HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-45B GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 13 OF 21..... .
11
ADMINISTRATIVE
DRAFT
ERV RONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT'
0ENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
APPLICATION t84-45
(MOOBERRY - BURRELL)
FOR THE
BELL--MUIR PROPERTY
Prepared for.,
Butte Colont
aA
u
P�bruar,t 19a�
Prepared- by
. 'INCORPORATED
EARTIi METRICS
650 COuan Road
turl.ingate � CA 94010
(415) 697-1103
r
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
-e
v
PREEFACE.... ..., ........... :....,.. ... ..i........
1,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .. _ ..................... .....
1-1
1.1Location and Character of Project Site.... ... ..... ...
1-1
1.2 Project Characteristics................i................,
1-1
1.3 Intended Use of the EIR...................._.....
1-5`
2.
SUMMARY... ... .... ... ,... ... ..... ... .... .. ....
2-'1
Mitigation Measures....:
2-1
2.1 Project Impacts and ...............
2.2 Alternatives Evaluated......... .....
2-1_,.
'
2.3 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved.;..........:...
2-1
3.
,ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING', SIGNIFICANT ENVIRO*IENTAL EFFECTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES RECOMMEINDED To MINIMTZE THE
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ...............��..'... .........,,.........
3.1=1
3.1 Land. Use and Planning ...............................;.....
3.1-1
3.2 Traffic and Circulation.... .................:Y......,.....
3.3-1
3.3 Geology and Hydrology..............Y.;....................
3.4 Public Services and Utilities..............,.........
4.
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT-. ..............:.....:...
4-1
4.1 No Project- Alternative........+:........:.....-..,...-....
4-1 -
1pj
4.2 Expanded Project Area Alternative..... ..............
4-1'
5
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF
THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED....i.......... ..,.............i:..i..
5�1
6.
GROWTH INDUCING 3MPAGTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ......
6-1
7.
CUMiJLATIVE IMPACTS...,:...... .... i .... a .. . s . ... i ....,.:.. . Y L 44 . .:
76-i
8.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT TERM USES OF MAN'S
ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF
LONfi'TERM PRODUCTIVITY...+....: ..:................i. ...:,.;....
8.:�'
XpRk1VERSIBLE ENIt'IRONMENTAL CHANGES AND IRRETRIEVABLE
1
CC�bh IIT►QENT OF P98OURCES : , .' .... ...... i i .. 4 ..... ..:.. 01 .. 4 il 4 ..
9-1
10;M@IFI-.sCTS
NOT FOUND. TO ;BE SIGNIFICANT. i . 01 01.....01 01 . :.... ... .....
10-1
11.
f1kf.'E9ENCES': PUBLICATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED.. i .. ...... ► 01 01 .;
11-1'
12.
PREPARERS . ...i , �
OF THIS REPORTiii .....................,...............
12-
i
Page....
Section
13. APPEN7TCES........... ..........,..... ......... ..... ..... ..
13-1'
13.1
Initial study...........,,................. ..................
13-2
13-6
13.2
Letters in Response to Notice of Preparation ..............
13-14
'
13.3
List of Parcels Involved in the General Plan Amendment....
13-16
13.4
Applicable Zoning Regulations ...... ...e ...................
13-1`9
13„5
Chico Area Greenline Pol,icy..... ..........;.....;.........
ii
■
IV
LIS:' OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Setting
1.1-1
Regional of the Project Site ...................»..
1-2
1.1-2
LocalSetting of the :Project Site ............................
. Sept
1-3
1.1-3
Location of Parcels ,Involved in the ,General Plan Amendment....
3.1-1
General Plan Land Use Designations in the Project Vicinity....
3.1-2
3.1-2 '
Zoning Designations in the Project Vicipity..................... :
3.1-1}
the Chico Area Greenline
3.'1-9
3.1-3
Location 6f .................»........
3.2-1
20 Year Circulation System Improvement Program 1980 to 2000...
3.2-3
3.2-2 '
Recommended Street System at M11 Buildout.... r ..............
3.2-4
3i2-3
.2-3
Count Buttey lenient Diagram ..............'........'
. Circulzto E
3.2-8
1
1
1
1
1
-
1
k
LIST OF TABLES
EASE
Table
2.1-1
Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..........
2-2
Descriptio» of Level of Service for Intersections........••• ..
3.2-2
3,2-1
'
3.2--2
Existing Levels of Service at Intersections in. North Chico
3.2-5.
During the P.M. Peak Hour Period...:..••, .......
3.2-3
Existing and Projected Traffic. Volimes on Major Streets
in the Project Area ..... ......
- 3:2-1j
Estimated Future Daily Traffic Increases Associated with the
3.2-10
Proposed Project :.................>....... ....... .......
r
3;v
PREFACE
The Butte County
Planning Department has determined that an Environmental
Impact Report is required for the proposed General Plan Amendmen t related to
the Bell-Muir Property. Under the California Environmental Quality Act, the
purpose of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to provide objective
information to public decisionmakers and the general public regarding
implemnttion. Butte
potential environmental effects resulre�Bcingfromadverseprojectimpaetseorac
onside
rr
County can then :institute methods of
alternatives to the project.
This Draft Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for Butte County in.
conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) as
amended. The degree of specificity required in an Environmental Impact Report
corresponds to the degree of specificity involved in the underlying activity-
-corresponds
proposed General 'Plan Amendment does not involve construction of project's,
therefore; the an presented in this report is more general than the
analysis Which could be required if the project were a specific development
proposal. CEQA, Guidelines section 15146 states the following regarding the
degree of specificity of an Environmental Impact Report:
(a) An EIR on a eonsteUetion project will necessarily be more detailed in
the specific effects Of the project, than will be an EIR on the
adoption of a local general plan or comprehensive zoning ordinance
because thP:effeets
o.: construction can be predicted with greater
accuracy,
(b) An EIR on a project such as the adoption or amendrent of a
comprehensiveing ordinance or a local general plan should focus on
the secondary effects expected to-follow Prom =the adaption, or.
amendment, but the EIR need not be as detailed as an EIR on the
specific construction projects that might follow.
The'ResoUrces Agency of California has adopted amendments to the Guidelines
'environmental Impacts Reports, whicharationooftantEIrpr6e heR
changes in
for ecent which addresinaoi
ses only
CEQA. The EIR guidelines allow the p p Planning Department identified a
significant project effects. iluttt. County Plan
number of areas in which the project could have significant effects on the
,` environment, including Land use, planning; traffic, soils, drainage,
' 1, Initial Ludy.
economics public services and iItilities (see Aipendix 13•
Also included in the amended guidelines (Section 15126 (e)) is the provision
that "the discussion of mitigation measures shall distinguish i�lin the
the
measures that are proposed by project proponents to be ineluded in the bly dtePro& tt
and Other measures which are not included, but couldbmeasuresPeab6naretommendeda to
t reduce adverse impacts". AecotKiingly, all mitigation
within this EIR. are not presently included in the project Uhl
otherwise
specifically noted. Where appropriate, this, EIR incorporates by
documents that are readily available to the general public, In
section '15150 of the Guidelines.
This Environmental I d Use gap, designation for the Bell=Mui'r Pro
' mpact Report (EIR) evaluates the impacts of converting
fromeagriculturain` 'low�densi�y resident aliases and propanes mitigation
effects.
�.
meanures to reduce'significant1 s;µ
V
i PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1i LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF PROJECT SITE
The properties involved in the proposed General Plan Amendment are located in
unincorporated Butte County, adjacent to the western side of the City of
Chico, California. The affected area involves approximately 270 acres of the
400 acres •.iithin the area bounded by Bell Road, Muir Avenue, Alamo Avenue,
Henshaw Avenue, East Avenue,
athethe^southern
Pacific
e presentedRailroad
intracks.
Figures 1�.1 1
regional and local setting ofpaojeetarea ar
and i.1-2, respectively. The project area and affected parcels are identified
in Figure "1.i-3. The affected parcels are listed in Appendix '13.3 by
Assessor's Parcel Number and acreage•
Tb6 project used for residential and agricultural purposes.
Portions of theacurrently
projeis areahe. been
subdivided
ueexisting bdiv ddnto one acre parcels for
residential uses, which is inconsistent
g General Plan Land
the: area.
Use and zoning requirements in, However, the majority of the project...
area is developed with walnut orchards and other agricultural uses on larger
parcels..
12
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
County General Plan Land
The proposed project is-anco�reea Greenlinent to the tteThe amendment would changeUse .
Map and a revision to the Chi
"Agriculture: Orchard and Field Crops."
the county's land use designation from s�^
„ e , ndmen�tural - Residential" (one
acre minimum' parcel size) . "--Alxhough" thAn;, t �,�
on he proposed Urban; Agricultural
(five acre minimum parcel size,) to Ur is only an administrative
action ,and would not involve construeti'eneour a private property
e
rty arners to
Residential land use designation d
subdivide existing p
arcels for ,resi.denti:al development. Approximately,�3� "
residential units currently exi8t in the project area. The existing land use for a
-
designa'tion would allow for the construction of an additional 20 units,
total 'of 50 residential. units. with.. buil
dont of the area.
The proposed General Plan Amendment would allow for the construction of
asap,. oximately f0 the aresidential units for a total of 3Q0 residents
al units,
with buildout
Count at"Butte Greenline, which is known as
Development of additional urban uses �n hQ project area would require
' V, relocation of the City of Chico/ y
the Chico Area Greenling. The relocation at the Greenling would be considered
a primary part of the proposed project because the existing Greehline dofines'
Protection of
tin the Chico Area of Butte Counhe limits of future urban development and provides long terse
agricultural resources t`. Tho project area
lies within an area defined as the Chico Area Greenline "Study Area Numb-zr 1"
(See Section 3� r
landUse Plann .ng,` Applicable Plans and policies) .
Net development allowable xtension of a sewer, tinder the requirements of the proposed General Plan
Amendment pme require an etrunk line from the City of
the
Chico to the Project area to min vdze the additions of more rit' hes intosewer
groundwater from new septic tanks: The decision to connect to the city
system or to allow septic tanks will be made after completion of a sewersage
P t indicates a tsewer connection is
study how being p
re aced: If' the repos
1 �1
m
2. SUMMITRY'
2,1 PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 11EASURES
The investigation conducted for this report included an examination of the
environmental impacts. The major project impacts are summarized in Table
2.1-1. The significance of each impact is noted along with the required or
recommended mitigation measures. The significance of each impact with and
without mitigation is also noted. The following impact categories are used in
Table 2.1-1 beneficial impact; (NS) not significant impact; (PS) potentially
or possibly significant impact (an impact which cannot be 'precisely assessed
at this times and (S) significant adverse impact.
2.2 ALTERNATIVE EVALUATED
The No Project Alternative and the Expanded project Area Alternative are
evaluated in Section 4 of this report.- Under the No Project Alternative, most
of the impacts of the proposed project would be avoided or substantially
reduced. However, the. No project Alternative may not be a long term
alternative due to certain existing and planned growth inducing activities
Which will affect residential demand in the projeCtL The txpanded
Project Area Alternative would involve a larger area and additional parcels
allowing development of 330 new residences (60 more residences than would be
allowed under the proposed project). This alternative would incrementally
increase the significance of most impacts- However, this alternative would be
considered more logical and. stable than the condition presented
by the
proposed project. _
2.3 AREAS
OF CONTROVERSY/ISSUES TO BE RESCIVED
.._ arming,,. epa has
ied hydrology an and public
services d Use.
The Butte Cau'�iity Pl d publie services
V circulation; xa.sr��r d �d� ' :significant envirot�n:ental 1!![Acts to
as areas of controversy and potentially signs
be addressed _n ;this EIR (see Appendix .1). Public concern in response to
.� radix 13
the information, provided in this Draft ETR' 14ill be addressed in the Y.,Inal EIR.
The primary* issues to be resolved ,involve interpretation of the `Greerz �e
Policy as it issues
to "Special Study Area NiJmber 1" and determination of the
need for specific setter and storm drainage .infrastructure in the proj+act area
to mitigete nitrate contamination of Area groundwater
r
r
� 2-1'
TABLE 2.11. SUGARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES'
MITIGATION MEASURES
(Significance After
IMPACT
Mitigation)
(Significance)
LAND USE. 'PLANNING APPLICABLE
PLANS AND POLICIES
(S)
The proposed prosect would encourage;
Not mitigable.
the development of approki.mately 270'
new dwelling units in an area of
agricultural laid and would
prime
increase the frequency and magnitude
use compatibility
'
of adverse land
impacts with agricultural activities:
(S)
Thep proposed project would' alter
ro sed pr
This impact is the subject of this ,,...,
EnVironmental Irapa et Report. (PS)
planned land uses in th e project area:
land use
A ,A,,'iz - +
"_ �� �
The resulting pa ttern of
designations would not be considered
�,1<'. 4 , �t �+�
y_'(�+CJ r a ,
logical or stable. However, the
to tre consistent
h4'' .✓r �'"Y.1
a"-'
subject site appears4i
with the Five site designation criteri
� MY
�" "
for the proposod'%&Agnation. (PS)
v
Development in the projeot area would
Not tnitigable.
not be consistent with the citY's
development it'
intent to encourage
other locations in the Chico Urban
Not'mitigable. (S)
The Amendment of the Chico Area
Greenline would foster population
growth and would remove a constraint
(S)
growth in the project area,
on 11.
or (B)
Tho proposed'General Plan Amendment
None required recommended.
would increase the suppler of `and
competition among higher priced
residential units. (B)
(Adverse
CJS Not Significant (Adverse)
ant
S Potentially Signif is
cant .(Adverse)'
PS
B ;ganef tial
_._
(CCNTiNUED)
2-2
f
TABLE 2.1-1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT 324PACTS AND MITIGATION ME-USURES
�A
MITIGATION MEAS'„RES
IMPACT (SigniPicance After K�
(Significance) Mitigation)
.TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION'
Additional traffic generated by tb a The City of Chico rand the County
project would add to the volumes of Butte should evaluate the need
:presented in the Chico Urban Area
to realign unconventional inter-
Transportation Study and would sections, in the project area as
incrementally decrease levels of land detiulopment intensifies.
service at conventional and unconven Right of ways should be reserved as
'* tional int rseetiarxs in Northern Chicoi soon as practical.. to ;rake realign-
(PS) ment of these intersections
possible after development occurs.
Special attention should be given
to the intersection of ;Bell Road
with Cussick Avenue. If feasible,
Road should be realigned to
Bell
meet West Shasta Avenue. In
conjunction with planned. improve
ments identified ;in the CATS, left
turn pockets should be constrtxcted,
- _ and on street parking shouldbe
eliminated on East Avenue between
Connors Avenue and SspliAbade, and
on Esplanade, between C gosen Avenueand, Rio r n
�i
cevelogersnshould bdo enue 4' ��titure
e required ono ,
contribute funds '.to construct tc�'a 1 "`�
zV'11
way improvem is idenl,.ified in the ;.►
GATS.: s�
GEOL
OGY/HYDROLOGY:.
A
shbould be
Site soils and geology present 4 Soils engineering studie asisrequired on a case by Gase
moderate shringlswellpatential
�.�
moderate allowable soil pressure for future development. Specific
low erosion potential and seismic engineering design and construction
engineereshould benincorpo ated,as-
CPS) �} ��,.
hazards : ,
needed, into the project design.
NS' Not Significant (Adverse)
S Significant (Adverse) . #
ria
y Significant (Adverse) B Beneficial
�
P5 Potenl:.
'( CONTINUED)�,Gx�
�, 2r3
3•
EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT OR POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT:
EXISTING :SETTING IMPACTS AND 'MYTIGATION 2�ASURES
1 LAND USE` PLANNING APPLICABLE ITS AND POLICIES ,
EXISTINGSETTING
Land Land in the project area is used for agricultural and residential
Uses. but other
purposes. The primary agricultural uses in the area are orchards,
uses such as pasture land and vineyards are present -I Residential uses are
located throughout the project area. Clusters of dwelling units are located
in four locations (1) along the West side of Rodeo Drive; (2) along the (west
lon 'the south half of Aorto `Avenue; and (4) ;along
end. of Muir Avenue,: (3) a 8. _
Bell Road near,Guyan Avenue. f `�
projectareaarea are similar to those Within the project
Land uses surrounding the prof
area; however, residential uses increase in frequency and density to the south
and east. The main Southern pacific Transportation Company railroad line
forms the project site's western boundary. The railroad tracks are located
parallel to State Route 32. Industrial and commercial land uses have been
developed along both sides of State Route, 32 west of the project
a• Large
�f parcels north of the project area are used for agricultural purposes.
ricultural Character of the Pro Pat Area and_Vicinitt. The project area and.
vicinity contain highly productive soils. These soils and other factors, such,,
as climate and the availability of inexpensive Water, combine to make this c gin,
area and much of Butte County highly conducive to agrieul'ture;
.''I0
�... o,
The continued viability of agriculture, the county's biggest, industry, is a
vital component of the county's economy. Both the City of Chico and the Butte
County General Plans recognize the importance of agriculture and address- the
issue with specific land use planning policies and procedures. A primary land
use planning tool, the city/county Greeniine policy', is described in the
following discussion ruder General Plan policies.
and agricultural lands on the l of �
The character of the agricultural lands Within the project
, Eir ea
typ
edge, of urban arem
areas. The inerental directia d Wr �46k
B.
indirect impacts of urban activity are sffeeting the economic viability of �+� , v
agricultural production: The follwing direct and indirect impacts affect the w .4,
viabilityof agriculture on the prof ct atter smaller parcel siz s' and � .
increasing Property values encourage more economically Pr impacts
uses
Vandalism) a p 5-.�'
than agriculture; urban nuisances (such as vandal ��
agricultural activities (such as the application of pesticides, dust, Weis
and smoke From burnings) all reduce the compadiothers havenotbil'Aty of ultur Prevented uses in
However these impacts an
an urbanised area. i,
roductive Use of the project area for agricultural purposes to the present
h` r
p � a
time.
General Plan Land Use Desir�nations,, Butte County1-8 Chico Area Land Use Plan
designates the project site For ro0rehard and Field Crops" uses with fiveeacre �'` V11
BnA 141
�
minimum parcel sizes. )�d.st;ng General. Plan land use designations.. in
i project vicinity are Presented in Pigure 3.1�-1. One single family diced ag
For on site employees 3s' the required
Per parcel with additional housing uses in
maximum density r properties suUjeet "to this designation. Primary
vol�v6P ouitivation harvest; storage, processing] ,bald and
this `zone�w h
_ �crops: The five
distlibution of all plant drops, :especially 'annual... food
F
R E Y��`
RURAL RE
LOW DENSITY RES.
AGRICULTURE
MEDIUM DENSITY RES. ARTERI:AI. -
RFA'COAi. `ror COLLECTOR
�t
_r..., OR STREE
�BiWI SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
GREENL'INE
ORCHARD AND
YIELD CROP
1
CFrE ++ = � 0
k
r ♦
3r 25Wj 8E78ACK ,
r i BO t S/GfS -nF JY Y 32
x
IN
x
rMW
ebb NxcuR
3.1-� GENERAL 'PLAN I+AND USE
e th rnetrice
SCALA bESIGNATIONS IN THE'
1►i =.. 2Oi�0
PRO18M 'V'ICINIVI
3,.1.2
hether an are, should be subject to the
primary criteria for determining w -,
orchard and field crop designation are as follaas:
soil conditions well suited for plant crap operations;
u Z
- adequate water supply; or five
predominant Preel sizes or secondarysusesmoand
Of
d for crop ',P A
usP and secondary uses:✓
adjacent uses compatible with `primary.
Zoe, The project area is subject to the rhe rements of Countye Buttninge
Comprehensive 'Zoning Ordinance Number 175 to the project
indicates that the requirements of four zoning districts apply
area: (A-5) ABricla] ture —Cs -R) Suburban Residential, (A -R) Agricultural/hparels
Residential, ,ane(A-2LTD),,1imited General (see Figure 3.1-2).
Th
affected by the `prop�ised: General Plan Amendment wre13.4. PermI lithin, the A-5 itteduses
The; requirements of this zone are presented in Appendix
are consistent with the General Plan land use 'designation of "Orchard and
Field Crop.n The minimum lot area required is five acres.
Urban Develo ent Trends and Patterns. Urban developmentin the Chico area
has been directed with public and private in,•estment to properties within the
existing urban area and to locations north, south and east of the city core.
In addition to this investment, the Nitrate Action Plan for the Greater Chico
Urban Area also encourages developm ,s sanitary sews
the city
ent in the existing urban areaer system.
particularly within those areas served by
--County
and City of Chicd, 1985), area's
connections (Butte at development be limited in
without sewer conn
The Nitrate Action Plan recommends
' Two large private projects, Foothill Park and Rancho Arroyo, have been
PP Chico The Foothill Park development includes 551 acres
approved in northern Ch 1 -'percent- have been
of rea�.clentia] and office Udes (3,200 dWellinQ !un. is 15
sold ).and,244 acres of industrial uses (Palmer.i, 85). The
units, none �
The Ntancho Arroyo
project includes 750 acres of residential uses (4",600
' have been sold at this ti") and 25 acres of commercial. uses )(Palmer. i, 1965) \N?"
�3evelaprrent in southeast Chico has i11,
ncluded residential",
south of State Routes 32 and east of Park Avenue• k ,
so ac
commercial and 1 Uht
industrial uses, primarily lapping efforts the
/De els eY�t�o4"t "of Chaco has been -Jtie by. l.oca]..1? Hareve , large
__gX- :,° `� and he city/cou ►tdEGreebline.
' of sewer serv'icc connections, , Y development within the
parcels of underutil'!Zed land are vailable
'existing Chico Area Greenling.:. ,� '
i . 1. wCfi�' * .t
the population of the rico paLa as approxi e20 61},000 persons in after and
is estimated to increase to 102,000 by y
ear 000 and to 171,000 after
0 oration of the project vicinity defined as the
The e
o Urban Area Transportation
studbuila�preparedUt of �ine1982. neral P� population
to the Chico
Channel (Traffic Zone
Y
at�ea north and hest of Bell Ftoady Cussick Avenge,
30 of the Chico Urban Area Traf fie Study) is expected to increase from 2;006,
2000 (Chico (Urban Area TranSPortation Study,
persons to 20114 by the year ( ''
i,k� ,'� 4
General Plan Policies
CAlto AREA GRRENLIM.
The City of Chico an i Butte County "Mv es abl�.shed a
E
f future 'urban
boundary to define the Chico area of Butte County�ethe Greenii.neoon
is
agricultural lands in
3.1-3
m
e
delineated in Figure 3.1-1. The project site is not included within the: urban
1.,"The
boundary lime, but has'been designated as "Study Area Number.,'�,
designation would allow the County; Board of Supervisors Mby a simple majority 6+61
vote, 'coo revise the location of the Chico Area Gre+:nline so as to place the , t
project area (Stud
Greenline. However, the special policies and urban sine the Chico Area
procedures
es related to the
Y Area Number 1) on the
r
Greenlne, as describedin the Butte County General Plan, 'would apply to any. .�.
amendments related to this area. The Chico Area Greenline Policy is presented
in Appendix 13.5. The ;purposes .of the policy and procedures for amendment and
review of the Greenline are summarized as follows.
Purposes of Greenline Policy. The purposes of the Chico k.rea Greenline
are
a) To define the limits of future urban development Which may occur on
agricultural lands in the Chico area of. 'B"utte County.
b) To provide for the long term protection of agricultural resources of
the Chico area of Butte 'County.
c) To mitigate the threat to agricultural resources posed by urban
encroachment ;into and conversion of agricultural lands in tae Chico'
area. of Butte County.
d) To reduce agricultural/urban conflicts in the Chico area of Butte
County.
' e) To establish'County cooperation with the City of Chico inland use
planning of urban and agricultural lands located in the Chico area
of Butte County.
P) To identify urban development.or near agricultural lands
y� limits in.
within the count 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 Elraditt Which will "enhance and uphold the
aforementioned boundary line and.policy text.
,
h) To establish certain land use designations "for the, Chico area of
Butte County in conformity, with the aforementioned boundary line and
policy text.,
Procedures for Amendment of the Greenling Policy: The Butte County
Hoard of Supervisors may Amend th Chico Greenline Policy through a
majority vote after adopting Written Findings of fact, supported by
substantiaidence in the public record, showing the following:
l ev
�- (a) than the 'public benefits of convertin, the agricultural land to
urban landsubstantially outweigh the public benefits of continued
agricultural production; and
(b) there are no other urban ori suburban lands reasonable available and
suitable for the proposed devehopmerit.
3 «1-5
Procedures for Review of the Greenline Policy. The Greenline Policy
states that the location of the Greenline shall be reviewea and
evaluated every five yeare to insure that local land use needs of the
Chico area are being met. The t- first review of the policy is .due in
1987. However, the policy also states that an individual may petition
the Board of Supervisors for a General Plan Amendment, including a
change in the location of the Greenline, in accordance with the
applicable laws and policies of Butte County and the State of California
(see Appendix 13.5)
HOUSING ELEMENT. The City ,of Chico and Butte County have adopted Housing
Elements as part of their General Plans. The primary measure to implement the>
Housing Element is the General Plan Land Use Map, which reserves lands for
residential uses. The City of Chico Housing Element defines the., policiesi.
programs, and recommendations related to the provision of housing in the city.
The following text from the city+'s Housing Element was adapted to summarize
Chico housing policies.
In planning for the provision of housing for all present and future Chico
residents, the city's primary, goal is to provide for a variety of housing
types in an atmosphere 'conducive to the well being of city residents, and
particularly to provide for an adequate supply of housing ranging in cost
' to meet the demands of students, low and moderate income persons, the
special needs of the elderly and handicapped, and to provide an
Opportunity for first time home buyers. The Housing Element recognizes
' the constraints of today's housing market such as building costs, mortgage
interest rates, the preservation of agricultural land, provision of
sanitary sewers, storm drainage and streets,, the provision of other public
-- services such as police and fire protection, school facilities and parks,
concern for design, preservation of neighborhoods a,)d, historical
structures, as well as concern for energy conservation within housing
units. The Housing Element states that all of theme factors must be
' considered in concert with one another, 'and no single item can be
emphasized at the expense of another if Chico is to pursue a balanced and
realistic a Y '
Chico residentsa(Cit of eCtaicois1985}f housing for current and future.
The Butte County Housing Element .also defines policies, programs, and
recommendations related to the provision of h6using. The following polic?Les
apply to the project area.
A governmental framework shall be established and maintained which
iencourages and facilitates ;taaximum performance of the private
homebuilding industry 'in accommodating the housing needs of the countyls
current and projected population.
�^
Planning And zoning considerations affecting housing production shall be
applied in a manner which seeks to balance the need for protecting and
enhancing the environment With the need for housing at affordable
p"rices:
New housing construction shall be encouraged in 'locations with
reasonable proximity to centers of employment and shopping facilities,
31-6
i
1 ,and Which respect the conservation of energy. The private homebuilding
industry shall be encouraged', to give priority consideration to
developing within existing urbanized areas or in locations adjacent to
such areas (Butte County, 1980
IMPACTS
Land Uses. The 'proposed General Plan Amendment would not directly affect t
existing, developed land uses; however, it would encourage private property x
owners to subdivide prime agricultural land for residential development. �1 • ''
1 additional 2,70 nest residenti t the project area if 'I u
the project is approved (Tuttle 983) Without approval of the project, only
20 additional residential units could be developed in the project area. Thea �(J s
conversion of additional agricultural land to urban uses would increase the'4,1
frequency and magnitude of adverse land use compatibility impacts between they "-
remaining agricultural land and residential ases. The incremental and
cumulative loss of agricultural land is a significant local, regional, state
and national concern due to the importance of agriculture in the economy.
Agricultural production levels can be reduced to the point Where the economic
feasibility of agricultural activities or support services such as processing,
packaging and transportation can be threatened. Once regional production
reduces to certain threshold levels, support services may be relocated,
service costs may increase, or services may be reduceda In the Chico area,
the reduction of parcel sizes and the encroachment of urban uses has had an
incremental effect on reducing production levels. The proposed General Plan
y p y
parecelesizes �and by encouraging further applications for General Plan
so incrementally affect reduction b encouraging reduce
Amendments within the revised Greenline (see Section 4.2, Expanded Project
Area Alternative; Section 6, Growth Inducing Impacts; and a later discussion
,4
in -this: section rcZarding the Chico Area Greenline) . �
Planned Land Uses. The proposed project would revise the General Plan Land
Use and Zoning designations on the ;'fected parcels. The designation of
ad scent
j properties and properties almost surrounded by the fected parcels
Mould not be changed. This pattern would not be considered logical or, stable/
(see
deProject Section 6t Gr�th Inducing, In
The newcland usesignationwould�rban: icultal esideial" with
t
pa eouz�._ha. - the applicable `
one acre minimum reel sizes. sa3ndieated-that
t e _
zoningse
r
dstcts--areanot�suba be
..
aly different..�Cone a e.minmumutpa�entsixe)-(see,,
' Appendix i3.'4). The secondary impacts associated with these revisions to
planned land uses are the subject of this report..
fFour ieldof the
edfive rima criteria for determining whether theaor
pplteableand
p gnation a lies to the ed ewt area ' y�
pp p � (soil �
eonditionsi Vater'supplyr parcel sizes, and agricultural use). The only
criteria that may not apply is compatibility'`With adjacent uses. The project
area appears to be consistentwith t%,e five site designation criteria for the
Proposed Agricultural Residential designation which are listed as follows!
- beyond service areas of community 'waterand seater systems,,,,
less than 30 percent slopes;
3,1
- public
adjacent or near existing. roads or u#,ilties;
not within floodplains or ;known active faults; ;and
past official actions (indicates possible General Plan Amendment
Number 1" (Butte Count 198,9),. to the Greenline "Special Study Area
Y
activity, such as act-.vit related
� Y>
UrbanDevelopment Trends and Patterns. The proposod General Plan Amendment
and subsequent development of residential uses in the 'project area could
result in the development of up to 270 additional residential units and
approximately 648 persons (at 2.4 persons per residence). Development in this
area would not be consistent with the city's indent to encourage development
�hneproject area would exceed the population proothejr locations in the Chico Urban ,Area. Theaddition of 648 persons to
jeeted.�.n the Chico Urban Area
Transportation Study; Although the addition of the 648 persons to the project
vicinity, would not be considered a significant adverse impact, the expansion
of the housing market into prime agricultural land at the expense of focusing
development in other areas with existing sewer connections would be considered
a significant, adverse planning inconsistency (see following discussion on the
Chico Area Greenling).
Chic Greenline. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment would
require relocation of the Chico Area Greenline (Study Area Number 1). The
change is shown in Figure 3.1-3. This relocation of the Chico Area Greenline
must be supported by substantial evidence in the public record showing that
N ,
the public benefits of converting, the agricultural land to urban land
substantially outweigh thepublic' benefits of continued agricultural'
production; and that there are no other urban or suburban lands reasonably,,.li"""
available and suitable -for the proposed development.
These Findings are to be made by the County Board of Supervisors. The
amendment of the Chico Area Greenline could be considered growth Inducing by
' directly fostering population growth and by removing the Greenline as a-
constraint to growth (See Section 6: Growth Inducing. Y,�paets). Review of` the
Chico Area Greenlne Policy is still expected to occur in 5987.
gousinx. Theeo
p posed General Plan Amendment would increase the supply of
available residential land in the Chico Urban Area. The future residential
units would not be expected to serve students or low to moderate income
Persons, but would increase competition among higher priced units. At this
time, the conversion of this property from agriculturaluses to r'esidentia'l
uses may not be consistent with city or county housing policies, Which
indicate
rote the need ,to balance agricultural
preservation of land and/be the
nment with increasing the supply, of housing (ace the previous discussion
pertaining to urban Development Trends :and Patterns in this section).
9N=�lE,A DRES. The following significant adverse land use, and planning
impact!
in this gecti6h. would be uniLvdidable if the Project Were
approved:
�t
idenefNo: aProject Alternative is discussed in Section 4 of this
report. _ -
The proposed project Mould encourage the development of approximately
270 'hew dwelling units ,in an area of prime agricultural land and would
3.1=8
— Fri v �-
:
ILL
r
S•
' + 'tom � � :.ice � -`` '�' R � �».�\�i�'r\\\w �•'=r"
_
,7S WIDE SETBACK ✓ �. `� _
aorm SIDES OF N SP "r---
o�+newa EXISTING GEENLINE
tiOGd4444 REVI E GI2EENL�
�
�
FIGURE 3.1-3 LOCATION, OF THE GillCO
GABENLINE
SdALE
earth Metrics
r ,
t�
increase the freq=uency and magnitude of adverse land usro compatibility
'.
impacts With agricultural activities.
Development in the project area would not be consistent with the ity.'.s
intent to encourage development in other locations in the Chico Urban
Area.
The amendment of the Chico Area Greenling would foster
population growth
and would remove a constraint on growth in the project
vicinity.
{
r 4
U r
w. t
Mr i
s.
�
! .i ;, f, rt'. r� �,�F�'N � �r� rK.� .• �'..F �
7 � f'4, U !"fl N i��MiN"'
h
i
:
31-10
r�
i
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
EXISTING SETTING
Roadway stem. The roadwa system within the project area is presented in
Y
Figure 1.1-2. P,oadways serving the project area include: Muir Avenue, Bell
Roadsere Alamo
Avenue,,Guynn Avenue, Nord Avenue. The primary access roadways
serving the project area: are East Avenue,: State Route 32 and the Esplanade.
Muir Avenue, Bell Road, ,Alamo Avenue, Guyon Avenue and Nord Avenue are two
lane local roadways. East Avenue is a two lane arterial Which widens to four,
lanes just west of the Esplanade. East Avenue is the primary east/west
Arterial in northern Chico. State Route 32 is a two 'lane highway providing
access to Hamilton City, te 5, and southern Chico (see Figures
Orland, Intersta
1.1-1 and 1.1-2). State Route 32 is a Cour lane roadway southeast of First
Street. The Esplanade or State Business Route 99 is a primary north/south
arterial leading to State Route 99 which provides north/south access to Red
Bluff, Redding (to the north) and to Sacramento and Southern California (to
the
eas, including
soutChico.
downtown h
hC� The Esola.nade also provides access to commercial. ar
Most of the intersections in the project vicinity are the conventional, 90
degree anglf; type,
but some of the intersections have an angle of incidence
which is significantly less than 90 degrees. These intersections are
typically.,able to accommodate fewer vehicles n conventional intersections
than
and can
present unsafe maneuvering conditions. The following unconventional
/Nord,
intersections are located in the project area: Bell/MWLr, Bell
Bell/Guynn, Bell/Aloha, Bell/Alamo, Bell/Jones, Bell/Ellnaood, Bell/Butterfly,
Bell/Cussicls, East/Kennedy, Kennedy/State Route 32, and Rodeo/Nord.
Local Traffic Clnedyitiors aiid rdes a
evels of Service. Table�stingpiraffic volumes'
description of els of service for intersections4
on roadways within the project vicinity 'produce acceptable levels of service
(relatively free Plow). However, levels of service are being inorenentally
reduced by increasing traffic volumes at the following ;intersections:
East/Esplanade, East/State Route 99, East/Cohasset and :Esplanade/Cohasset (see
Figure 1.,,-2). Table 362-9 provides the existing P.M. `Peals hour levels of
service at these intetVictions.
Areawide Traffic Conditions., In 1982, the City of Chico,:prepared an areawide'
transportation study. For purposes of documenting the traffic setting, the
Chico tTrban Area Transit. Study (CATS), prepared for the city y tt
Associates, is hereby inoorporated by refe"renee.
The objective of the Chico Urbah Area Transportation Study was to predict
future ;traffic levels in the Chico area and identify transportation
improvements that`xill be neasssary to accommodate this future travel demand;
The CAWS information is constantly being updated and revised based upon 'the,
most current data available. Table 3,24- presents existing traffic Volumes,
year g000
and 'projected voles in the Figure 32-1 ghosts the major
improvements requir d by the year 2000: Figure 3.2-2 shows the major
improvements require! by buildout of the General Plan capacity. The following
are the primary improvements in the project area expected by the year 2000.
3+1-1
r
i
0
'�
transportation system, Which ensures' convenient access for all Chico
residents, serves the proposed patterns of land use, and minimizes disruption
of the environment. The discussions focus on: 1) the implementation of a
coordinated multi modal transportation system accommodating private and public
motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians; 2) the scenic enhancement of the
highway landscape,
3the
abatement of noise generated by transportation 4safety;and5)separatian of modal systems•Noise kasnot f
ound
r
to be a Significant environmental issue for the proposed project, according to
the InitLal Study prepared by Butte County (see Appendix 13.1). The following.
Policies summarize the Transportation Element
Insure that 8 Proposed circulation systems
- the existing and ion accommodate
the multi- modal traffic functions they are intended to serve with a "
minimum adverse impact on the environment of the city. Coordinate all
systems to maximize safety and efficiency- and minimize conflictbetween
modes (see following discussion on the Chico Area Transportation Study,
Traffic Setting).
Develop a public transit system responsive to the needs of the greater
Chico community. Actively promote the system as an alternative to
automobiles. (The Chico Area Transit System (CATS) is <<n existing
service.}
Develop a system of bicycle facilittes that provides, where possible
separate access to major destinations and assures the safety of all (see
discussion on pedestrian and bicycle facilities).
Protect and enhance the scenic qualities of State Routes 32 and 99 and
other major entry, trays to the city. Ali,new commercial development-
adjace-nt to State Routes 92 andadequately
r a m
99 should be ade uatel landsca d., F
Element of the Butte M
Circulation Y
County General Plan, The Circulation. Element
of the Butte County General Plan is a guide to managing and developing the
future transportation and circulation -system in the county. The intended
timeframe of the Element carries to the year 2000, with analysis, evaluation,
and planning focused on gr ro Policies ;and ams within five and ten year
- Programs ar
timeframes. The Element is organized ,into three basic components, a first
component, Part 0'ae-Basis for Policy, is intended to be an analytical and
descriptive basis for developing a transpor'tatioa policy. Transportation
Issues and Policies, sets forth Butte Couhtyts countywide and urban area
transportation goals, objectives, Policies, and programs to the year 2000.
the A.ppendices�`c�'h�a`�n ac�gdonal information and data supplements referred to
'"� "
by the previous text; noYuding the Elemehtks environmental impact report.
A y}
A summary of the County CireulatiOn Element as it relates to the project area
is°"presented in Pigure g°.,2-3,.. The
goals slid objectives presented in the
County Circulation Element are less specific than the policies identified in`` •:
' C City of Chico Circulation klemeat.
the LATS and the
zt�ACTs'M r a, .
'ri n Generation. The proposed d6bde al Plan Amendment x
cold allow tip to 270
nett residential units to be approved in the ,Project area. These residehces.'
Mould generate approximately 2!706 trip ends, inbound or outbound) per day,
.. 3.27 .
based upon a trip generation rate of ten trips ends per residence per, day
(.Institute of Transportation Engineers 1982). Peak hour trip ge on from
the 270 residential units would be approximately 270 trips ends duringieach of
peak the A.M. and P.M. hour periods. The A.M.i and P.M. peak hour periods are
the highest traffic
the one hour is volumes between 6:30 and 8;30
A. M: and �IOOtnd 6100ih
Trip Distribution; The total number of trips generated. by the proposed
project (9,700 trips) were distributed within the existing roadway system by
making assumptions about where new vehicle trips would be destined.
,general
The primary assumptions were as follows:
- Five percent of all trips Would use State Route 32 north of MuirAvenue.
20percent of all trips would use State Route 32 south of East Avenue.
- 70 percent of all trips uoul,d use West. Shasta (10%), West Lassen (10%)„
Henshaw (150 and East Avenue (35%)•
- Five percent of all trips Mould use Guynn Avenue (2.5$) and Cussick
Avenue (2.5%) south of East Avenue.
Table 3.2-4 presents .the expected: incremental iner,ease. in vehicle volumes
projected to occur from 270 additional residential units in the project area.
Traffic Conditions The addition of up to 270 residentirl units to the
project area would incrementally increase the traffic volumes on area
roadways. This additional traffic would add to projected volumes in the
pro ect vicinity and would decrease levels of service at affected'
j Y
; clarifyas
tndiscussions where mpacts tuld occur
a-intersections.
resultofthe additionalitripsgeneratedby the project
STATE ROUTE 39. The additional trips generated by development allowable: under
the proposed General Plan Amendment would increase the amount of left turns
from East Avenue to State Route 32 Mould increase traffic on the east/West
portion of Kennedy avenue, and would increase traffic t the State Route 32/la
Muir Avenue intersection. Although these impacts mould reduce travel capacity
somewhat along State Route 32, they would not be Ionsidered significant. and
would act require mitigation due to the relatively IW traffic volumes
`
involved and the remaining capacity of these ,intersections. Planned, long
germ traffic improvements; such as the construction of a third lane (two way r
'
left turn .ane) along State Route 32 and other east side adnhedtorsi are
s Q
expected to maintain acceptable levels of service in the future. Other
!
measures to reduce conflicting :,raffid tcovements such as those associated
later
State $outs 32
intthisesectiontional t improved.evelsnofoservice along State Route
EAST AVWtg.Cast Avenue Uould carry it. largentrips
by �.he' esidentiai growth allowed under the propoosedproject The additional
traffic at the west end. of East Avenue Would not be significant. (See the
previous discussion pertaining to State Route 32), However, the additional
traffic created at the intersections of East Avenue/Esplanade and the State
touti§ 99 ramps/Cohasset fioad would reduce levels of service at these 10dations,
although#not to a s3gni icant extent, Previously planned and recbmmendad
,,.2-9 P .
a
r
,
i
i
e
roadway improvements related measures identified dt the end of this section
should be implemented to maintain acceptable levels of service;.
ESpLANAM The additional traffic ;generated on West Laalsoenn, EWestAShasta, '
Henshaw, and East ,Avenue would affect travel capacity
increasing left turn conflicts at main intersections. The impacts of this
traffic at the F.9planade intersections with West Shasta, West Lassen, and rjk f
tion
Renshaw would not be considered significant and would not require mit�aaacity. '� �
due to the relatively low taraffie volumes involved and the remaining p �
of these intersections. However, the loss of travel capacity at the A
anade/East and Esplanade/Cohasset would require ' +�t��
intersections of Espl
mitigation.
The proposed project does not
-�ctCorsistenev With Localansportaton Piannin�. a
s which would substantially alter the 'data bases
present any significant imps the data
utilized for transportation planning �in the sseedcdHowever,
eveopmentdensity of one
basis did not anticipate the projects propo
acre parcels in the project area. The ,traffic analysis presented in this
section has identified the traffic impacts of the proposed project and
specific measures are recommended to mitigate adverse impacts. Therefore, no
city Wcounty transportation policy inconsistencies would occur. y
MITIGATION tASUiES. The following measures are recommended to mitigate
the
traffic impacts identifiedinthis section.{;`
Butte County and :the City of Chico should evaluate the need to realign'
unconventional intersections in the project vicinity as land developmentµ; w'
intensifies. Right of ways should be reserved as soon as practical to.
Make realignm
ent,_of these intersections possible as development oeeurs.
,Special attention should be given to the intersection of Bell
ealigned to meet /
Road/Cusick Avenue. If feasible, Bell Road should be r�
West Shasta Avenue. "
a con unction •W i;!� Planned?uimprovements -identified its-the •CATS; left
i pockets should be constructed and on street parlsinE should be
turn p
* ast Avenvs, `between Conners Avenue and gsplanade, and on
elim
inated on E I Future land
!Esplanade, between Lasses Avenue and Rio Lindo Avenue,
developers in the project area should be required to contribute funds to
construct roadway improvements identified in the CATS and -in thi
s report.
y
+
*, h
�4 L `�`4,��"4��t,iS.•-��h �..X,+- l+'V'1r,. � �: 111
" lY
3 GEOLOGY/iiYDROLOGY
EXISTING 'SETTING
gl2l OU i The 'project area is located on a broad alluvial plain known as the
Chico FiLn, which is located in the northern Sacramento Valley between the
Sacramento River to 'the west and the Sierra Nevada foothills to the east. The
project area is underlain by Recent Age coarse Th grained
allrse i oonsistied alluviumois
unconsolidated. silt, sand, gravel and cobbles.
overlain by a�k,0 urface soil layer and is underlain by Sierra Nevada
Foothill.metamorphic and volcanic rocks.'
SOILS. Surficial soils occurring in the project area arecomposed primarily
of loams belonging to the Viva Farwell association (USDA, 1976)• The Vina
Farwell association is characterized by good natural drainage, moo
slow
to 'moderate subsoil permeability, slow to medium runoff and no erosion hazard.
The,Vina Farwell association also possesses a moderate shrink/swell,
(expansion) potential, a measure of the volume. change of a soil with a change
in moisture content, and a moderate allowable soil pressure rating, a measure
of suitability of a soil for foundation pressure.
The Soil. Conservation Service identifies and rates the agricultural Potential
and limitations of soils into eight land capability classifications. Soils in,.
Classes I to IV are considered agricultural, and soils in Classes Y to VITT
possess 'Characteristics which limit agricultural uses and are better suited
for forestry, range; Wildlife or recreation. The Vina Farnell soils gave been
identified as Class I and II prime agricultural ;soils,
Portions of the project area also contain surficial sails composed of clay
b �
loams belonging to the Conejo Bdreendos association. The Conejo B rendos tely slow
association soils are characterized Y good natural drainage, modea
to slog subsoil permeability, slow runoff and no erosion hazard. The Conejo
Borrendos soils also possess moderate to high shrink/swell potential and
moderate allowable soil ;pressure. The Conejo Bcrrendos sol"ls are Class III;
prime agricultural soils.
SEISMICITY. The Chico area does not have a history of severe seismic activity'
1 (City of Chico, 1976)• There, are no active or potentially active faults or
Alquist Priolo Special Studies Zones located in the Chico area which includes
the project area. There is no record.
history ofgroundfa�:luresuchas
bodurring
Inaddition, there: is no doeLmenteddifferential,settlement in
liquefaction,,lateral spreading,
lurching:and
.:
Chico
The Cleveland Hi11 fault, the only known active fault in Butte County, is
located approximately 30 miles southeast, of the project area. Movemen'c'along
the Cleveland Hill: fault was responsible for the 5.`i magnitude Richter Saale)
t�, 1975• The Oroville earth4bake was felt in
hquake in Augus rt, north/northwest
damage was recorded A series of sho
Choriico l8-itad ive faults are located approximately ten miles north est of the
trending inset
.
th cake ground shaking from earthquake
pro��eot area.
the 1975' Orov311e ear q r Br'.
In addition
the Chico
epicenters outside the immediate area has been felt previously in
3.3M
i
r
was
area. However; the greatest intensity of ground shaking recorded in Chico
5.0 on the Richter Stale and there is no historical evidence of any,
significant damage having occurred. A statistical estimation of earthquake
CaliforniaalindicatesdChico couldction of experiencetanated return earthquuake ofriod r
f r , magnitude 8.,0 on
thiRichter Seale once every 40 years. Other studies have, however, suggested.
smaller maximum intensities (City of Chico, 197.6):
r
Hydrology
DRAINAGE. The overall topography in the project area slopes gently to the
northwest toward Mud Creek, which is located approxma ely one mile northwest
of the project area. Lindo Channel is located. approximately 0.75 miles south
of the project area. At present, there are no existing storm drainage
facilities within the project area. Overland runoff in the project area ponds
and percolates into the ,soil. There are no well defined "surface drainage
courses in the project area. ' See Section 3.4, Public Services and Utilities;
for a discussion, of storm drainage.facilities
in the project area.
A storm drainage study completed for the :north Chico area, including the , ,
project area, has recommended installation of collector storm drain lines' just
south of the Southern, Pacific Railroad and. along Bell Rp d in order to t .
aceonimodatt potential urban development of the area 'L egecollector lines W
would flows by gravity to Shasta Union Drainage Assessment District ($UDAD) N
channels which would ultimately discharge into, Mud Creep (Rolls, Anderson and
Roligli 1985). The proposed collector lines have been designed to carry 100
year storm floss, in acccrdance with Butte County Public Works 'Department and
Y :north Chico area which jointly /
Butt. Count Improvement 5tand;�rd p1Th�e �e�oa city are aurrentl j h
Y County
considering a storm drainage master `'
includes the subject parcels see Section 3.4 Public Services and Utilities).
jcated Mud Creek and Lindo
FLOODING. The subject UrbantDevelopment,t1974�� year floodplain �
(U S„ Department o n8 '
Chanlael are modified ephemeral channels designed to vrovide flood control for
Big iChico Creek. The project area may, however, be subject to minor, ,
ponding flooding due to the lack of drainage �L
localized stormwater riding and flo ,.
infrastructure.
GROUNOWATEE. The project area and Chico vicinity is underlain by extensive
groundwater supplies of the Sacramento Valley groundwater basin (California
Department of 'Water Resources, 1980). Section 3.4; Public Services and.
Utilities, contains a discussion of water supply and distribution in the
project area. Th9re are three water bearing zones beneath Chico. These, zones
are the shallow intermediate; and sleep aquifers. Groundwater generally moves
westerly and dowtnward from the shallow to intet-mediate aquifer and from tine
intermediate to deep aquifer.
Tiie shalloN zone contains unconfined groundwater at depths leas than 20 Feet
below ground 'surface in thick alluvial material. The shallow zbp'e receives
recharBe directly for infiltration of predipitationi streamflow, domestic
wastewater from leachfieidsi and urban runoff from drainage wells.
Groundwater in ade into derikiluviud4 The intermediate aquifer receives low
Gro wand. surfthe s at depths 20 to 50 feet be
8r r occur - leakage from
to aquifer elluv pati through vertical 8
recharge from streams incised in older
343-2
r�
overlying saturated alluvium and possible subsurface inflow from the Tuscan
Formation,
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 of groundwater to deep irrigation and
municipal wells, receives recharge mainly from streams that drain the foothill
area east of Chiec. (CDWR, 1984) .
Since 1961, recharge of the local` groundwater basin generally has exceeded
local discharges in the Chico region, in contrast to other localities in the
Sacramento Valley groundwater basin which have experienced an overdraft.
Groundwater tables ;in the Chico area were lowered by an 'estimated 10 feet
between 1912 and 1961 as'a result of intensified agricultural irrigation, but,
have since stabilized, or have risen between two and six feet '(Butte County,
1982).
WATER QUALITY'. Specific water quality data are not available ;for project area
surface water or groundwater. Runoff from the subject ,parcels would be
expected to contain minor amounts of sediment and contaminants characteristic-
of
agricultural and urban development in the area.
Groundwater in the deep aquifer is generally of good mineral quality,
reflecting the ekeellent mineral .quality of surface waters in creeks which
provide groundwater rechar e. Poorer qualit
g y ,groundwater is found in parts of
shallower aquifers with nitrate concentrations exceeding drinking water'
standards of 45 milligrams Per liter (mgll) (CDWR, 1984). Nitrates are toxic
, particularly old,
to humans articularl children less than three to months
Each area of high nitrate concentrations, two of Which are located 0.75 miles
northeast and south of, the project ;area, underlies unsevered residential areas
and also lies in the directiun of groundriater flow from urban development
drainage wells (as discussed below). The numerous :individual disposal
sysiems, which return domestic wastewater containing nitrogen, phosphorus and
chlorides to the shallow groundwater zone,Aarei theYlmajor source of the
elevated nitrate concentrations. There are el so more than 40 known drainage.
wells that return to the shallow groundwater zone surface water runoff from,v
areas of inadequate surface Kates drainage systems(CDWR 1984) +
To resolve the existing nitrate problems in the Chico area and prevent
additional hater quality impairment of valuable groundwater resources ,in the
area, the CDWR recommended that (1)unsewered residential areas in the Chico
area connect to theexisting sewerage system as soon as Feasible, and (2)
construction of additional drainage, wells should be prohibited and all
existing drainage wells should' be eliminated as soon as feasible. Other study
recommendations pertain to appropriate well construction and Monitoring of
shallow iiquifer groundwater quality (CDWR, 1984).'
The City of Chico and Butte County have adopted a Nitrate Action plan fog° the
Greater 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 thdL groundwater: The primary objectives' of the
Nitrate Adtion Plan are to jointly develop a Sanitary Sewerage Plan and a
Storm Drainage Plan for the Chico area.
M-8 -8
r
The sewerage plan would include standards and requirements for sanitary
sewerage facilities, land use designations and densities maximums for
nonsewered areas, 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
fields. At present, the county and city are jointly studying master plans for
both seurers and storm drains (see Section 3.4, Pnblie Services and Utilities).
A feasibility study :of providing sanitary sewer service to the north Chico
area, inoluding the project area, recommended installation of a trunk sewer
which wouldaccommodate potential ;:;Yban development of the area. The trunk
sewer, which would pass approximately 750 feet northwest of the project area,
would connect
the project area to the sewage treatment plant in, .Chico, _
IMPACTS
GeologY4 Residential development allowedas a result of the General Plan
Amendment and amendment ,of the Chico Area Green' Line would have no ,significant
impacts on the geologic ogic setting of the project area.
,
SOILS. Surficial soils located in the project area would not present
significant development constraints to potential residential development
resulting fry the General Plan Amendment. Potential impacts due to the
moderate shrink/swell potential and moderate allow,Eble soil pressure of the
project area soils (the Vine, Farwell and Conejo'Bbrrendos associations) could
be reduced to insignificant levels with implementation of standard engineering
design Arid construction methods.
The j ss an erosion hazard °
_.
not
due to the level nature ofothe rprojectrendos sarea.doPotentialecs st erosion
related T,
erosion occurring with disturbance of the soils could be reduced to "
insignificant levels with standard erosion control .practices. Potential urban
development on minimum one acre parcels would limit the extent of '
construction, which Would further minimize potential erosional impacts. See
Section 3.1, Land Use, Planning, Applicable Plans and Policies, for 'a
ro eat.. � p
sdussion of d °.
tential agricultural impacts as a result of he 'Proposed
SPISMICITX. The primary, potential seismic hazard to the project area is
ground shaking. As discussed in the Existing Setting, there is a high
probability that the area would continue to experience ground shaking in the
future. various intensities of ground shaking bave been predicted for the
Chico area. The intensity of ground shaking would depend on a combination of
the type of fault, the distance to the earthquake epicenter, the magnitude of
the earthquake, the types of materials between the fault and the area, and the
properties and thickness of the foundation materials at the site. Potential
ground shaking impacts to 'residential development and storm drain oe sewer
facilities could be reduced by standard engineering design and construction,
in accordance With the 'Uniform Building Code and the Recommended Lateral Foroe
Requirements prepare Engineer Association of
d by the Structural Engine California.
k
The potential for liquefaction, a process by which water saturated,*
e strength and become liquid during '
cohesionless (clay free) soils los (;�0
earthquake induced ground shaking, is o-Aeratd in the site area (Butte County,
1917). As discussed in the Existing matting, the Chico area has no documented
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 conBtruction
information, tte Couzuty�..�
methods which tak,,A into ae�.ount all lrnown seismic
develop,aent in the project area would be consistent with the B
Seimic Safety Element ('Butte County, 1977), and no significant seismic
hazards would be expected.
H_ dy raloa-
DRAINAGE. with the level h ture of the project area, and with proposed -
minimum oneacre parcel sizes limiting CQnstruction$ development of the areatt'erns. The potential
would '4L -t alter the overall natural drainage pa
rea'se i 4
which would. result in a corresponding minor inc
a n
m
tlrivewa�ys,��roadways) ot, the r would increase impervious surfaces (buildihe `ting
tha volume of runoff generated within the area. As discussed in
a s�tor�: drainage study has recommended the installation of collector
Setting, The Butte "-.." �^►�
(storm drain linen to .accommodate future development in the area.
County Public Works Department has indicated that storm drains Mould not be
required for parcels greater than one acre in size due to ,uhe excellent
percolation uapahiliti,es of the area soils ;(Ede7.1, 198 ) • Since significant
a result of development, no adverse--
increases in runoff are not expected as
nimpacts would ba xpected as a result of the proposed project. See
S etion 3public: Serviees and, Utili �;ies, fox a discussion of storm drei gage
1
consideration:, in the project arez,
FLOODING. The ,project area is not located Within the ;100 year floodplain.
Development o:P the area with impervious surf aces ,w storm draind create a, s
are nereaso
in the amount: of MhOtf generated from the area.
constructed to collect surface runoff, the minor additional -runoff would not
min
be expected to cAuse downstream f OL4i.ng. If storm drains are not required
with. development, minor localized stormwater pot.�P�ng may continue to occur:
Development of the area would be able to dire( any localized starmwater
ponding away from residences.
GROUNDWh'%A,4 By the year 20009 groundwater extraction in the Chico area is
not expected to exceed the rate of recharge, although; reduced irrigated
duce the quantity of redhafl (Butte County*,1Q82 i?uture
development 11
the
Project
area would
whicheplace would represent anrtions of �incrc�me tasting unt
parcels with i,mlervious sur :
reduction in groundwater infiltration (recharge) due to inorean surface
runoff: The reduced recharge would not be expected to resole in an adverse
s due to the limited' construction on mitd.muam one
impact to graundvater level
aerer par^,els. Potential sources of "ator supply to future development are
addressed in Section 3A t public Servieos and Utilities.
I
nevelopment reg n Mutant proposed
t esa Plan Amendment
` W,ATER QUALITY. y the proposed Ge in runoff
would result in minor inareasNj inurbanFa ber, iron), and
generated by: increased vehicular traffic (hydrocarbons, rub
from application of 'pestjoider'Jand fertilizers' Development would not
3.3-5
introduce any new .pollutants to area surface waters that are not already
present. overall water quality impacts, therefore, are not expected to be
significant, As addressed previously in the soils discussion, no adverse"
erosion impats and associated water quality impacts are expected.
As discussed in the Existing Setting,
ureas of nitrate concentrations above 45
mg/1 have been detected in the shallow aquifer in the project area. This
degradation has been due primarily to individualized septic tanks and
Approximately 40 surface water runoff drainage wells. The city and county are
jointly preparing sewer and drainage master plans. At the present, it appears
that unless the project area is annexed into the sanitary se"Ter system 9ouldervie
i
area future -development on the subject parcels, at least temporarily, would
ba required to use septic tanks and leachfields for wastewater disposal,
(:Nunez- 1986)• Consequently,, potentially adverse. 'groundwater quality impacts
could occur in the
site;
area.
Septic systems in recharge areas could result in potential public health
impacts. specific increases of nitrate concentrations in groundwater cannot
be projected at this time.
The feasibility and affectiveness of septic tank
and leachfield systemaare dependent upon several constraints, such as sail
percolation rate,, soil depth, slope, the level or seasonally high groundwater,
and development +'ensity. 'The septic system should be located in soils with i
adequate pe,rcoiation rates for the design hydraulic loading of the system.jt 11
k}Sa
The sail should be of sufficient depth to remove organic material and --�:�
microorganisms in the Wastewater, The sinpa ,!bk)Uld be .adequate to minimize ,��t� «
oversaturation. If the groundwater rises tO the lower surface of the
leachfield, the soil would become saturated, the effluent would contaminate
the groundwater and effluent mayurface.
accumulate on the ground s
The maximm number of soil absorption systems 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 treatment, minimum sizes of
deveioped areas most be established to control the density of on site disposal
system. In general, a standard minimum developed area size:of one acre s
s4 ,
_reeomnid, to,. prevent hydraulic overl6ading of the soil, Other information
�
contai_ned 1 tI «journal of Environmental Health suggests that 0,5 to one acre
of land for leaehfield disposal has been determined to b6 reasonable for
c tanks in nitrate areas .lan$�hieh8a,ts abebe dweliingral ��it densitynotto
septi
satisfies the Nitrate Aetiota P
exceed three dwelling units per d City of Chico, 1985
r acre (Bute COCoAn.ty an
As stated previously, specific project related increases in nitrate to
+ be projected at this time, Methods rare available
''to
cannon
estimate the p6tent.ia degree of increase (Reed, v086).. studies to r.«,, tip: cziate
the potential increa yes in hitrate doniientrations .,hould be completed once
norm information about pGtiilitisl development as Neil as baseline groundwater
conditions is availahle. the results could thea by used to identify
appropriate mitigation, if necessary. �roiandwat%ar duality monitoring as
outlined, in the Nitrate Action plan shhodd also, be continued to detect
potential groundwater quality impacts and to Id6fttif'y And implement
appi�opri to mitigation. In addition, in OtOOr to protdd groundwater quality
and t inilize potential impacts; the county end city should eoritinue joint "
leve Jpn�ent of sewer and drainage me,stet plans to include elimination of K
3.3-8
septic and connection to a sanitary sealer system, and to eliminate all
dra.{ gage wells.
P ingATION MEASURES
Geology. Residential development of the project area is geotechnically
feasible. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduceQ.�
potential geologic and seismic impacts to insignificant levels.
Soils engineering studies should berequired,on a case by case basis
for
future development. Specific engineering design and construction 4'
techniques recommended by the soils engineer should be incorporated, ash
needed; into the project design.
Building design should comply with seismic requirements of the current-
Uniform.Building 'Code and the Recommended Lateral Force Requirements
prepared by th,4 Structural Engineers Association 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
implemented (including dry ''weather season grading erosion control
plans, reveBetation, acid devices to retain tiediment within the
construction area) to minimize potential erosion impacts. ,N
Hydre*lM. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce
potential hydrologic impacts to insignificant levels.
Y y continue :,o jointly develop .
Butte Count and -theCit of Chico should
' and implement master plans for storm drainage and sanitary sewers as
mandated in the Nitrate Action Plan.
If the use `of individual septic tank and leachfi,eld systems is
necessary, the systems &`could be designed to satisfy county health
standards And,1 the requirement - of the Nitrate Action Plan.
Groundwater Q unlitY monitoring,
as outlined in the Nitrate Action ,lam,.
should be continued to detect potential groundwater gualit and dmpacts
to identify and implement appropriate mitigation, if necessary. �.
- d',As more information about future development and baseline groundwater
,quality conditions in the pro�iect, area beo tea available, calculations
)of the potential indreaset, in nitrate concentrations should be completed
and appropriate mitigation should be ideritified and,:mplemehted, if
1Y necessary6
M
f,
v_i
3.4 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
EXISTING SETTING
Water 5App_ ', Water is supplied to the ;project area primarily through private
wells. California_ Water Services Company (CWSC), a private water utility,
serves the southeast side of the project area with eight inch water mains at
Cusick Avenue. All of Chico and its unincorporated areas receive water Prom
"wells. Some newdevelopment in the project area will involve additional
private wells rather than connections to C41SC
g purchase of a new well site near
lines. CWSC is currently
looking ; at the yn Avenue ("Grant, 1985).
Sewer Service. The
project area is currently served by septic tanks. The
nearest .sewer main, connecting the project area to the Chico Water Pollution
Control Plant is located on the north edge of East Avenue and that main can°
only serve the area located 600 feet north of East Avenue. Itis uncertain
whether the portion of the project area north of the 600 foot limit can !e
conducted by flows A Sewer Master Plan study currently is being
served b Y
Y Y y and the Cit of Chico as 'required by the city and
county Nitrate Action Plan(see Seetion.3.3, Geology/Hydrology).
The Chico Water Pollution Control Plant is currently operating below capacity.
However, the unused capacity, already has been Allocated for other areas of
ekpected growth.
Payment of three fees would be required to obtain a connection to thecity
sewage collection and treatment :.system: (1) a water pollution control plant
fee, (2) a trunk line capacity fee, and (' ) a main line E7xtention fee. The
rates may vary betwe-en residential and honresidential areas and fees may
change according to implementation laf the Sewer Master Plan. In order to
corinect to the kl,�tyfs water pollutb5n control plant, the project area must be
annsxed to the City vi' Chico: I or Affected property dimers wouldbe required to.
sign an annexati art;agreement. The annbkdtion agreement waive.-4 the right ;to
Oppose .,future '.annexation actions (Re
k, 1986; Nunez, 1986).
County and the City of Chico to develop y Plan requires Butte
Implementation of the city and.. county Nitrate
Plan �rhieh wall
include: the area to be served and the standards and requirements for
sanitary sewerage facilities; tM area to be served by septic tanks, with
designation of land use and maximum densities for honsewered area; and a time
q p connection to
Y se tie tanks and
schedule for requiring the elimination of
.septic
sewer a system:, The cit and count will develo a financing plan:.
Y ag Y Y p
and determine the availability of grants or low interest loans for the
extension of sewer, drainage and/or wctee facilities to unserved "areas to G
minim'groundwater.
minimize and avoid ,nitrate contamination of the
Stott Drainages There are no storm dralbs in the project area. Butte County
requires storm drains on lots iiith a gt ss area
of Ono- acre or less: Water
costly percolates into the sandy loam soil in the project area and runoff has
not caused sigifieant flouding. The project area is not within a 100 year:
floodplain, according to the national Flood Insurance Progeam (FEMA, 1977).
i property owner or theideveloperr(Cdell,g1986)lly is paid by either the
,r
Since' storm water runoff has been listed along With septic inks -as being the
nitrates, the Nitrate
most contributory and the most controllable sources of
a storm drainage plan for the '
Action Plan has required a p6werage plan and
greater Chico UrbanArea. The drainage plan Will include: the standards for
the standards for the elimination of all a f existing drainage �,�ell:; �
drainage facilities and leachfields and a financing
installation of temporary
plan for construction of new drainage facilities (see Section 3.3,
Geology/Hydrology),
Police Services. The Butte County Sheriff's Department provides police
service for unincorporated 'areas of Butte County. Ten deputy sheriffs serve
800 square miles), using a.-
the northern half of Butte County (approximately
four to five miles from the
beat patrol system. The nearest station is
475 E. Park Avenue and Highway 99. The average response time
project area at
to the pro,jeet area depends upon the priority of`the service call. If called
five minutes.
for a life and death emergency, response time could be less than
hours. The county
.�
A nonurgent call could take as long as three or more
sheriff Is department 1!3 severely understaffed, with only two patrol officers-,'', ,
"the
at any given time serving 65,000 people. For minimum staffing, Butte
Presently,
�v
County Sheriff's Department Mould need to have 60 patrol officers.
21 (1Gray, 986). The
Butte Sheviff's officers
haseaamuteal aid agreement.rith the City of Chico police
sherff'snty
department
Department and the California Highway Patrol (G:- y, 1986).
Vire Protection. The Butte County Fire Department is responsible for fire
Butte County. Station 42
protection within unincorporated areas of et
Road serves the project area." The department
Frontier Circle and Cohasset
operates with one paid firefighter per station in the winter and an Additional
pButte-County Fire Department also has
aid firefighter in the summer. The
radio dispatched to assist paid personnel. _The
volunteer firefighters who are
Chico area has.approximatOly 40 volunteers. S+.ation 42 is one of the twelve
stations in the county. The service area of Station 42 has an
`5 Witt►in 1,000 feet of a
Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of Class when
fire hydrant and Class 9,b'eyond 1,boo feet,
Fire department service levels nationally ai'e rated on a scale of 1 to 10
(best tc, worst) in an effort to determine the cost of fire insurance for
a 9
property owners. Any area not having fire hydrants is automatiOallar rated
department can ;provide a dater tender, that
Oki the scale. If the fire
classification could be reduced to an 8,
The county fire department is currently Wiab.`le to serve the project area
fire sta n;
because of the lank of fire hyd"rants' in the area. Anew
adequately meeting fire protection standards (1166 43), is plannednearthe
'the,
i
project area At the. nterseation of East Avenue and State Route 32• ��eW .•,
A`11, f
.,"L
service area is called they
..
est ! eo Fire Station Benefit.Area,and e of « w
u nex..panceS�d vis"0n� to help.-4pport
��.�
75 dollar's per`iarce] ntoJThis station is estimated to cost $40010001
the cost of the new fit,4 :statin
with personnel ecsts of approximately $140;000 to $150$000 annually. Aesponse
five miru
ty tes (Hawkins
time to the project area is estimated to be three o
• ). x.
1986, Tiller, 1986
Se is The Chico Unified School District serves the City of Chico and its
unincor P.. orated areas: The school district has 11 medium sized elementary
8,
"
*choolt and three small rural schools offering k{ndergarten through sixth
grade .educaton,' The school district 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 higb
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
relocatables will, be'-used... in Jhe next five years to help meet the demand for
primary education'-(Matthews, 1986). With the current and projected demands
1 for educational facilities, as a result of approved but not yet built
_ �.' a('Mathews, 19$6a)' expected 1,500
tob2i000iaddi,tionl elementary .tudents.
the elementary schools could not aec o to the
Neil Dow Elementary School serves the project-area and students are bused to
its location approximately three miles away on east 5th Avenue. Neil Dow
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
of 839 students and a capacity of. 1,170. Bidwell is located at Sunset and
Third Avenue approximately three: miles from the project area. Chico High
School, located at Lincoln and blest Esplanade Drive, is approximately two
miles from the project area:. With an enrollment of 1,103, Chico High School
has not yet reached its planned capacity of 11693 students. Future schools
are planned in the Chico area and one school is beingM.considered--nthe
project area but land has not yet been purchased' Matthews, 1986). ,
proJ
Otherarea
► deco. are-Za#4� Community
College and Califarnia.State University, 1
College
that serve the Chico at ea and :Butte Count `
Road Mainte' - a
nance e iutte County maintains the roads in the project areaThe .A
streets in the project avaNa are in need of Widening and upgrading, but at this '.
time they, are considered t„Ma,quate to meet existing demand. The county'will
'maintain any roads built bj a subdivision that is built to county standards.
County road maintenaneP,is funded by the ;gasoline tax (Edeli, 19$8).
aries. The Butte County Library at East 1st Avenue in Chico serves all of
b-=-- Library in h6used in a
' r y y year
the Chico area. The recently constructed �'`ucal housing growth past the
tie .out; .
building designed to accommodate expected local
2000. Funds to support the library come mainly from the Butte County tyudget,
approved by the Board of Supervisors. Currently, the library is ury,'1986).
and understaffed with operating hours reduced from past years (Terry, '1986).
lies iP rola. Two hospitals currently serve the Chico area. Enloe Hospital, a
privately operated non'prof'it facility located at 5th Avenueand Esplanade, ig
within five miles of the project area. Enloe Hospital has approximately 220
`beds and is Used,close to capacity (estimated at '90 Percent) (Calarco, 1986),
The second hospital serving the Chico area is the privately owned Chico
Community Hospital, also located within five miles of 'the projeQt; area. This
hospital has approximately 85 beds and eurrentiy, is not used to Capacity
(estimated at 60 percent or lower) (Calarco, 1980.
4th acres an
Parks and Recreation City maintained Bidwell Park sr,rves the City of Chino
d
and its uninoueporated areas. Bidwell, park covers over ,
eittet'tds from Califorhia State University, Chico in the center of the city,
3 ti "'
past Bidwell Mansion, and on for ten miles to the east into the foothills.
Bidwell River Park is West of Chico along the Sacramento River and consists ,pf
180 acres of unimproved state owned and maintained land (Greater Chico
Chamberof Commerce, 1986)
Chico Area Recreation and Park District (CARD) operate Wcommunity4park
located southeast of downtown near State Route 99 and 20th Street.? All
elementary schools have been designated as recreation areas. Other recreation
areas include the East Side Little League Park at Southgate, off State Route
99, and Chapman Recreation Center, located at 16th and B Streets. All
recreation areas are heavily used at this time (Hughes, 1986)• Butte County
is currently writing a Natural Resourcees and Recreation Element to be added to..
its General Plan.. A discussion of park dedication requirements and in. lieu
fees will bepresented in the document (Browny 1986),
• S
IMPACTS s
µ Water Sunaly. Development allowed under the proposed project would require up
to 86.,.400 gallons of water per day, assuming 270 additional dwelling units and
a demand of 320 gallons per day per unit (Earth Metrics Incorporated, 1986).
The California Water Services Company (CWSC) anticipates no difficulty in,-°
providing water for this additional growth in the project area., However, the
expansion of water service would require the drilling of one additional well.
Water from the additional well would continue to meet the standards of the
Nitrate Action Plan (Grant,, 1986). Residents of the project area may choose•
to drill their own wells, Which Would reduce the demand foe water services
from the CWSC (Grant, 1980
Sewer Sery _den An estimated 77,760 gallons, per day of sewage generation from
the 2'O neli residences allowed by the proposed proje0t is based on 9O percent
of projected water use (Earth Metrics incorporated, 1986)•
�c
Since the project area, currently is not served by sewage collection lines and
the Chico Water pollution Co�lteol Plant, wastewater from project related
M development could be disposed of through the use of septic tanks, the method
of disposal used by .existing development near the project area. The addition.
of septic tanks in the project area could contribute to the Ongoing his.
®, contamination of area gtoUndwater. 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 Master Plan now under
- preparation. b. //
If the Sewerage taster Plan concludes that the additibn of septic tank systems
in the project area Would conte bute`to the existing nitrate problem, then the
project area could be connected to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant.
The Nitrate Action Plan recognizes thit sewage treatment by the water
pollution control plant, instead of by septic tank "systems,, is one method of
redt;.Q ng nitrate -. t5tamination of the groundwater. Detailed impacts related ,,
to providing setter, service_: to a the pro jeet area, such as the potential
(10,11
navailability of teeatment5iant capacity Viand costs associated With extension
ti
a� ` llje Ldewet�' tlrtl�i Ines, cannot "b 'etct'inined until the Sewerage
Master Plan
y
is completed - - ���" ����r> ,�.;ell
n�t.JF14
M-
r,
t
If the sewerage plan indicates that an extension of a sewer trunk line into
,
the project area is necessary and feasible, considerable capital cost and +� �
subsequent environmental impacts, such as growth inducement would need to be
evaluated and mitigated Annexation or anree en to annex would be
required if the area is to be served' i'y `N`e (' ewer system. Impacts of
annexation, such as the ohange of responsibility for the provision of public
services, is not the subject of this Environmental Impact Report. These
G
be evaluated, as necessary, as part of any future,
impacts and others willN44
.
annexation application processed by the C ity of Chico and the Butte County (�
Local Agency Formation Commission. t
Storm Drainage. New residential development in the project area would
increase impervious surface area,frombuildings and roadways, which would
result in a corresponding increase in stormwater runoff and the demand for
drainage capacity. As discussed under Existing Setting;, Butte County and the
City of Chico are developing a storm drainage plan for the Greater Chico Area,',,
as required by the Nitrate Action Plan. Development of one acre and less
improvements would cost the developer $22 perwlineal foot
ofrfron The
would require curb, gutter and sidewalks, A
frontage. .The:
cost to improve the project area could approach$9,000,000 .(Edell, 1986).
Police Services. The proposed project would add to the demand for Butte ^
County Sheriff's Department services, but would not, by itself, require staff; '
or vehicles to be added to the._departm_ent. However, -along with other y
proposed development 1n Butte County, increases in staff and/or vehicles at
some future date would be required, depending on the cumulative levels of
activity generated by future projects (Gray, 1986).
w
Fire-Protection. The proposed project would 'increase the demand for fire
protection services in 'thc project area. The lack of fire hydrants in the
project area reduces the firefighting capabilities of the Butte,,C.ouaty Fire
Department. A new fire station (No. 43) is planned for 'the 100jeet areas -and
could be completed in two to three years if started immediately:fihis station f`
would need to be fully staffed to accommodate the increased demand for fire
protection services. In addition, Company 42 would need expansion in the
interim, The number of additional volunteers needed to protect the project
area would be five to ten individuals: Cumulative development in the Chico
H6A ins 1986• Tiller, increases
in staff and equipment in the future
area also could require increases
> : s
SQluols. The proposed project could generate 0.4- students (grades K" W per
g , ► 1986)-
dwelling unit resulting in an increase of i16 students CMathews
Ne.;R Dow Elemebtary School, which would serve the project area, is currently ,
at 84 percent of its capacity and is expected to reach capacity in the next
year: Bidwell junior High School is presently at 11 percent of its planned
capacity and it is anticipated that the school cafe meet the projected growth;
Chico Senior High School currently is used to 68 peroentl of its planned
capacity and is expected to be able to accommodate the additional residential
growth in its enrollment area, The increased number of studentt;s generated by.
e
proposed projects therefore, is likely to significantly, affect Neill Dowro
School bttt s not likely to affect Bidwell junior 'High School. or Chico High
School Kkat 4b,, 1986)
3U-5
lk'AM
�
The proposed project would have a cumulative impact on schools in Chico ands''
its unincorporated areas. As discussed under Existing Setting, the schools
district anticipates the U,ue of 60 relocatables to accommodate the future
' growth within the next five years. The district is -also examining the
Potential for new schools to accommodate growth (-Mathi—iii 1986). °
Road Ma{ntenancei" Librariepital. /E'arks and Recreation. p y
' allowed under the"�pr-oposed-project would-inCrementallyincreaseetheodemand for C�? C
road maintenance, park and recreation facilities, and library and hospital° axe
services. These impacts would not be considered individually or cumulatively {.`a
significant due to the relatively low increase in service demand expected by
these services (Edell., Terry, Calarco, Hughes, 1986)
MITIGATION MEASURES. The following measures `
' ed to mitigate the "
g es are recommend
adverse public`service impacts identified in this section,.
Sewer Services.'
Butte County and the City of Chico should require that new development'
ations of the Sewer being prepared.
age Platt now
Butte Count and the
follow the recommend
County :Cit aP Chico should :evaluate the potential for ,�����
adverse environmental impacts associated with a sewer trunkline"�', X
' extension includin impacts related to annexation- if deve"o ment of
the project area re uire-a sewer service. P#
project q �
e
Septic tank systems in the project area should be designed to meety'
county health standards :-std the standards and requirements of the 4A,
Nitiatq Action- n ;Plan -::and sewerage study.
Storm Drainage,
Butte County and the ;City of Chico should implement the findings of the ' •"
- y provide drainage in theproject
Drain ag area.
Drainage Piaster Plan study to
v 'Police Servicesr'
Butte County should consider cumulative demands for police services and
P appropriate ng future level of
deve]a an a ro riate fundi mechanism to maintain
service standards in the future
11�y Pire Protection Services
•p per areel .in the West Chico Butte County Mill collect 75 dollars p' o Fire
Station Benefit Area to acquire funds to build a new Fire station to �
serve the ro eat area. 111 N
k Butte Count should seek additional volunteers to Station ation 1#E until
Station 43 is operational:. — VY
„ uid bo installed in the project area to
' pressurized water system ho
anfo'rm to the Butte County Fire Department Operatiola.Standards o
u. ALTERNATIVES
Two alternatives to the proposed project are considered in the following
analysts: the_No Project Alternative and the Expanded Project Area
' Alternative. The following discussion compares the impact of these two
alternatives with the proposed project impacts discussed in Section 3 of this
report.
u .1 NO PROTECTALTERNATIVE
The No Project Alternative involves maintaining the project site's existing
General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations. Only a limited amount of
couldfuture be added in the project r
area ash esultnofithis 'alless ternati20 N'�e�
e.Novariation of the Chico Area
Greenline would occur. -
Under this alternative, most of the environmental impacts of the proposed
r, P
project would not occur, would tea substantially redu-eernativor e due o the
uld be ayed>��Or
The No Project Alternative may not be a long term alp n n to the
designation of the project are: a� ";study Area Number 1 in3relation t Eaton
Chico Area Greenline. Many ct?z,ar .6.wYt1 i.nducyng impacts, urban density
Road Extension, developmeut saongState cute 32 and increasing
in western Chico, may a f iture amendment to the. Chico Area Greenline.
I ~� the No Pro dot Alternative by issue.
,,ltd the. General Plan Lard�USa "Sihnations for- this area. The following,
discussion summarUes Impacts of _
LAND USE,_ r'�5,.'�NZI?NG APPLICABLE PLANS AND POLICIES,. The
No Project Alternative
conflicts in the project
would maintain existing urban/agrictilt�tral land use
increase
'these conflicts or subject new of larger parcels A
st Kould not i and for
IF
areav
land use conditions. Tile demand -'for
ydwithin the Chico Area "
development Would be shifted to properties
s policies. Tae growth
Greenlinm which xs consistent with cityfh arming P
inducing impact of she General Plan Amendment and relocation of the Chico Area,
be: avoided. Beneficial housing supply impact 'would be lost.
Greenline wou'dbe 1� t�
TRAFFIC. tional traffic Mould be ge
nested by only about 20 residential
Levels
units rather. than the 270 allowed under the proposed project,
of
service at intersections in northern Chico Would not be significantly offected.
Potential toil and seismic impacts would be minimized with
l;�OLOGY/HYDROLOGY... .
the No Project Alternative. Stormwater runoff and infiltratioiA and urban
pollutant levels would be less than with the 'Proposed project.
Pn1Lrr rE,?VICES/UTILITIES. impacts related to additional demand for public
services from new ;residentg Would be minimized: The feasibility e a b44wer
ion into the project area would he reduced. Existing nitrate SOUalityea
extens p r quality
within the project area would remain as pontributoe to the Ovate
problem
in north Chico.
4 2 EXPANDED PRCk` tOT- .AREA
t�
The �pianded.Project Area Alternative
involve a Genera
S l: Plan Amendment
including all of the parcels within tha 4Curcre
area delineated in Figure
a-1,