbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell fish, bernthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique,*rare - or endangered species of animals? c. InVroducti.on of new species of animals into an area, or result �.n a barrier to t !e m 1 rat' . a migration or movement of animals: . d. Deterioration to exzsting fish or wildlife habitat? G. NOISE: Will the proposal result in substantial: a -. —Increases ,in existing noise levels? , b. Fxposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND GLAF.E. Will the proposal produce si.gnific3nt light and glare? 3. proposal result in LANDUSE, Will the ro osal ' *, o p hod substan4zal alteraltion of L he present or lan land use of an area? 9: NATUPAL RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resources? 10: RISKOF UPSET`; Will the proposal involve' 9. A risk of explosion or the release of hazard- ous substances (i't!cluding, but not limited to) oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset co,ndi,tions? r b. possible interference with 'an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 11: POPULATION. will the proposal alter the location, Human s' tri-btitYon densi.,t, or ,;r+��rth r<<!to n£ tttc t1Oii5I��C. AIM the proposal affect existing ho!!sin , oto cret!tC �r dem;�n.1 ,Cor additional hottsin,g? - . y'y YES MAYB}i NO RECREATION. OP3. ll the Proposal result in-,__himpact uon the quality ox quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Z0. CULTUR:VL RESOURCES. a. -Will the proposal result in the alterati01n p }•- of or the destruction of aro listoric or historic archaeological site? b Will the proposal ;result in adverse, phys-5ca.l or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? C. Does ;.he ;proposal have the potential to cause ' a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. 1,1111 the proposal restrict existing religious`` orsacred uses within the potential impact f :. DISCUSSION OF ENTAL EVA"LU.4 TON NV?1tOIME AP Various January, 1984 the Board of Supervisors initiated s General Plan "urban" Amendment from Orchard and Field Crops to for a 400 acre or more area known as Be11-Muir. Bounded by the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks to the west, East Ave.. and Renshaw ensaw to the south, Alamo Ave. to the east, and Bell and thfuir' Avenues to the north. This area hos long been in planted orchards. In ntid-Vebruary 1984, residents of the Bell4luir area inde- pendently applied for a General Plan Amendinont from Orchard and Field Crops to Agricultural- Residential, 1 acre minimums: The location of this Gener-al Plan Ainendynent is essentially the same,, but the boundaries are itregular, encompassing more or less 270 acres: Tlie' protect is located on, Class X and II soils : Vina Loam, Viria FineSandy Loam, and Fart.vall Loam, These soils ,arc cap-, able of supporting a gide variety of agricultural Crops ' Many of the.parcels are planted in orchards Forty acres is the preferred minimum parcel size"however, a5 small as 10 acres can be viably farmed acrd p otiride a sec- ondary income..* Assuming 1 acre minimum parcels from more or less 253 2 to more or ess '312.3 could be created,- and snore or less 261-522 nett homesites deyelo loped -lots Teleplione intorvict,r Bill Olsen 5[7f84____ I Farm Advisor-� Walnuts: 3,4010 lb/ac x 40 ac k $ .40/lb $54,404 t;1,Q00 ac, costs x 40 - S4C?,000} 1 net $14,400 moderate income(county average income) 2 Private application. 80ard Application. 4 Build out is 2 units per parcel: As parcel sizes decrease-econotnid8 of scale work to� pro��or� tionall:y increase fdrtning costs 13;1_5 If variances are granted or boundary line modifications are approved, these figures could be 5n higher.. More specifically- 261-522 homesites equals:. 62i 1,252 persons 11-229 ,school children 6,260-12,520 daily vehicle trips 5 acres 1 new community park (more or less ) new police officers runoff 432 cfs (see Chico Area. Land Use Plan) The very size. and intensity of the project dictates that the Chico i ca �t to Environmental Impact Report (EII.) or a sup plime� Area Land Use Plan tiR be prepared., In :19$2 an EC. was prepared on the "'Chico Area Land Use Plan) whichincluded these properties soils and other back ground information which Regional setting, Gently covered, and r�:ould also apply to this P j ro ,,ct are suffi should be referenced. The iR does not discuss circa atien within the ''Bel'1-hfuii, area �. g anon and drainage : p (Paget discuss cxrcul 122) and recommends a holding zone of A 5 or A-10 until a s ecf ' p s prepared to plan i Bell-l�iur, outside of the ShaUnion Drainage Assessment Dis- .. - trict, has been identified as lacking drainage facilities and ex periences localized flooding. (Page 85) Y otherwise Development of Bell Mu,r would be contrar to the Land Use Eherwise policy of restricting developm�_nt in flood prone or areas ot lacking drainage impto"vements It was further recommended that a district(;s) ".e formed to fund all public. improvements., ` While this project is located outathestatesecon intiedrurbanization ' the Division of Env ronmer►ta1 tle on.septi.c tanks will undoubtedly increase ground water deter ora- tion, (Memo of March 20 j 19 84) rict has noticed Butte County that The Chico Unified School Dist continued approval of development: projects within theated1. distrri fiy absent a funding mechanism, constitutes an unmitigsig cant impacts onus on checklist Land Use ETR This E:IR may be preparereferencia thc� Chico Area Land for background ;information, and f 1. oyercovering of soil) erosion surface and ground 3 drainage, increased sedimentation, water quality 8 11,12. land use issues such as Amendment ' justification and need der General Plan impact on the already approved "Vdlop . I in. the east including the oxtensive,inAiestment iri public itnprovemen s . APPENDIX 13.2 .Letters in. Response to Notice of Preuaratiori PLANNING OFFICE CO. Ma^mgConm r FEB 24 1984 irte rl ' NY-Slrow—, CII-ytmCHICO plc Bny.34Z; OrW46, CafiiW216 February 23 , 198' CA 95.4— Butte �CentersDrve Department 25 County orouille CA 9$965 RE-, Midway' Orchard, Heidinger /.Sweet Nectar, and Bell -Muir General Plan Amendments The City of Chico finds that, the proposed projects noted above are in direct cflict with the 1;+80 Compromise plan and urban growth policies established after on extensive discussions between the City and County: In aur opinion, each of the above referenced projects may generate significant impacts', An independent consultant should be retained to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Report addressing the following items for each'pr0ect area: 1. The justification and need for the General Plan amendments 2. The impact on the already approved development in the east including he'dxrensive investment in public imspe s at a result de tiopment in agricultural areas west of the adopted Greenline. Impacts o , 3, n public services and public Improvements including but not limited to fi.?lly improved streets, storm drainage,. schools, parka, police and fire protection. Project impacts on shallow well domestic water systems, and ' vels within In particular, potential increases �n nitrate le each project area, ` Traffic generation Arid cirrula.tibn problems as a result of full buildout in the project area. Ttie City would like to be kept info y action to be taken onrthe above informed of an r' projects, and is looking' forward to reviewing' and commenting on ens*ironmetital documents prepared for the proposed prgect8 Sincerely;; Edwin R. Palmeri Assistant Planner' 8RP : pb Joe Department o1 Transportation Fish and Game -Regional (?ficrs District Contacts + A. Naylor, Regional Manager' 'Don Canstock Department of Fish and Game peparrmeut of Transportation' 0 627 CYPfess ( ► Di:r00 trict 1 Redding, CA 961, ,/ IB 0 Union Street 916/246-6274 Eureka, CA 95501 707/442-5781 pDep ensen, Regioosl; Manager michetle Gallagher rtatlon -tment of Fish and Game DePartm nt of Transpo 1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A 0 District 2 0 Rancho Cordova. CA 95670 165- 7 RiversideDrive 916,1355-0922 Reddingj CA 36001 916 j246 -4A04 B. Hunter. E,-Zional +r^ner riti"I J: Smith Dopa - ut of Fish and Game De,,aris,ent of Transpa-lotion 0 Youatville Facility, Bldg. C _ 0 Distrlct 3 Yountville, CA 94599 r'�0� H S set 707�9i4-�450 MAX sville, GA 95901. e 916/674--1277 G. Nokes, Regional Manager vara Melan3rp' ' Department of Fish Enid Gasae pepartment of 'Transportation 01234 Fast 5hav Avenue 0RincDistrict 4 Fresno, CA 98726 P.O. E od Anne= �q�3?2-3761 San Francisco, CA 94119 415/557-1887 y, nager Fred A, ii;or2hlep Jr., Re8• Jerry LA vwr^ Dtepd nt of Fish and Gave 0 p,.partment o1"Transportation l , .245 West Broad•aq District 5 `„fJ wig Beach, CA 9302 11iguera street G ,93401 213/590-5113 San Luis Obispo, 805/5'19'-3114 ' Rolf E. Meal Mert parker k+arine Reeotirc�es ileK:on' DEparbwnt of Tan rspo-lotion 0 245 west Broadway 0 District 6 Lone Betas. CA 90802 4O, x 12616 213/590`5155 Fresno, CA 93776 209/48S-40$8 Rayne Ballentine State Tater Resources Control Board bePaortation Joan Juraecich 0 1 Spring S vision o1 rater QualitY Districtn7 aY TransrState tate later Rewurces Control Board Los Angeles, CA 90012 0 D 213/620-5335. Sacro nth, CA 95901 916/372-341:3 Robert Pots rartatinn Department of Tnspo Jerry Johns 0 District 6 State water Resources Control Board 4 Rest Third Street, 0 pelta bait San Bernardino, CA 92403 2125 19th St., Sacrab'nt•.o; CA 95818 714/393"-1629 p; p, t3dt loo SAcrament+o, CA 95801 Ton Dayak Al Yang Control Board ODepartment of Tran portltion State Fater Re, urces District 9Division of Fater. Rights 500 NSouth Main Street 0 961 P Street, Bishop, CA 04514 Sacramento, CA 95814 7141873-8411 916/324-5716 John Gagiian0 rtatioa Regional Water Qaality Cony 1 Hoard' Dep3rtvent:ot TrannsPo • % City S DistrictRegion 11 Bb[ 2�1s Stiockton; C!1 95201 Jim Cheshiig rtaf on Department of TrzftsAb ODistrict i1 Street 64/237-6759Z3s Sail Diego, Ct65 1:244 Inter. p De artmeMUL, 4lemorandnm supervisor Hilda AI-ieeler To; , �: AUG s 1 1984 ane Dolan x� Drav a, Califwa* ,Faou- supervisor J + . sUI)JECT: Proposal for Bell--Muir'Area o�Te August 24, 1984 SW The Bell -Muir area, 456+ acre,A-5 zoning district (bounded gjust by properties fronting on Muir Ave. -Bell Rd., the S -R zoning west of 8ay-Cusick0 Henshaw Ave., and Hwy. 32), has been the l subject of much debate the ast four years.: has been zoned A-5 since the mid -50's and with a couple The area on Bell 'Rd. and Foreman of exceptions (tisenhauer rezone blip homesite segregation on Rodeo Ave.)' there have been no nsmaPlerels created smaller than 5 -acre in 15 years. However, many than 5 -acre parcels were in existence prior to the effective date. of the zoning (some created legally; some not), The focus of the arument has been the 1980 g proposed Chico Area General Plan amendment process. During the 2+ years debate on that plan, at least 3 proposals were set forth and iPlan Gp) designation• and. 1) place area in agricultural General Plan (;GP) e lace area in Agricultural -Residential GP leave honing as A-5, 2) P c:re nunimum zoning; 3) place designation and re -zone it to a 1 -accessary consultants (engineers, the area I a Study Area and hire n other planners;) to- develop a dra;inac a and traffic ' roposa.lan n ncludedepro- v pat a before changing the to ting for this am Ings beechanism to, have property owners in area` paY ■ study. in 'September 1982, the Board of Supervisor's approved ul. In r d initiated a cp amendment that Mould put December 1983, the Boar this area in some unspecified urban GP designatiocBOAdregUere 5ric- ified zoning. 5ince the Bbard did not specify, analysis of the "worst case" possible xhich could be'presutried to he �tia1. In 19.84, a property owner Petition I, `high density retideri ) a GP de:i representing - 27© acres of area was presented�proposiyacre minimum. nation of Ageltuitural-Residential and a zoning An ElR has band een deemed necessary for bottanetoopoantnout aasasome 1 property owner petitions. -This is 1mpor 1')el'ief thathis people hold the erroneous t area has been studied when it hasn't. The Board has several choices to makes clarit or argue this matter �r,.thout bringing Y 1. Contitlue to what We':Ve begin doing sihce 5eptcmber I closure: This is 'really .. 1982: 2 ' A110 the Bnarcl� hitiaLed amoindinettt to proceed in the usual inannc:r This would mean the Department dill get to it as they cats in l.iglit of established priorities. This .is a tion procea"s. supervisor Hilda Wheeler August 24, 1984 page Z f 3. Drop the Board --initiated amendment and leave area in Agri cultural designation and still zoned' A-5. W h property owner proposal to proceed in the usual 9. manner. This would mean they write, or hire someone to write, an EIR and when that is done hearings are Scheduled 5. Define the area proposed sed for GP and zonE'chan4e,'specify what GP designation and zoning is proposeed, dr�el�chargep a arlandfor setnupii►g drainage and traffic, determine a p� Pa a owners reim- the procedure allowordthe costeo£atheQplaneandproperty pay t their pro rata burse : the county:f share for improvements as they develop. 6. Select Ia consultant to prepare an EIR for the property owner application, xequre the Board -initiated application to be analyzed as an alternative `and require wthose hat the1gm departmentthe zaning ' petition to pay these costs. This is recommended and we tabled July 17.• I recommend 45. Since a drainage plan is already underway, it pi could be said -this proposal has been stw tod,: alith the beit ist ngcsmall• got their share onecessary, ,This choice does not answer what to do f cessary improvements', but it certainly gets paying 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6 in settling the Bell -Muir ' us further along than controversy: must say I that my first choice would be -w3. There is much support from property owners in the area to leave things; as they are: I remendous btipp Mould say that there would be. tort nor than from all who travel Ni Esplanade and . East Ave. Rowe�•er, I recognise a strong desire an the part of many property owners (clearly 270 acres worth) to have the opportunity to divide their property. Y reco2lSt nd 45 for these reasonst It is fair to honor the request of property Owners for us to g ng the GP and zoning in the area cons der chap i 2. It is unfair to burden the ta�rparshetce,cnecessaryst �6f eto legally required EIR,; P nn�.ng analysis) la hobo this togUest. 3: Since it; has been a long established, appropriate, fiscally conserVatiVe policy of Butte county to'1laQQ de revX5rmi nOfps pollcy pay their own way, it would seem a very p inappropriate allocation of public resources to sub. id - and an napp- ize development in th18 area. q. We, as representatives of the publis interest, fmust seek answosts toy at feast, and traffic impacts that will be the drainage 13.2-6 r LIST' OF PARCELS INVOLVED R THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPENDIX 1 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 042-02=21,22,42 28 20 042-02-1U 10 042-02-20 4. 042-02-54 2 042-02-17 042-0:2-6, 7, 101 30.3 10 042-02-9s 10 042-02-6, 7, 101 2 042-02-23> 2 042-02-16 4.8 r 042-02-90 5 042-02-99 18.5 042-02-19 4.8 042-02-89' 9.9 042-05-38 o42-05-33 7�3 042-05-14 9 042-05-34 10 042-06-15 Mineral Only 042-05-35, 62` 5 042-06-56 2.5 042-05-24 042-05-66 5' 5 042-05-64 4 042-02-27 15.3- ACE3' RCEL`NUMBER AS 1&SSOR PA - 042-02-98 _ 4.6 _ 042-05-67 2 042-02-35 4.8 042-06-77, 4.6 Q4- 042-07-83 10 5.1 042-05-61 r r .r r APPENDIX 13.4 APPtICABLE ZONING AEGULATICNS Sec. 24-72. A-5 (Agricultural) Tones. (A) Uses po-mitted (1) One Single -family dwelling per parcel; (2) General farming, horticulture.., commercial livestock, poultry production, warehousing and storage-, (3) Accessory buildings and uses ,pertinent to the permitted ases including m a r�cultural processing plants; (4) Housing ,facilities (including mobile homes) to accom modate only agricultural employees and their families employed by the owner or operator of the premises*; and provided further that such housing :facility shall be considered accessory to the main building and shall conform to the provisions pertaining to required yard and open Spare for dwellings'; (5) Mobile homes to house one family when such mobile; home is the only housing facility located on the prem- ises, provided f1je following conditions are conformed to (a) The floor area within the mobile home shall not be Iess than five handred (500) square -feet. (b) The parcel of land conforms to section 24-72(C) (minimum lot area of five (5) acres), or a smaller parcel of land lawfully created. Uses requiring ate peMzUsl The fbIlowing uses are permitted subject to securing a use perni t ; ,X each case: (1) Golf courses and country clubs; (2) Public or quasi-public "uses including churches, firehouses, hospitt ls, and clinics, parks and play- > grounds, 's ty buildings choolA, public utill'. . (2) .l" �iegr g a anon of homes tea, pursuant too the reQ , airs- i xnents of section 94-64, -44) Segrea,ation of agricultural processna uses, tu.ceuant td the riquilrements of sec',on 24.55, �,.td oodq Oryi g `"" exCdVr- tion (S� Dtining, parr �.ningcp7,ant•.s1a1. ,� r w . (C) minimum lot area required: The requirements of section 24-33 of this Code notwithstanding, the minimum lot area in A-5 zones shall not be less than five (5) acres. (Ord. No. 1750, § 1, 8.31-76; Ord'. No. 2,167, § 1, 11-25-80) Secs. 24-73, 24.74. Reserved. Sec. 24-75. A -?.0 (Agricultural) Zone. (a) Uses peranitted: (1) One single-family dwelling per parcel, ilucluding mobile homes; 2 General agricultural farming„ horticulture, commercial livestodk, poultry production, growing and harves*ing . forestry products, warehousing and storage; (3) Accesiory buildings and uses pertinent to tine permitted hats, including agricultural processing plants; (4) Mousing facilities (including trailers) to accommodate only, ernploYees and their families employed by the owner or, operator of the premises; and provided further that such housing facility shall be considered accessory to tyke main 'building and shall conform to the p g' to required yard and open space ovisions per. inin for dwellings; (6) ,<gining, quarrying, commercial excavation and wood i!t! processing plants; p + (6) Hunting and fishingcAmps, including those which accommodate recreational vehicle# and travel I�railera, providing tha+ said rEsreatlonal 'vehialcs and travel trailers shall not be used for,year-round occupancy, (b) Uses requitilng, use permits: The followiaig uses ere 'it perixtitted subject to securing a ease Per lin each case: (1) Segregation of honaesites, pursuant to the 'req,uir& menta of sectiol t 24,sM; .. . uses, p�:rsuamt (2) Segrega4aon o� agricultur al processing ... to the tiegvuremente of soctidn, Zd-55. I r 13.4-2 tl (c) Minimum lot area required: Minimum .lot area shall not be less than -ten (10) acres. (d) ,Front yard setback: Minimum front yard setbAck shall be fifty (50) feet from the cznter line of the road; except where the road ;is classified by the county as.a. Federal Aid, Secondary Road, the minimum building setback require- ments shall be fifty-five (55) feet from the center line of the road. (e) Side and rear yard required: Minimum side and rear `1, shall not be less, than ten (10) feet. '(Ord. No. 1750, § yard 8-31-76; Ord.; No.. 2161, § 22 1145-80) Sec. 24-162. SR -1 (suburban Residential) Zone. (A) Uses pE M -1— d dwelling POr parcel, not including (1) One single-family tents, trailers or mobile hornea; (2) Accessory buildings pertinent to the permiVP-d, uvea, (3) Agricultural uses excepting a minimum lot area of thousand five hundred sixty (43,560) (square forty-three feet to be devoted to residential use and the following kept on the additional requirements for each animal premises (a) For each horse or head of cattle or s vine over horse thousand one hundred _ one year of. age twenty-five (8;125) square feet! (b) For each sheep or goad --Two thousand MON) square feet. (B) [Uses requiring use p iThe following uses (are us P ermitted] subject to securing ,nae permit in each. case'. (Y) Golf courses and co blic usesb including churches, fire- (2) Public and quasi -p playgrounds, schools and parks and playgt houses, hospitals, Public stilit� buildings; Sales tract office. Section. 24-33'shall apply except - (G) [Site requirements:] ng lot width and lot areal be lot area per dwelling unit shall not . (X:) The minimum the provisions of section 203 less than one acre, notwithstanding, lot width shall not be less than one (2) The minimum hundred thirty (130) feet, the provisions 10 8 3 76) § 24-53 'notwithstanding. (Ord. No. 1150, i 1 i�,,4_ ApPENDYx 13.5 CHICO"AREA GREENLTNE POLxCY VI, CICO AREA GREENLINE In addition to the other policies of the Butte County General Plan, P n ; the followingpolicy is a plicable to the Chico Area. Lan se a A. PURPOSES`• ones define the5limitsyofxfuture urban The pu'rp p n development which a) To define t ma occur on agricultural lands in the Chico Area ofButte Y County, team xatection of agricultural b; To provide for the long-term p resources of the Chico Area of Butte County. c) To m'cigte the threat to agricultural resources posed by urban encroachment i=nto and conversion of agricultilral lands in the Chico Area of Butte Count g County - d) � •, ultural/urban conflicts �.n the Chico. - d to reduce � ric ATea of Bute County. e) To establish County cooperationnwith the landsolocated in land use planning of urban anagricultural; in the Chico Area of Butte County. f) To identify urhan development limits in or neat agxi- culttixal lands within the County's Chico Area Land Use Plan by use of a certain bold dashed boundary; line. g) To establish a certain and clear policy text for Butte County's'Chico Area Land Use Element which will enhance and uphold the aforementioned boundary hne.and policy text. h) To establish certain land use designations for the Chico>Atea ofButte Count), fr- n11 ty .n conformity with the aoe mentioned boundary lime and policy text. B. PINI7INCS- The Boardof. S►.;perviSors of Butte County hereby find and determine that+ possesses valuable, agricultural lands with a) Butte County p g , rime and non prime soils and one o. t est. growing climats, in, the world; b) Agriculture and its,r businesses are critical to Butte County's economic stability. Inappropriately IP urban dev`E:lop'm:nt in the Chico Area of BtItte County threatens 1 the continued economic viability and cultivation practices of commercial agriculture. in the Chico Area. ubstantially c) At present, the Chico Area of Butte COu ty is s surrounded by agr ctultural lands on: northwestern,,we5taevit`al and southwestern borders `These agricultural. lands play role in the overall economic vitality to County and 'must. of But be, conserved. d) The Chico Area of Butte County has experienced the continued convrsio "y agrruitural lands to urban andsubur�aar► develop menu UnIt8slt,he bond 'Use Element of the Butte "County General Elan; PAS it pertains to the Chico Aria, is mended to • an a clear policy teat, 'it is include an urban lith line a County wi11 continue to • i Cou y likel tla.t the Chico Area of Butteutuxe, kith tignificant experience such conversionn flue f adverse effects on the V,t,+"il,ty of agricultural uses in the ChicoxArea. 13�a-1 Y e) It is critically important to the citizens of Butte lishC order Greenlineto ounty that the Chico Area lands an ensure conserve agr. Chico Ghio'ria of atotal to cultural viability gricultural lands in the destroyed bypremature and inapP p e not permanently conversion to non-agricultural uses, Chico Area of Butte County ;a i l 1. fl, The population of the The City of Chico General Plan estimates continue to grow- an urban area population range of from 5`6,500 to 71,100 areawill result in urbanitiation ineirban by the year 1995, which the Chcoarea. There exist in the to 1,600 acres in of u'p ve a ricultur,al soils Chaco Area of Butte County product_g suburban dortingmfuture already committed to future urban and soils capable of Supp _ as well as less productive soils urban and limitline llylocatedveasterly.OfSuch the urban are generally loc • ,, limit line is by this ordinance. Unless an urban agricultural lands established established to protect uncommitted productive it is likely, based upon in the Chico Area of Butte County, . future urban and suburban growth will ted: historical trendtowards commitnot ' which be those lands ch are already and suburban land thati to or capable of supporting urban g) It is the desire of the people 7f Butte County ned future urban land development required to bec�irerted and the Chico Area snail population growth in Accommodated.on the Urban Side of the C.itico Area Greenline: land development Such dirmodation of u�ibain ec.' ion and accom hereby declared to be an essential component the Agrpcuent of the con- isSide of - ervato-, of eltural • total uses an s : It Is further th' desire of the pet�ple the Chico Area eenl ne. _ officials of the County of FUtte of Butte County that public of of Chico in order City • cooperate with public offacial:s of the accommodating p fanned population oses of a r�cultural lands in s P61icy i s pvi - he Chico Area trowththis g g f conserving tonents are carr zed out. _, .. of Nothing herein; is intended to relzeVe the prop in the Chico Area t .all proper future urban land developments assessments, fees or charges required in order h urban land to such and reasonable o fund the cost of providing public .serices to developments Or the residents thereof. Ce DgPINITIONS otic" the following words and phrases For, purposes of this p Y� ascribed to them by this respectivelV, shall have the meanings c section: � 1� �+ means that geographic area shown. on the Chico Area a art of the Butte County Land Chico Area. Land Use Plan clap s p Cha Use Blement-. IL -9-2 b) "Official Chico Area Greenline Maps" means the Chico Area Land Use Plan and that large scale map certified by the Planning Director and on file in the Planning Department office located at '7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. c) "Chico Area Greenline" means the boundary line: established by this pbYicy and delineated on the Official Chico Area Greenline Map which line separates urban/suburban land uses from agricultural land uses in the Chico Area. d) "Butte County Land Use Element," shall refer to the Butte County General Plan Land Use. Element,; which element was adopted by the Butte County Board of Supervisors on October 30, 1979, and as amended from time to time. e) "Agricultural" land use designation and "Agricultural Uses" mean the "Primary Uses" and the "Secondary Uses" set forth in the '"Or`chard`and Field Crops" land' use designation of the Butte County Land Use Element as it existed on March 1 1982, and as amended from time to time. f) "Agricultural Residential'" land use designation means theA ricultural Residential"' land use designation of the Butte Count Land Use Elementas it existed on March 1, 1982, and as amended from time to time.. g) "1TrbanlSuburban Land Uses" means al.l lawful uses of land (including agricultural and agricultural residential :Land uses) h) "Agricultural Side of the Chico Area Greenline" shall refer to lands within the Chico Area which of the Chico Area Greenline. are located westerly i) "Urban Side of the Chaco Area Greenline" shall refer to lands within the Chico Area which are located easterly of the Chico Area Greenline. D. ES'TAELIS Hh1ENT OF CHICO A REA GREENLTNE The General Plan of the County of Butte is hereby amended as fo11ows a There is hereby established the Ch.cb Area Greenline wh7.ch shall be located as shown on the Official. Chico Area Greenline Map. The Official Chico Area Greenline Map is incaiparated into this policy, by this reference. b Should a dispute arise or ambiguity appear as to the et location, of the Chico Area Greenline; the ;following 'rules shall be applied in determining the exact location of such line: # 1) The Greenline shall be identified. in the Chico Area'Land Use Plan with a bold dash line as shown on the Chico Area Land t.1se plan Map. The Greenline is specific; large scale maps certified by the 'Planning Director shall be consulted in the, t event of a di pate: 2) Where the Greenline is inideated as app'roxxmately following street, ailey, railroad right-of-way, creek or channel lines, the centerline of such street, alley, railroad right-of-taay, creek or channel lines shall be construed to: o be the location of the Greenline 13;5w3 i 3) Where the Greenlne is indicated as approximately line shall be construed to following a lot line, such lot be the location of the Greenly is not subdivided, and 4) With respect to p'rope'rty that c Chico Area Green'line bisectssameosoindicated by Where the loca `ion of the Greenline, unless the 'official Chico Area Greenline Map, dimensions shown upon the on the determined by the use of the scale appearing shall be Official Chico Area Greenline Map. he boundary 'and c) The Chico banArea Urban Sideeof1ne theshall ChicocArealGreenline" between the '"Agricu.ltural Side ofthe Chico Area Greenlrnpccur on the Residential land uses may d) Agricultural Agricultural, Side of the Chico culturaleResidentinline alwuse �on for those areas designated mine Map. the Official Chico Area Greenli (d), of this rovided for in subsection e) Except as Agricultural Side of the Chico the Ag section, all land use on of Agricultural land uses Area provided by thelorchardsandoField Cropdesi nation. as provided y Brea Greenline cUse f) Land uses on the Urolicieseof the eLand Element and be by the p in s}ia:ll guided the applicable urban land, use designation as, contained the Land Use ,Element, E. ESTABLISHMENT OF' GHICO AREA LAND USE POLICIES ich in order to minimize or elimcversiOA.tonate the eurban/suburbarse effects n land premature and inappropri ateon to cause to the agricolicies dherebyhadopted. uses are likely areultural Area of tutte County, the following p nt of the- c County General But as pant of the Land Use Eleme e County a lcable to the Chico Area of `Butt to conserve n Pla ) . of Butte County :it shall be the pol7cy in hofCtheo and protect for,AgriculturaleU8A0rtcult�ral 5idends situated on the � are Chicorea Area Greenline. do accommodate Chico Are. of 'Butte' County Z) It shall be the policy, Ch future urban/suburbari growth that intheUrbaurs in nSide cofAthe of Butte County on lands situated Chico Area Greenliie, F RESERVED. 4 G. 7,ONING ,REG=TIONS rA) In order to carry out icultilraleSide ofs Of ltheoChico Ag properties located on the subsen;uently be zoned or rezoned in Area Gireenlirip shall accordante with this pallcy as follows: zoned A�S x-10 on the effective All areas which are 1) th this policy deemed Cot�sstetit wi' date of this policy are At�riC`eTeafLerRbelaexonecl 2) All areas which are. thou'n as Greenline Mopall h on the Chico Area 13.54 to a consistent zone or a{cvnditional•ly consistent zone, as the same were listed as of �t:�rch 1, 1982; in the Ag�iculturaa S Residential Land Use Designation of the 'BuheeButte tCounty r~�� Phan. Rezoning'sha l be.accomplished sc i • annex prescribes by law• Board of Supervisors in them eXGept as spec`i 3) After the effective a), noo,fproperty on the Agricultural � Pied in 'hit subsection (a) A 2 ,. the Chico Area Greenline shall be rezoned to an A- Sxde 01� district calssifidation. 4-S, cr .A-10 zoning, Lide 4by A11 lands located on the Agricultur hesabovef(a)eshallL Area Greenline that are not affected eafter be coned or rezoned, consistent tsrith this policy- hereafter her shall be done by, the Butte County Such toning or re_onon� r •� and in p the exercise of 1_s aXscretion of. Su ervzsors tnrouoh prescribed by lair. the manner p �,-40, K ani-160 b) 'All references to A-2 �,-5', A-'10, A-V0, as well as references to the con. istent and g d:istticts, applicable to the zoning consistent designations ap. conditionally • rat Residential Land Use Design.�tiO11, shall. he dee;red Agricultural and Use designations and terms as to mean those same coning defined in Chapter 24 of the Butte' County Code as the sane d 1`952 and as amended f 'om time to time. read on �1arch 1, o legal lot of record .seated (�It a l'eaA�result existing nc which, r c) Any ide o z the Chico Area Green. i t cox f(,,,t- n wra. th the min- cultural S otic} does no Of the adoption of this p district designatan assigned imum size required by the toning on forming lot and shall be by this p olicy shall be a none nonconforming titled to the benefits and the restric�zons of en y 1a�r Lots as es tabTiShed b, olic�• shall be deened to d) Nothing contained in this P orictiiltural nuisance ordinance prohibit the application 0, the ao --� ntw` Ordinance number 22Sg) o' the a;�ricultur�.l (Bu��e Cou , s'e regat'on ordinance (Sectionas2the4sar�e rtati•Sno�fe isChattor 2�tgof the Butte County code) hereafter be ametded.. - H, ZONING dONSiSTBNCY AND_TIMING 1, The Chico {Area Larid UsePlbJ'eefuture5land�Lise patterns. i designations which depict deszxbetWee general Plan policies State law requires consistency transition of and zoning. In order to encourage an order stern, the County land use from the existing to the desired P with.the shall undertake to rezone those lanns°ese areaslshall be Zoning o'f need , Chico Area land Use plan: ns'urate showing upgraded thraeigh time kith a c°mme rovided for in the `Butte adequate services, drainage, etc as County Land Use Element. Zoning in these areas to Less than the m.ixx mum p z s i s General ell L pro foe• 1ntheeButte Gountygnations shall considered consistent with 1.Development (page 30)" Policies directed at Orderly` _ shall virtue' of P • a es 33-34y: Px oxI Ana AoLgidentlal Develo meat CP g capacity, be giver, to those areas with infrastr structure 13.55 I . AMENDMENT AND REVIEW The above Greenline policy may be amended as follows 1) By a maj"ority votr of the Butte County 'Board of Super- visors provided, however, that if any such amendment involves a change'in the location of the Chico Area Greenline that the Board of Supervisors shall approve such amendment only aftbr the adoption of written findings of fact, supp ored substantial evidence in the public record,, showing. b su ' al y . e a ricultur a " That the public benefits of converting the, g land to urban land substantially outweigh the public benefits of continued agricultural production; and b) There are no other urban or suburban lands reasonably available and suitable for the ,proposed development 2) The Gr�enline .is established for the period covered by the General Plan, 20 years To insure that land use needs of the Chico Area are being met, the location of the FoTline shal be reviewed and evaluated every five (s) y, ea this purpose the Board of Supervisors commits itself -to 3Tiitiate such a review at the time interval specified above. 1 .. + han ;gab, ;or amendments shall be made only upon the findings `7• time from petitioningpthe Board 1 specified 1 subsection 1 above: Nothin in this otic shal prevent an individual at any of Supervisors for a general Planamendmententjti�:h�thenapplicable in the location of the Greenlsne laws and, policies of the County of Butte and State of California. 3): Sttl.dy* Area No . 1 generally known as th Le11-tluir area 1or_ated in northwest The area S tl;c Sotttilex•n pncit:ic Railroad Tracks, on Chico (bounded on the wast by the ,_o&Itjj by East k!entie alta Hensj't V ;i .�4t!!t �.�%lnishdesi<uatedAasm"a tivenu� "Study • Bell Road and and on t'?�c north b) },r, •►n addition to that shown on the Arei1 ho . 1'� This designation shall . reap. This rest tte4" Hated as a Study Area No. Chico Area Land Use Plan 1 shall be subject to the sjaecial diol icx i 4 j' �`r,�a=sori }`vote, may revise a, The Board of Super�v�sors, bs *�3. the C' p G,.tFenl,inc sv as to place the the location of hco A"�* Study Area No 1 On, the Urbti-t Side r,f tj�., Chico AYe'� Grecnt�ne{ z 13 5 6