Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-45B GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 6 OF 21SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS ANDMITIGATION TABLE' 2.1-1., SU ,ON MEASURES MITIGATION MEASURES IMPACT (Significance After (Significance) Mitigation) - LA11D USE, PLANT?ING: _ APPLICABLE pL A.NS AND POLICIES The proposed project would encourage Not:mitigable. (S)' the developments of approximately 270 new dwelling units in 'an area of prime agricultural land. Loss of this a ri- cultural land- .Would, represent a 0.875 percent decrease in, the, total amount of county landused fors fruit, and nut production. This increr'ental loss and other incremental losses would be considered a signif icant cumul ative impact at -the regional; etate and - national level. (S) The proposed proj�set mould increase The, City. cf Chico and Butte County toe, frequency and oAgritude of adverse with should support the Chico Area 1 Greenline policy by requiring that• land usc.eompatibility impacts agricultural- activities ,;to the north 1) an Agricultural Use Notice be and hest. (S) applied to parcels ttithin_ 200 feet of the Greenline '(refer to Butte ` c' County Code Sections- 26-8, 34 i j 34-2, 34-3 and 34-12); 2) new urban development within _200 feet of the Greenline.be set back to the maxi- mum ,feasible distance consistent With the applicable zoning district requirements (cluster designs should be encouraged to achieve this objective); and D specific performance criteria be met by agricultural operations. Examples of performance criteria include the following; ated by fa Noise gene equip - Noise a tent should of exceed they S Significant (Adverse) NB Not,Sinificant (Adverse) PS Potentially Significant ( Adverse) Beneficial (CONTINUED) 2-4 t TABLE 2.1-1 :(CONTINUED). SUMMARY PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES �. ITIGATION MEASURES IMPACTSi ( gnificance After (Significance) Mitigation) 3et by applicable city and county noise standard noise generation exceeding 70 LMax dBA , at the Greenline should not be conducted between the hours of 10:00 P. tai., and 7: 30 A.M. , and physical barriers should be eheourag ed in all cases and should b6,----oouired where4 conditions would be expected. to eXceed tolerable limits. (NS) The proposed project would alter This impact is the subject of this Planned land uses in the pro,feet area. Environmental Impact Report. The resulting pattern of land use Measures to improve infrastructure designations would not be considered and serviees.are proposed in other logical or stable. The subject site sections of this report to improve appears to ,he consistent with the five Consistency with zoning and site deli ria frsr the designation criterif ertint development criteria. For example: Proposed land use designation,adequate fire protection would be , appears to be inconsistent with provided with --the proposed conditional zoning and development mitigation. (PS:) criteria. (PS) 1)evelopaent in the project area would Not mitigable (S)' not be consistent'ti.th thecity►s .n - tent to: encourage development in other locations in the Chico tirbAh, Area. (S) The Amendment of the Chico Area Not mitigable (S) Greenline i.Fould foster population growth' and would remove A constraint on -growth in the project area. (S) The proposed General Plan Amendment None required or recommended. (B) Mould increase the supply of and competition among higher priced residential units. S Significant (Add erse') NS Not Significant. (Adverse) PS Potentially Si nifieant (Adverse) B Beneficial (CONTINUED) 2- r ''� �� t r r TABLE 2.1-1 (CONTINUED),. SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES MITIGATION MEASURES IMPACT( Significance After Mitigation) I (Significance) cance? The 'applicants should be required to contribute funds for the instal- lation of traffic signals at the following .intersections (,East/Nord, East/Guynn, East/Cussick, and East/Alamo). The total cost for these improvements is_epeeted to be appeqximatay� The ase tribuiion isa pro ratash are based on the projsetfs traffic increment compared to the total traffic volume. The applicants'should be required to contribute funds for widj.ning, 61-1- East. Avenue to allow for Panes_ (central continuous left lane.). Thio requirement Would involve a 13 foot Widening' from Alamo half Way to Guynn and'a 26, foot widening frcm SR 32 half wily to Guynn. Sidewalks, curbs and gutters Wov.ld not be required of the applicants, but a pro rata contribution of funds (bas .on. traffic) for a_ Corm drained -age culvert Voula be The, total cost for then improvemens is expected to be $132,693• (NS) Aecetis :by,emergency 'vehicles {.large See previous mitigation measures intersection realignment. (NS) five tr ub_ics) Mould be hindered by for unconventional intersections. (NS) The proposed pro eet WouYd Alloit The applicants should be required roads in the prd,3ect ` to imarea development along narrow substandard Iprove standard set by the roads: (PS)' ButtetCountyPlanning Comtaission S Significant (Adverse) NS Not Significant (Adverse) PS Potentially Significant (Adverse) A Beneficial 2-7 TABLE 2:.'I-1 (CONTINUED). SUMMARY,OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES F-1IMPACT ------------------ MITIGATION MEASURES (Significance,) (significance After Mitigation) «, The feasibility and desir.,eability of enue 'Extension throw The City of Chico and Butte County the project site irould be altered by '� review the Chic Urban Area Transportation Study's recommenda- the. proposed project. (pS) tion for >extending Lassen Avenue. west to State Route 32 (Funding for such an Im rovement Wouldbe difficault without further density increases or an areawide funding district). If this proposal is determined to be a long range requirement, Butte County should require property dedications of right of wa ,_ wayprior to development. i n the area. (NS) The proposed project Would allow Incremental increases in the. demand Site design criteria which for transit service for the CATS Route increase opportunities for transit patronage should be encouraged 1 and along the East Avenue Corridor. (NS) s cifia development 3P PeProposals were to involve clusters of development. (NS) The proposed land use intensification would A Access to the future extension of A encourage the extension of Eaton Road, Which Presents the potential to Eaton Road should be provided via make Nord, Guyon and Alamo major north/ Bell 'Road. Intersections with Mord Guyon and Alamo should not be south connectors. 'encouraged "unless additional land use intensification and related roadxay improvements occur prior to extension of these roadways, (NS), potential for conflicts Ik=enicycles'; pedestrians, and Pedestrian,erossinga should be icles along East ;Avenue. ( S) considered along East :Avenue where Primary pedestrian routes. and_ ficant (Adverse)NS Not Significant (Adverse)tially+ Significant (Adverse) B Beneficial (CONTINUED) 2-9 e i t e �' s e TABLE 2.1-1 (CONTINUE."). SUMMARY OFPROJECTIMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES MITIGATION MEASURES IMPACT (Significance After (Significance) Mitigation) .PUBLIC-SER . VICES AND UTILITIES Development pm: pare of ls allowable tinder A minimum of one new well and a theelro proposed projectwould require 85,400 pressurized water systemwill be gallons of .water per day.. (PS) required in the area, All Cal Water requirements shall be met. The required well and water system Will cost approximately $775,000, (NS) The proposed project would indirectly Septic tank systFht should be a allow additional sewage to be generated installed in the project area. in the 'project area. (P pr S) Each system should meet the sw 'L f k standards and requirements of the Nitrate Ac Plan and the County ,tion Health Department. -.j if septic ,tanks, :cannot meet the standards and, requirt3 ients of the Nitrate Action County Health Departmentaim theCfu tore, a - trunk. line should be extended to the Project area from the Chic+.o Water Pollution Control Plant. The cost for such an .extension and for service to the projectarea (including a treatment plant ex-pansion foe) would be approximately $3,190x500. An Assessment District should be established oto compensate the applicants for proXiding, sewer capacity to ;parcels in the project Vicinity. (NS) Development of additional residential. Butte County should consider cumu- 'uses would incrementally increase,the lative demands for police services demand for police ser-Vides. (PS), and develop an appropriate funding S Significant (Adverse) NS kot Signif3cant.(Adverse) PS Potentially Significant (Adverse) B Beneficial (CONTINUED) ?-12 t t �� t 2-16 TABLE 2.1-3. SUMMARY OF TOTAL ODST FOR REQUIRED AND RECOMMEN MITIGATION t FIXED COST ANNUAL COST ( PER ACRE) ( PER ACRE) , SCENARIO 1. Proposed Project {270 Units) $2,287,775 $35,622 SRS -1 :Road Standard, ($8,u73) f$132) Septic Tanks, No ,Sewer, No Stormwater Infrastructure 2. Proposed Project (VOUnits) $11,189,108 $35,637 0: RS -2 Road Standard, ($132) Sewer . :onnection, Stormwater Infrastructure 1 t Area Alternative 3. Expanded.Project $2,337,571 $42,627 (330 Units) ($7,083) ($129 8RS-1 Road Standard, Septic Tanks, No Sewer, No Stormwater Infrastructure � rnative 14i,Expanded Project Area Acte $11,289,904 $42,632 (330 Units) ($3�,2 1'2) ($129) RS -2 'Road Standard, Sewer Connection, Stormwater,Infrastructure' r ; 14 �EFFECTS DETERMINED TO "BE SIGNIFICANT OR POSS EXISTI2IG SETZ'TNG ACTS AND MTTTGATI017 NE ASURESSGNTFTCANTt �1 LAND USE. PLAt1NT NG. APPLICABLE PLANS AND POLICIES EXISTING SETTING _ nd Uses. Land in thero "ect area -ta is used for agricultural and residential purposes. The prima uses such as ry agricultural uses to the area are orchards, but other pasture land and vineyards are present. Residential uses are - located throughout the project area. Clusters of dwelli in four locations (1) along the west side of Rodeo Lrive; )salongarelthetwated west end of Muir Avenue; (3) along the south half of Nord Avenue; and (4) along. Bell Road near Gu yhn. Avenua . Land uses sur'roilndi ng the project area are similar to those within the project area; however; residential uses increase in frequency and density to the south and east. The main Southern Pacific Transportation Company forms the project sites wester4, bounds. p Y railroad line parallel to State Route 2. .7. The railroad tracks are located developed along. 3 Industrial and commercial land uses have been ng both sides of State Route 32 west of the parcels ,north of the project; area are used for agricultural area. Large purpose's. A&ricu.ltural Of of the ProieCb Area and Vicinit vicinity contain highly productive sails. —�� The pro�iect area and as Climate and the availability of inexpensive and his and other factors, such to make this area and much Of Butte Count highly du quality water, combine Y Bh Y conducive to `agriculture. The continued viabilityf oagriculture, the countyts,biggest industry, is a - vital component of the zcouhtO s economy. 136th 'the Cit of Y Chico Ahd,'the Butte. County Genera] Plans recognize the importance of Issue with specific land Use lanni agriculture and address the use planning tool, the citylcounty nGgreenl1ees and procedures. A primary land follo i General Plan policy, is described in .the rib discussion- under Policies. ; The projeat_.area, currently produc3es al»tGs pecans k nds, walnuts, " and other l al products (see Table ! tai, feijoa; `, acres) represents O. 3.1-1)• a project area 270 County.. agnea_ ur" 75 percent of the total fruit and nut; acreage e in: 3 The �40p acre area represents 0.555 Butte acreage in Butte County,. percent of the '.total fru3.t and nut The charac'ter, of the a agricultural lands on the edge of urban areas The inject area is typical,. of ..indirect impacts.: o Bi'leiiltural lands 'within the project three Of urban activity are affecting the economic viability of viabilit and, ty o production. The following direct and indirect impact's affect the viability of ' pro rt agriculture on the project site and increase the incentive for y owner's to discont nue agricultural on the short tem economic Production in order to capitalize smaller gain which:caci be realized by urban dev.elopmettt Parcel sizes, increasing property values; urban nuisari"es;, such as . , end i"mpa ct s of � Application a8ricultural activ..tes on tirban tiles, such as thea. AitVAnch sm of pesticides and th,e generation of deist smoke and poise: pphpcati�e$e impacts are - hot ' Although ng agricultural uses: on the site, they have riot prevented Present time, project, area for agr'icul'ture to the Productive us'e of the r 3.i-1 4 ... 1 1, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e General Pian La d Use b �; ; n4,'. Butte Count y s Chico Area Land Use Plan esinates g the project site for rtOrchard and Field Crops" uses With five acre mpinimum aroel sizes. Parcel sues whidh are le��b than 20 acres are conditionally consistent with this designation. Existing General Plan land use designations in the project Vtdinity are presented in Figure 3i! -i. One single family dwelling per parcel with additional houbing for, -oil site, employees is the required maximum density ror properties subject to this ne cultiAtionj droceesssino, sale and distribution A� g� d crops. The five pri�ary criteria for determining whether an area, should be. subjpct to the Orchard an d Field Crop designation,are as follove: Oil .conditions well -suited for plant crop operationa, -preqpate, y , pasupply, cePP sizes of five acres or' mare; �minahtrl Ail usedfor crop production or secondary uses; and: `ad agent uses compatible with primary and iary Uses. 3,1_2 ',�... +�� ! r _�y _/.�.� •..u� —....:_..GLS' ="�= �—a� _— a'� ..�L-- - � ,:...:tom Yw—„—�� "�•'`: " � ` ..• � I IN , -- PR'OJECi SiTE= �� }-- _ �. ,,�h�"' it � .•� � r •`:. ••,• •.• • ..•..• • •... a. +� � —•ter Le+-_ ' • . • • • • + rte— ��.5 •. • •• •. • �.,....��� , r r _'� �.r. � 'L �`- �M_�, •� \III z — ~' MEDIUM DENSItY RESIDENTLAL ' C.7 , L • ORCHARD AND FIELD CROPS LOW DENSI`T'Y Rt8IDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL + ,..-• .,>✓ . r ,____. � �`� � PUB LIC I'IGURE 3.1-1 CYTY AND COUNTY G>rNERAL "",MUM_ PLAIT '.LAND USS D951WT?6N8 earth metrics scALE TN THE PROJECT VICINITY ` t e0- The three conditional zoning and development criteria for the Orchard and Field Cropuses are: - Predominate existing parcel sizes range from 5'o 10 acres; - adjacent to or in the general vicinity o, urban boundaries; - present statusof agricultural, production will not be significantly impaired. The six zoning factors for the Orchard and Field Crop uses are: - existing parcel sizes and dweling densities; - proximity to urban development;; , - effects on adjacent uses - potential for pest insect breeding, economic viability; -, local desires. The protect site's existing Orchard and Field Crop designation appears' to be consistent with the five primary` criteria for designating the site and the three conditional zoning and development pm criteria.,However, the ;designation _ may not be consistent .with two of the six zoning factors (economic viability, and local desires). Economic 'viability heath � was discussed .under the heading Agricultural.'Character.of the Jpreviously Pro'ect Area and via inity^, If nlocal desires include the desires of local property arners, then the existing designation is clearly, inappropriate relative to this factor because the project applicants are all local property vwriers oni . The project area is subject to the requirements of the Butte County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Number 1150. ,The Butte `County zoning map' indicates that the requirements Of tWO.zonirig distriets`, (A-S) Agriculture ' and (S-A)"Suburban Residential, apply to the area within the dark border in Figure 3.1-2. The parcels affected by the proposed General Plan Amendment are within the A-5 District. The requirements this of zone arepresented i permitted uses are consistent 'with the General Plan Ianduseppendix designation of "Orchard and Fieli. -Cro n P The minimum lot area required is five acres (see the Pr discussion of zoning Arid development criteria and zoning factors) . has been �riament Trends and Patterns. ,,r e_velo Urban development iin the Chico area en public and private investment to properutid's within the aPeA an existing urban area and to locations north, south and east of the city core: In ae.d tion to this investments the Nitrate Action Plan for the Greater Chico Urban Area also encourages development in the existing .urban area} Mrtieularly° within those areas served by the eityf s sanitary sewer system, Che Nitrate Action 'Plan recommends that development be limited_ in areas' rithout sewer connections (Eiitte County and City of Chico; 1985) Ttio large private 'projects, Foothill Park and Rancho Arroyo, have been approved in northern 'Chico. The Foothill Park development includes 551 acres d units 15 r percent have be r been sold)satdn24 acresoofindustrial�usesd(Palma$ Arroyo project it*cludes 750 acres of residential usesi(4o600)dwelli Rancho ave beeen e sold at .. i ng unit's, none this time) and 25 acres of commercial uses (Padj% '1985) . 1levelo lim ant in southeast Chico has included residentiali commercial; and light 8.1-�1 r � 1 9 � _ n � 1 �` ' utriaal luses, primarily south of State Route industrial 32 and east. of Park Auenue, -Development west, of Chico has been directed towards infill, of existing parcels planned for urban uses by local planning efforts, the lack of sewer service connections, and the 'city/county Greenline However, large.'pareels of underutilized land are available for development Within the existing Chico Area Greenline: The population of the incorporated area of Chico was approximately 1985 according to state De Department 2.9 in of Finance calculations dated ,kpril 29, 1985., The '1 85 April 9 population accounted for approximately 44 percent of the total. Population of incorporated areas of Butte County and 19 percent of the total county population in 1985 (see Appendix 16.7) . A summary report of controlled county population estimates for January 1, 1985, including breakdowns by r housing unit type, estimated vacancy rates, and the Aver persons''' age number of 'per household for incorporated and unincorporated araas in Butte 'County, is presented in Appendix 16.8. The population of the incorporated and unincorporated ^Chico Area was approximately 64,o00 persons in 1985 and was estimated to increase _r to 1,02,000 by the year, 2000 and to 171,000 after buildout of the General Plan.Land. Use Map, according r to the Chico Urban Area Transportation Study prepared in 1982. Table 3.1-2 presents a more recent Population forecast for buildout of the Chico Area, The Population of the project vicinity defined as the area.north and west of Bell Road, Cussick Avenue, Lindo Channel (Traffic Zone 30 of the. Chico Urban ,Asea Traffic Study) is expected to increase from 2 006 persotrs to 2,114; by the year 2000 (Chico Urban Area Transportation Study, 1982). General Plan Policies 011CO AREA GREENL'INE. The City of Chicoand Butte County have established a_ boundary to define the limits future of urban development which may occur on lagricultural lands in the Chico area of Butte County. The Greenline is delineated in Figur;: 3.1-1. The project site is not included within th a urban (boundary line, but has been. designated grated as "Study Area Atumber I. The a£ Supervisors, after if ppropriate f3ndingslowatproGoditlr aod making ng . ng simple majority vote, to revise the 'location of the Chico Area Greenline so as to place the affected parcels Idthin 'Study Area Number 1 , in the Urban portion of the Chico Area Greenline: However, the special policies and procedures .elated to the ' , Greenline, as described in the Butte County General Plan# would apply to any amendmenta `related to this area: The Chico Area Greenline Policy is presented in Appendix 13.5. The purposes of the polio and Y Procedures for amendment, and review of of the Greenline are summarized as followsc - Purposes of Greenline Policy. The purposes of the Chico Area Greehline are; a) define the limits Of future urban development whish may occur ` agricultural on lands in the Chien area of Butte County. ' b) 1'o Provide for the hong term protection o agricult�iItal resources P f e s of the Chico area of Butte County. r� 3.1-6 is r� ..... ..:F a .. .. ..... ... _ . c) To mitigate the threat to agricultural resources posed by urban of agricultural lands in the Chico encroachment into and conversion area of Butte County. ' d) To .reduce agrcultural/urban conflicts in the Chico area of Butte ' County. id use e) To establish County rcultural lands located in the Chico with the City of Chico in leo area c planning of urban ag of Butte County. f)To identify urban development limits in or near agricultural lands a certain within the county's Chico area Land Use Plan by use of bold dashed boundary line. g)To establish a certain and clear policy text for Butte County's and the - Chico Area Land Use Element which will enhance ,uphold aforementioned boundary line and policy text. h) To establish certain land use designations -for the Chico area of boundary line and Butte County in conformity with the aforementioned policy text.. Procedures for Amendment of ,the Greenline Policy: The Butte County Greenline Policy through a Board of Supervisors may amend the Chico adopting written findings of fact, supported by majority vote after in the record, showing' the following: substantial evidence .public (a) that the public benefits of converting the Agricultural -land to tie benefits of continued urban lard substantially outweigh public agricultural productions and urban no otheurban or suburbanlands reasoiaable available and (bt there areother suitable for the proposed devel.opcent• ;. - Procedures for Review of the Greenline Policy. The Greenline Policy Greenline shall be reviewed and states that the location of the to insure that local. land use needs of the evaluated every five years in being meta The first review" Of the policy is 'duettion Chico area are also states that an individual may pe 1987. Hotaever, the polioy S s foe a General Plan Amendments including a the Board of upervisor in accordance With the change in a l.ocatiori of the Greenline j Taws and of Butte County snd the State of (:aliforn3a a pplieable policies (see Appendix 136). ggt SING II,gNlENT4 The City of Chico and Butte County have adopted Housing to ithe The primary measure Blements as ;part of their General .Plana. `taplement reserves lands for' 'General Hauss'ng Element is the Plan Land emep j nldefines the policiesi City of Chico Housing residential uses, The related to the provision of housing in the city; progrannsj and recommendations The following text from the city's Housing Element Was adapted to stmmarite Chico Housing policies. 3:1-8 i In planning for the provision of housing for all present and future, Chico residents tgoalisto provide for a variety of housing the city's primary r9 g types an, 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 aarieultural. land,, provision of sanitary sewers, storm drainage and streets, the provision of other public services suer as police and fire protection, school facilities and parks, concern for design, preservation neighborhoodsaf dhistorical es, as well as concern for energy conservation uhits.The Housing E oment states that all of these factors must be consideree in concert with one another, and no single -item can be emphas_zed at the expense of another if Chico is to 1 pursue a balanced dnd realistic approachto the provision of housing for current -and future Chico residents (City of Chico, 1985). The Butte County Housing Element also defines policies, programs, and recommendations related to the provision of housing. The following po icies Apply to the project area, A. governmental framework sha7..1 be established and maintained which encourages and facilitates maximum. performance of the private county's h.6mebuilding, industry in Band projec�ed populationdating the housing needs of the r Planning and zoning considerttions 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 prices. New housing construction shall be, encouraged ;in locations with, reasonable ,proximity to centers of employment and shopping facilities, and Oich respect the conservation of dnergy. 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, 198+) IMPACTS tand Uses The proposed General Elan Amendment Would not directly affect existing, developed land uses; however, it Mould encourage private property ooners to subdivide Pima agricultural land .for residential development. A maximum of 270 new residential units could be allowed in the pwo,ject area if the project is approved (T,u, ale, 1985) i, Without approval of the project, only 90 additional residential units could be developed in the project Arear Doss of, Akrieultural Land. -!The, indebu6ntal loss. ex .the :prune agridVItural land, in the project area would represent a 0,.375 percent decrease in the total a1IIG�f"�' of county land used for fruit and nut 'produbtion, This incremental 1 . tild not be considered significant on a countywide basis. However, this F increment and otherincremental losses are contributing to cumulative loss of agricultural land, at the regional, state :and national levels. At the regional: level. cumulative agricultural impacts and the, loss of agricultural land are reducing maximum potential yields of agricultural products to the point, where the economic feasibility of agricultural activities or support services, such as processing, packagingand transportation, are being threatened. Oboe regional production reduces to,eertain threshold levels, support .ervices may be �r-elocated,-"service costs may increase, or services may be reduced. These ' impacts in Butte County would be considered cumulatively significant due to the importance of agriculture to the regional economy, Further 'losses of agricultural land could occur as a result of increased land use compatibility impacts, as ;discussed in the following section and in Sect4bh 6, Growth Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Action. Section 4.2, - Expanded Project Area Alternative, addresses the agricultural impacts -of a General Plan Amendment which includes all of the parcels in the project area. LAND, USE:COMPATIBIL°ITY. -The conversion of additional 'Agricultural land -to residential 'uses .would, increase. the; frequency, and magnitude of existing .land use 'incompatibility within and, adjacent to the project area. Those agricultural parcels which; are. contiguous to the converted land would be most affected (see Figure 1.1-3).. However, the general encroachment of urban uses presents cumulative; land use compatibility impacts along the Chico Arear Greenlinu. Increased nuisances (vandalism and: theft of agricultural property and agrio.+ultUral activities,. suoh as 'applications of pesticides and .the generation of ;dust, smoke and n?Jl.se) :would increase -'the potential for conversion of othek"'agrictiltural 'lands to urban uses. The application of Agricultural use notices would inform future land owners of potential. problems; but Would not mitigate incompatibility impacts. Agricultural buffers would not be practical on' a parcel by 'parcel basis. However:., agricultural Wffers and !Use notices should b6 utilized by the City sand .county along .the Chico Area Gr online as a l'ong�rang& program to reduce land use incompatibility. The appropriate buffer grogram must be developed on '& case by rase basis using; some combination of the following mechanisms: setbacks, design constraints (cluster housing), physical barriers, such as roadways, fences and vegetation, and performanee criteria, such as limits on huisance generati�,n (noise; dust, ,smoke,: etc.). Recommendations are prtvided under Mitigation Measures`'in-this sectioni pj armed Land Vsas. The proposed project would revise the General Plan Land Useand Zoning designations on the affected parcels. `The designation of 'by adjaent propertiesandpropepfies almost surroundedthe affected' parcels would not be changed. The resulting land use ;pattern would not be logical or stable compared to a project involving all of the parcels in the project area or, a project with better beunda.ty delineation, :such as roads or creeks (see ' Section 14'; Expanded Project. Area And Section 6, Growth Inducing Impacts). The new land use designation fnr the project area would be "Urban: Agricultural Residebial" with one acre minimum parcel sizes. The applicable zoning designation could be 8R-1 (see Appendik 16.4). The secondary impacts ese revisions toland uses are the subject of this associated with the -s6 planned rP ort. p 3.110 ,Urban D6velapment Trends and Patterns. The proposed General Plan Amendment and subsequent development of residential 'uaes 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 dwelling unit). Development in this area would not be consistent with the cityis intent to encourage development in other locations in the Chico Urban Area. The addition of 648 persons to the project area (Traffic Zone 30) would exceed .the population projected in the Chico Urban Area Transportation Study by approximately 31 pet�cent of the population projected for the year 2000 and wouldrepresent a SL fold increase in the projected number of people to be added in this zone by the year 2000 (648 vs. 106). Although the addition of the 6148 persons to - the Project vicinity Would not be considered asignifcant-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), Chico. Area Greenling.' Approval of the proposed 'General Plan Amendment would require relocation of the Chico' Area Greenling within study Area Number, 1 The change is shown in Figure 3.1-3This: relocation of the Chico Area Greenling must be supported by substantial evidence in the ;public record ,showing that the public benefits of converting the agricultural land to urban land Substantially outweigh the public benefits of continued agricultural production, and that there are no other, urban or suburban lands reasonably available and Suitable for theP roposed development (see Impacts on Land Uses). These findings are to be made by, the County Board of Supervisors. The by- directly i'osteri Chico Area; Greenling could e red amendment of the bconside growth inducing by,. Y ng population grclwth and by removing the Greenling as a constraint to growth (See Seetiou 6, Growth Inducing Impacts). Reviex of the Chico Area Greenling Policy is still expected to occur in 1987. Housing The proposed; 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 the supply of and competition among higher priced units. This impact would be benef ieial. At this ` time, the conversion of this property from agricultural uses to residential uses may not be consistent with city or county housing policies; which indicate the need to balance preservation of agricultural landand/or the enviroiment with 'increasing the SUPP11,of housing. The previous discussions, Pertaining to Urban'Dev Trends and Patterns and. the Chico Area Greenline indicate that the loss �ofnthe subject agricultural land is a significant impact and that the availability of housing in other areas of eastern and northern Chico may not justifyf the proposed General, Plan Amendment at this time. �lT.TiGATI0,�1 �,ASURES., The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce: a land use and planning impacts identified in this seetlon. Land Use Compatibility "The�Gity�of Chico and-butte County should .support the Chico Area GreeriLine policy by'equiring to ti?t: i) an Agrictural Use Notice be' 3.1-11 4Az- J. Kf rtRC tt ✓KJ r } ',. "+ .•1 .fit b r'L � ,�'/ • Itl Jal'�J y� J L!r �Y art .. li x ' 4h�lr `. JI �. �f,✓8 f � '✓"r a wy!'-'o "si.„ .r ✓i,✓' ar +�W r: n a rer M , '.b �. iota .t '' �r_. �:.. � lcl.:r'S � t �`'i x -r ^`�c}1 Y t e`�^yt?=» ,f 1 •• "t . t�✓.-;�:.i Lr..•�t t' � 1 xtr, t lIr }`�^;�?. y=f Y•-'�Ttrjrj 1 ✓a L ,�.._� r,,- .i "S ,✓ { r2a tr t.Jrt ,,1{ •i �r]I�+rr[i^ 'Le i'.+•L. ♦1. er ._✓`{t ,Y• ✓ ,, Ja��-=�1.j,�; /. '�, il:r.• t1 ! � r C 'fr n!: ragrry{r � G K�': � ,C.lc�i „_.r" }-•• i t iti� '•Lai i _.. l"�.ir ri 1+ � ,rJlrfv'� a i '��.•J4,• ic-t�il,�✓ t4GIL�.' _ '1t C�.yJ,µtltck�rr„ , �A�•.f c.,,.� «�.i+ t✓st1, •+i°��?Kiir �. s � i 't � �'- u ' �S � `�. .�� r.+� .. +l ,a s , a�. • r mac.+ =r+'i 7Clf,5r:` 1��`.�� •�' r�ii k: �l�'!r+• �Liq J + .. {S.r�.l s+ i ^+li ,�• �s-t,�: ✓n•,-!f%.I�. • ,, y.r r.. q �. � .� t �.r. �i{.''�J +t r ti: t��'•:,�pifr. tifii�'t+�7�..Ni fiFF Lt� •,Y7 �'-'�r4 ,�y��•'y :-`•t`,,, `: ✓ �,ii s.",. f�T� -� [ ;nt' + .• �• f Y +J J,•: �+[~[��',w�+t f lr 1. . .f �• +:•fj�. i� f tin�s�r �fi.r r ..« ✓x. r.ti•� 7,'{{: `i 'K;' K'S�`i;,i ' r✓,+• .r ✓ {K.v r�i .��,�„+�'�'-- -__ -- _. -- r '-; - H "t hCa:. �t - vrt." fi��it'r tt• t�j rt%,Y '.. f,f>. c,t.S+•.`{' It - ,�r r. .+• t'T'l: er .treit + tray_• f '.L-1 •�,lE�Y'{�m,y�L�S- t��tn :ti�'c�,--ts•�.�' �,�4` t fm�sY�i3:.> ti"�SL,�;�� ' . "'_. �4•,�rr 't},r : fhb"•l.r� f .•tJ.;,G� i . R•i.�i.�Jr V% :1c f, wtiY� •J� t;.i .�. �� �'�: . t�r . ,.�fp't;{ ii�,•,r i • eV � +i. � tQ.i . vti .w' i sr-T r' 1%: :� c. J %:,e l� ' , tF� � •reg. Y S 7`:«-- 'S" .a�`.f� �:. •z_✓ r+�;�VY-f'4;. "`�•3� ifv,` ..'1•,,! � .t ,moi �j.��,_ r. � tt• K.� 3 �•�t '•.wi ... ♦ �J.iti�.�•'�T�;L s��y �1•t!�%..«j _, •rtl�, 'rt .,... -=C •�aT ,,E. ,�.Gi.�i• tr�`��4t 1 ' +� 7 F;'iTcL�,I-'"n'rt�,7v:f' �A�a ! �ti%,!L •"t�t!f"r�f_ .��'�i' � `���%h'c $•t.�t�}�;�hSiQy�1't } f r�, '•�j'•';y f.'+'-c;{f1r . t�, .r +r.i ✓T� ftai , ..t. ;r4i•T S',cr,•,..,+L` h`•.•t�,.S ' 'Lvl[ -'f � +!- 7 fst•, fy�t � y G�✓ F 1r•� .f .t'ti%r ,[ ° ka .moi H.y t1r ,.r-{,,� . • 1, �� ,, l,� a � f ,, `�!' •� •� 1 j-i i f Ytlll ui: y tt✓ l } y�Ltikti• � ,r ? i� .t�,Fi, '�"� Lrq�� r�'�yr=�a�; w � -tn st're •� ' �> � +�+rtx Wit,., i�': It ifi�ffk t ' •M;i .. "00* &IsTiNG GREENLINE v > AREA Ot G. P t A. BOUNDARIES or REVISED GREENLINE res ALTERNATIVE ARDA ll{rtniQM GREENLINE 'WITH ALTERNATIVE AREA FZGR3,14 LOCATION Op THE CHZCO ARIA RELINE SCALE ea►,th metrics 1 ' C TRAT TRAFFI��ND Ci1z. Nr 1;XJ Sx=NG SETTING gh�y,y �vstem. The roadway system within the project area is presented in include: Muir Avenue, Bell Figure 1.1-2. Roadwaya serving the project area Nord Avenue, The primary access roadways Road, Alamo Avenue, Guynn Avenue, the project area are East Avenue, State Route 32 and The Esplanade. two serving Muir Avenue, Bell Road, Alamo Avenue, Guynn Avenue and Nord ,Avenue are is tt two lane arterial south of the project lane local roadways. East Avenue lanes just to.the west of The Esplanade intersection. site, but widens to four Avenue is the east/west arterial in northern Chico. State Route East primary 32 is a two lane highway providing access to Hamilton City, Orland, Interstate Route 32 is a four 5, and southern Chico (see Figures 1.1-1 and 1.1-2). -State First :Street. The Esplanade or State Business Route lane roadway southeast of 99 is a north/south arterial leading to State Route 90 which provides primary north/south access to Red Bluff, Redding (to the north) and to Sacramento and The Esplanade also provides access to Southern California (to the south_). areas:, including downtown Chico. ud .commercial Mast of the intersections in the project vicinity are the conventio nalf 90 angle of incidence degree angle type, but some of the intersections have :an than 90 degrees. These intersections -which is significantly less ahlethe construction of the associated roadways are typically to substandard an cnersections And standard vehicles galsopresnnt unsafe maneuvering waoate;fewer roadYsProdectarearoadwyseaional intersections are roasted in_ and following unconvent conditions. The near the project area: Bell/Muir, Bell/Nord, Bell/Guynn, Bell/Alamo, Bell/Cussick, East/Kennedy, /Elkwood, Bell near/Jones, Bell/Butterfly°o Rodeo/Nord. The following roadways do not -meet,' Kennedy/State Route 32, and , county roadway. standards: `Alamo, Guynn, NordRodeo, Henshaw and Muir. Table � a f volumes Local Tri 1, o Cond�t�on ��:e� ceP.oreintersections. Existing traffic �, description of levels of s ry table levels of service . int rod`uce aece on :roadways within the project vicinity p p flow•). However+, levels of service txe being iriet�ementEast (rel'atiVely free East/ reduced by increasing traffic volumK:s at the following inEast�Cohasset and ;The State Route 32, Ea.W The Esplanade, East/State Route 944 (see Figure 1.1-2). Table 3.2-2 provides the existing PAL Esplanade/Cohasset hour levels of service at these intersections. At some locations, the ons peak' level of 'service is estimated based on observations rather than ealculat T»�Ffe Candi ions. In 19820 the City of Chico prepared an arede e transportation study. For purposes of documenting the traffic setting, the the by JkIK and C}+� co Urban _A _Tat j.1jt_a ,dy (CATS), prepared for city The CATS has not been Associatesi is hereby incorporated by reference; presented in. CATS' adopted by the county. Some of the assumptions/findings be prudent., or accurate. This EIR recognizes and accounts e may not current, for these inadequacies to'the'extent ferasible The QOLinty will cooperate and encourages the. city to refine the CATS:' ' the Objective of the Chico Urban Area Transportation.Study `was to predict transportation future traffic levels in the Chico area and identify to this future travel demand. improvements that will be necessary accommodate i' BNM 6 PROJECT ' AREA � I ri i — coal r. SOURCR Y "Tax Ass,, SOURCE!' nose�ction lanpmer is Itrrova� sww■rWlden to 4 Lame ri.aanes widen td --INsvu Artarltdls tvarOnp WIdths) • Flatt M-1 20�-itAR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1980 TO YEAR. 2066 ' N QSt'ti h iTii9t1^ICS lii SCALE 1 MI. w _ ------------ The CATS Information is to be updated and revised based upon p the most current data available and represents a basis from which cumulative traffic, Analyses can begin. For purposes of cumulative traffic impact analysis in the area, the 'CATS assumptions represent all reasonably foreseeable projectsoinct the area of potentially environmental impact (Palmer,, 19$6), Table 3.2-3 presents existing and projected traffic volumes on major streets in the project area. Figure 3.2-1 shows the major improvements required.by the year 2000 according to the CATs. Figure 3.2-2 shows the major improvements required by buildout of the General Plan capacity according to the CATS. The followZng are the primary improvements identified in the CATS for thero e p ,1..ct area. These improvements are expected by the year 2000., Widening East Avenue to four lanes between State Route 32 and The Esplanade Widening of East Avenue td six lanes between The Esplanade and State. Route 99. (Butte County,questions the feasibility of this improvement. The maximum feasible width of East Avenue, in this location is expected to be five lanes. Widening would eliminat-. on ,street parking along Eatjt Avenue in this location.) Intersection ap .improvements at Lassen/The Esl nade, Lassen/State Route' 99, and The Esplanade/Cohasset..' The additional primary improvements in thero`ect P � . area identified in the CATS for ,buildout of the General Plan capacity would be: A new four' land connection between State Route 32 and State Route Lassen Avenue, including a, new nterrha' a at State Route ;gg. 99 via A new two lane connedtion between State Route 32and ;State Route 99 via ` Eaton Road, The following text from CATS i:larii'ies traffic conditions and planned 'vement ' s in the Northwest Chico Subarea. Generally, the Northwest. Chico subarea involves the area north 'of 11th Avenue and Kest of Cohasset. "The major bottleneck in the Northwest Subarea will be East Avenue, there traffie,of up to 55400 vehicles per day is forecast, East Avenue will have to carry all east -west traffic between the commercial areas on Nord Avenuea('Stage Route 32) anis Cohasset Road, To avoid massive Widening of. made a four lane arterial thro�d be ektended w�� nue Lassen Avenue should st to Nord Avenue and be throughout. The existing sections of LAssen Ave- asnuev�. . ' would be widened from X10 to 48 feet except for under the freewa W40116 the bridge abutments are Only 52 feet apart: Such 'a parallel road,, which 'Would also be linked to the Route 9.9 freeway, would attract as much an 30% of the. East. Avenue traffic. Further relief could be provided by extending Eaton Road West 'to Nord Avenue. This would divert about 5,bo6 external trips ,'day between Route 32 and northeast Chico as well as too to three thousand trips between Route 32 And' the Route 99 freeway. Thus, with the Lassen and Eaton eXtensions,; about 71000 trips would be diverted to Eaton, and. around 15,006, trips would B y 000 tri s on Ea Avenue be diverted to Lassen leaving only around 27, p st i ABLH'3.2-2. EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE AT APPLICABLE'INTERSECTIONS IN NORTH CHICO DURING THE P.M. PEAK:HOUR P.Mi PEAKHOUR' INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE '(a) East/SR 32' A (b)' East/Kennedy A (b) SR 32/Kennedy A (b)' -` East/The'Esplanade NA East/SR 90, North Ramp - A (.47) South Ramp A (.57`) East/Cohasset B (.62) The Esplanade/West Shasta A (b) The Esplanade/fest Lassen A (b) The Esplabade/Henshaw B (b) ' Th e.-Esplanade/Cohasset SR 99/Ea ton B (b) NA Not Available � (a) See Table 3,2-1 for descripbioh6 of - Y Eby This levels of service for intersections, level of service, is assumed b the city based on observation's. rather than. tiiit� movement vol � been limes, because no recent counts have performed (Derrick, 1985):; Source: Derrick, 1986, 1 3.2-6 STREET SEGMENT EXIST7.Nr FUTURE (2000)' DAILY VOLUME DAILY VCLUME 1981 ('a) 1986 (b) II EAST AVENUE SR2 to Dixoi!Cussck 8,800 9,716 15,504 Dixon/Cussick to The Esplanade 10,400 11,257 26,700 The Esplanade to SR 99 14,800 16,340 29,700 SR 99 to Cohasset 11,300 12,476 18,600 THE ESPLANADE Eaton to Lassen 7,400 8,170 18,500 ' Lassen to East 131,300' 14,684 26,800 East to Cohasset e3,600 26,056 25,800 (c) STATE ROUTE 12' North of East NA NA 12,700 South of East 81700 90606 11,400 ' (a) Source: Butte County Circulation Element, 1984. ' (b) 1981 volumes increased by two percent per year for five years; Derrick, Ind_ (c) caies underestim^}.ed future volume or, overestimated 19 ' t 86 volume,, NA! Not., Available Source! Earth Metrics, 1985; -Butte County Circulation Element, 1984; and , Derrick, 1+986; Pierce, 19,86: (:west of The Esplanade). East of the The Esplanade, the traffic on Eaat will be further reduced by the proprsed Lassen Avenue interchange which will divert much local traffic., TY.us, traffic along East Avenue between ' Nord and Cohasset Mould probably range from, 25,000 to 30,000 Vehicles per day, with traffic on Lassen ranging from 15,000 (at Nord) to 25,004 (west of the freeway) Vehicles per day. IThus; East Avenue taay still be able to ' function as a four, lane road', although it has been shown as a 6 lane roadway on Figure 19 to be conservative. in any case, the Lassen and Eaton extension projects should be done firsts and East Avenue only widened to six lanes if eongestion.on East still occurs. 3.2-7 Other necessary improvements in the Northwest Subarea .nelude widening Cohasset Road to four lanes between The Esplanade and Mangrove (adequate right of way exists along most its length), and making Eaton Road a four lane road between The Esplanade and Cohasset" (City of Chico, 1989.) Another improvement which is not mentioned in the CATS, buy: is, anticipated by the. City of Chico, is identified in a CALTRANS`"Route Concept Report" related. to State Route 32. In the project vicinity, this improvement would involve the wideningState Route 32 to four lanes, ane; the construction of bicycle lanes and left turn pockets. This project is at the bottom of the CALTRANS top ten priorities for construction between 1990 and 1995. Transnnrta�inn RlPmPn. of the Chino Geberal Plan. The Transportation Element of the Chico General Plan is directed towards achieving a balanced transportation system, which ensures convenient access for all Chico •relsidents, serves the proposed patterns of land use, and minimizes disruption of the environment. The &Odussions focus ohi 1) the iinplementation of a coordinated multi modal transportation system accommodating private and public motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, Z)`the scenic enhancement of the highway landscape; 3) the abatement of noise generated by transportation, systems; 4) safety; and 5) separation of modal systems. Noise was not found to be a significant environmental issue for the proposed project, according to the Initial Study prepared by Butte County (see Appendix 16.1). The following' policies summarize the Transportation Element. Insure that the existing: and proposed circulation systems 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 conflict between modes (see following discussion on the Chico Area Transportat;.on Study, Traffic Setting). Develop a pub3iC transit system responsive to the needs of thee -greater Chico community. Actively, promote the system as an alternative to automobiles. .(The Chico Area transit Systemis an existing service). - Develop a system of bicycle facilities that provides, where possible,, separate access to major destinations and assures the safety o` all (se:e discussion on pedestrian and bicycle facilities). Protect and enhance the scenic qualities of State Routes 32 And. '99 and other major entry ways to the city. A11 tie' commercial development adjacent to State Routes '32 and 99 should be adegUately,landscape d. Circulation $Ieme t of the Butte Cnunty General P1ar,,, The Circulation Element of the Butte County ;General Plan was prepared in 1984.. The Element 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 policies and programs within, basiccompoh6nt , timdftabds, The onent'f Element Is for Policy, "into three is intended to be an analytical and d' p' g descriptive basis for develo in a transportation, p y analytical p , th Butte Counbyis clic Trans ortation Issues and Pol.cies sets for countywide ane urban area transportation goals, objectives, policibs-, and programs to the year 2000. The Appendices of the Circulation Element contain 3.2-8: additional information and data supplements referred to by the previous text, including the Element's environmental impact report. The Butte County Circulation Element Diagram is presented in Figure 3.2-3 The primary improvement shown in Figure 3.z=3 that relates to the project area is the Eaton Road extension which would be constructed after the year 2000 to provide additional east%west-capacity in North Chico. The following policies, programs and requirements of the Butte 'County Circulation Element specifically relate to the ;project area and proposed General Plan ,amendment project.' 2.1.2 'Butte County will encourage, and support sincere efforts by county residents to form assessment districts for road maintenance and road drainage: 2.2.E The county will. pursue the development of a comprehensive fiscal impact model or program,, including for traffic or road itpactsj. to assist in the analysis of cost and revenue balances from proposed development projects: 2.P Program: The county willstudy, develP and implement,as feasible, the folloxingro diprograms,, ov ee cad asses nee of new development: 1) R assessment districts for maintena 2) Development. fees .for off site traffic impacts caused by neer sed chedW es for specific developments that will contribute to the - impact of circulation in surrounding locations. -A long term - goal df a countywide developer fee program for traffic simpacts should be studied and implemented at a Yater date. Comprehensive road development fee programs should be jointly developed between the countY and'. the cities of Butte County. 3) Drainage assessment districts in 'problem areas. 4) Enforceable,, road development agreements. r expansion of existing roads aso. 4 1. Right of way needed, for new rod p 8 �+ g y , shall be planned for; land uses that would preclude the timely_ development of such right of way shaxi be prohibited. e 4.146 Usable road easements of adequate width shall, be located as to most beneficially serve the needs of all parcels, 4:1.8 Private subdivision roads will be built to full county standards and they, will be privately maintained as such through their maintenance cycle: 4-,<.1.10 Nest land divisions should be held responsible for their fair share of the offsite road improvements needed to handle the traffic increases that they cause, 3,,2..69 4'-.1.11 The count should enoura a the utilization of development Y g agreements as one wayof ensuring that road development standards and plans are meta 14.1.1 The county will maintain the integrity of the Chico Area Greenline. adopted in 1982. Pedestrian and Biey�rle Fao�,11f��RS, Pedestrian and bicycle activities generated from within the project area are relatively low due to the low density of development in the area: No sidewalks or, formal bicycle lanes exist along roadways in the area, but the low traffic volumes and lowresidential density make walking and bicycling relatively safe activities. Henshaw Avenue, Lassen Avenue, and Cussick Avenue, south of Bell Road, are designated as long range Class 'III bikeways. Class III is equivalent to a bike route with no on street right of ways or improvements. Tu§lia Transit. The Chico Urban Area is served by the Chico Area Transit System. Regular scheduled bus service is provided near the project area by Route 1, which serves East Avenue and The Esplanade, east and south of the Project area. The route serves North Valley Plaza Mall, both Chico hospitals, and the Social Security office.. The capacity of this route I's equaled during peak hour periods. No route changes are anticipated in the near future. Intensification of development' along, East Avenue and the increasing importance of East Avenue as a key arterial, bowever, may result in a modification of Route 1 or the addition of a new route servin; properties along `East Avenue, between The Esplanade and State Route 32• No schedule for this improvement has been adopted (Derrick, 1986x). The closest bus stop to the perimeter, of the project area is located at the intersection- of East --Avenue with The Esplanade— approximately one mile eaat'of the project area. Bus service veekdays is provided between 6:30 A.M, and 7:30 PM. Saturday service is available between 8.30 A.M. and 6:30 P.M. Most transfer are located the, Regional. transit servioe is lchdowntown provided by Y'ButteCountTransit o eratea. Y , whp s routes from the City of Chico to Butte College and the community centers'of Oroville and Paradise. Eme `encu Access. Access routes to and throughout the project area are presented in Figure 3,2-1. No emergency vehicle access restrictions currently exist within or around the project area. However, the unconventional intersections identified previously 1n this section preser.r: minor otjstacles to large Vehidl6bi such as fire trucks; ACTS Trip denerat{on. The proposed Genera]. Plan Amendment would allow up to 270 new residential units to be approved in the project area: These residences would generate approximately 2,700 trip ends (inbound or outbound) per day, based upon a trip generation rate of ten trip ends per residence per da?,' the2itute of Transportation Engineers, 1982). Psak hour trip generation from 70 residential units Would be approximately 270 trip ends during each of, the A.M. and P.M. peals hour periods, The AM, and P,M. peak hour periods are.. the ane hour periods with the highest traffic volumes betwee- 6:30 and 8:30 A.M. and 4x00 and 6:00 P. M.- Trip generation .frog reasonably, fbreseeabit Projects in the area 'bounded by, lrindo° Channel3 State Route 32y the proposed gigaton; Avenue ektofi sioh and Esplanade, (sed Appendix 16-:9), is expeoted,, to ,,be approximately=17500...trips The trips generated by the projedt represent app okimately 15'percent of these reasonably foreseeable trips. 3y2-11. ,.,ijrwrwt..prwrrrsrr.�:fwywt�rwf�rwif �iwr� • f O •. '.�! ,i t ,,°•�♦, iiiiiiiii ♦�°♦•, i♦��♦�••}}nnjf `IMrfrtbffrfluruUii`t ,' ' r o �f.~�rirr{ _ ' iii+'�i �* (r », 11((v '. r - •,; ' , ! • i*iii+lr s r ,�,�,r "„ue.. �' , , � , .. ,r• rti.�iiii ''r, a.: y'�A"u M•,. ,�, J �4 jQ yr. J . � _ _• r4m J�''' �'• . , _ Ir+� rt `1'” 1• "+' +" C &�� G '� - � C fiirtrtip•i ' !� . XHi �,<r./ �- Eiyiyi''•r.. ,��•�,t•i�iii•i� i i'i`A� P5 tiS6' : tJ�' t�Ay. �H �l� ♦.e' ' Kna '�k;�uY�`w�A3 '•+�•�`'I1n�7. "y°rr�.` T. I F{��,�IJI fUr� .r. �! !(y•i. ,1r+11.��. 11���•}A�r;8.C�a.iit%�}tiYi."iD.+t-ifZC y. . «+.IM�• �*'',�ih'r'qC� r' "t�t,7r�tr.�•1 �11ts L 11)•) :i1 t i ak�� trrCr}�. rr, � _ r✓«`M��J 1 f� G'"•a`+'• ��s i.lift E;I.s a':~i' s.r ♦ , .►CS ���{.'� "t.st;,i•ti♦ tNoa. _ "_ .✓. • w.tr r,. �,s� 1L 4.y7ii° ♦!rte cF As 4 '7= F %; z .•t� i t�Yi .'• s l L't• ,r '1 f�• ,���i rL �`+rF•i a C -�jr� r �.. .:" ",� � ;•,-., 4_ ,., t 1 \yih cr .u,.�ili �• r+t '�•`•... f •j11., ,� � �r � r . � �.�^ � r�j:rt � rte/ ..�, � h�~S i; ; � �° i�Y �i r. ". �,! r�,tr'�,r . �• 1+ r'"r•`'y Xr, " . •f,i � �� y , � � �� s irra•.: .. • ..„� �. J i '►'° i'y-.!rr.` {:/ 1, `' ✓. �r.,?.i j" 'R 7 yr �r iiia '�. { rtt �'�'! .`�' �. \ ^( i `s � . '!4''�'•� _ ' T ��,�1.� ♦ � :'�•�m�.I� F••4 u iri � • �'Prer s a SCF % n + W ♦ r. >x - .ti y ,�, r�. ��,� '.'•�„'4t .e:��.'1" i� �'w :�F�S����" �\},�SiF ��/�'rtr•�'*•'..:.~C�����. i��~i't':>3'. ,,�,.. . w , =2`•- .• •! �. IY•r.. 13 Far' ,� F' IT { I��• ,�' ^1, M e l�Lrv�` Y�t'7j 3•1ti leG+.. ��9 N '' i•trf•':. � �t ' Ji, #� �r is c..�-- .. - ;r , . r' ` k'� r r'"`► itj P"� iter,,,< + !� Y u.. ,,+r' �• r.i;`�~ j� 1. i �,i f }SGp �'F ,. ..r, •.".. ii \ •/"•,,r •,� � .. ry1 • tSLr�� � \`� � i `- f L � N � � r �� �`� �-�� * , rs �' r,� a �� � • • � ...;,;k f v ,it �.Fr e'4 S" �,y`' 1 *�, CIDY r t w r.r-.}`s•`�' !,+w ice, i I� «�,, , i° Y t Ay �} "' 1 ! .f�.•w.�. GLASS y pp • q tPA1"N). t� •.:1 � ! �, r,y lx Y AIR tI . I�Irt1nYYr•'�. t: • Cl.AS5 Ii fLANEi - 'ririrtirrrttiifti ?� :ribr� A / • I P ~ 5��r • �� •ter k' • ,.B N r1 " ,r".. CLASS `�11 ili3Ol�TE) yyL• -��._ +.s �cri ♦4'•.;tied .r�'Ai. �s� ``��•, `i� t�ttYi�F�fi.r.+ r �ryr==�:o" { [� 1 'S 9 ,.�,., `L , et'Iy+'. i- r *'y:.�,r rc .a s,: ins4n . �."eY i,,+: •`�•si .. • .. x, . a r4 SCALE �• .yr ` ri ,'•.° .�: .f►` ` °11y 1 / �y,li«ilti 'ar ,,. � .i ^� n r �%, ". " ♦j�� ,`y `i°1i w f 1r'��, �iI1°. * i l +"�� ,.1 R+�' *n � }r , •'. s 1 i VN TNOU�i1gD5 bF FEST ar ',� , . . � (" �•...,:n.i ee�rtM '"Numm rnetrio EIC»URE 3.2-+ bfktJ&S PLAN bp "E CHICO GENtAAL PtrAN 1 . TABLE 3.2-4. ESTIMATED FUTURE DAILY TRAFFIC INCREASE& ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSER FROJECT 1 . PROJECT GENERATED. r RoRDWAY<SEGMENT VEHICLE TRIPS, (a) EAST AVENUE 500 (b) SR 32 to Cussick 950 r Cussiek to The The 0 The Esplanade to SR 99 450 45 � SR 99- :.to C.ohasset T1E ESPLANADE 100 Eaton, to Lassen 500 Lassen to East 1040 East to Cohasset STATE ROUTES 32 135 North of Muir - 100 Muir to East South of East 540 270 wzsT SHASTA - -- -_ 270 WEST LASSEN 400 - HEI�SHAti1 GUYNN (South of East) 70 CUSSYCK West 'Shasta to Henshaw 270 150 r Renshaw to East 70 South of East (A) Represents the incremental increase in traffic in both directions by the proposed pro on develo went these roadways duQ to the p allowed �- (b') Maximum. Soirde Earth Metries Yneorporated, 1986. _ r 1 r THE ESPLANADE. Theadditional traffic generated on West Lassen, West Shasta, Henshaw, and East Avenue would affect travel capacity along The Esplanade by increasing left turn conflicts at main intersections. The impacts of this traffic at The Esplanade intersections with West Shasta would not be considered significant and would not require mitigation due to the relatively low-raffic volumes involved and the .remaining capacity at this signalized intersection. However, the loss of travel capacity at the intersections of The Esplanade/West Lassen and Esplanade/Henshaw would require mitigation. 'Coca] 'Transport tj on Pl annnioa. The proposed project does not present any significant impacts which would substantially alter the land Use, data bases utilized for transportation p3anning in the Chico area. However,. the f,xisting.data bases did not anticipate the proposed development density in the project area.. The construction of the Eaton Road extension would not be affected by the proposed General Flan Amendment or,related development but would encourage urbamrdensity and would increase traffic in the project area in the future. The impacts of the 1.extension would be examined and mitigated prior to approval o£ such a project. The feasibility alad desirability, of the Lassen Avenue extension through the project area would The altered by the proposed projecti Mitigation would be required to address this impact The proposed Generai Plan Amendment appears to: 'be inconsistent with the policy in the County Circulation Element which indicates that 'the county will maintain the integrity of the Chico Area Greenline (see Section 3.1, Land Use, Planning, Applicable Plans and Policies for a discussion of the Chico Area Greenline). The, Circulation 'Element ta intent in maintaining the Chico Area Greenline is probably to reduce trtip generation in areas of low urban density where roads would require substantial improvements to meet county standards. Tha remaining policies and requirements presented in the Ekisting Setting of apply directly to roadway improvements recommended as•m Many of these measures pp p Y itigation measures in_ this re ort ''address financing of roadway improvement this report. _ Padest�riAn and bi�y project would increase' cycle activities by allowing increased urban density in, the y ril�i�iee, a proposed rojec P r expected to create of be ex T d n ;project area. The projected increases wool P significant safety impacts or vehicle conflicts on local roadwaysy such as Henshaw Avenue. Safety impacts along maj6e'artehials would ''not be significant.,, however, the project related bicycle activity and motor vehicle trips would increase the need for appropriate bikeways and pedestrian street crossings along major arterials, such as East Avenue, especially near schools such as J: Partridge Elementary,- The Chico bike route along Henshaw Avenue Would not be significantly affected due to the small increase in traffic ptojeitbdI for this street. Elibl.Txa�G.3,t.• The proposed project would allow development which could increase patronage of Route 1 of the Chico Area Transit System. However, because the distance between most of the project area a.nd the diosest bus stop is more thanohe mile, many of the residents may not utili7,e the bus servicei impacts from the future developtent are not expected td, be signifioant but would IhOtementally increase transit -demand along the east Avenue corridor: if cluster development is proposed, measures to encourage transit patronage should be required during site plan review. ii 3 —1-'16 Emargann,A. io The additional dwelling units allowed by the proposed General Plan Amendment would increase the need for emergency service access to the project area. Unconventional intersedtibhb ,in the project area should be realigned to improve turning movements. b ` MITIGATION-MEASURES. The following measures are recommended Y the staff of Butte County and the City of Chico to mitigate the traffic impacts identified in this section. The applicants should be required to pay for all costs.associated withreali'. nal intersections ln the project vicinity. 'Timing specific "realigiWentn-thould be determined by the Y• ButteCounty Public Works Director as:development progresses. Realignments at the following intersections should be completed with - buildout of the .area; Bell/Muir, Bell/Nord, Bell/Guy nn Bell/Alamo° and Rodeo/tord.` The total, "cost It expected to be approximately $6,250 if reagnmen`t are coordinated with other road improvements. - The applicants shouldbe required to improve the reads in the project area to the standard set by he Butte 'County Plan ning;Commission and Board of St pervisors. ' The 'applicable 'standard would be SRS--1, if, they eoun4o requires minimum parcel sizes equal to or greater than 1.001 acresruraldevelopment "standards'. The applicable standard for 1.O acre parcels and urban standards is RS-2, which includes sidewalks curbs and gutters (storm drainage infrastrueture). The timing for the required improvemDirectorentsbproould be vementstodetermined hefollowing roadwautte y�segmentsunty 'Public shouldkbe completed with buildbuti of the area: Muir, from SR 32 to Bell; Rodeo, from Muir to Henshaw; Nord, Gwynn and Alamo, from Bell; to East; and Henshaw, from Nord to Alamo. The City of Chico mould request that these roadways meet the standards�of the city or county`, whichever are more �( `str ngent.LL The 'total cost is expected' to be approximately $1,i�14°,'125 to ■ achieve the SR8-1 Standard and $2,2621825 to achieve the R8-2 standard. The11 constructiontofsleftdturnreockets andCforrthe-elimina for 6'f po q - p-elimination on street' parking along Esplanade at Henshaw, and along Esplanade at Lassen.' The total. cost for this improvement is a expected to be approximately $2,0,;,5,00,, An additional $632 would be,'required if signal modifications' Weeb tgs red. "This 'contribution is a pro rata share based on the p j rement compared to'th, total traffic volume, and a $15,1700 cost for signal modification. The applicants should be required to contribute funds for the installation of traffic signals at the following intersections ;(East/Nord, East/Guynri, East/Cussick, and East/Alamo). The total dost for thea ompr6vemehts is expected to be approximately $10,125. The contribution is ,a pro rata. :share based on the project°s traffic increment compared to the total traffic volume.; The applicant's should be rq e 'uired to contribute funds i for 'widening East - Avenue to allow for, five lanes (:central continuous left turn lane). This regniremelt would involve a 13 f oot widening from Alamo halfway to Gwynn, and a 26 foot widening from SR 32 halfway to Guynn Sidewalks,' �.2-17 �1 curbs and gutters would not be required of the applicants, but aero-., -. rata contribution of funds (based on traffic) for a storm drainage culvert would be required. The total cost for these improvements is expected to be $132,643. - Site design_ criteria which increases opportunities for transit patronage should be encouraged if specific development proposals involve clusters p p of development. - Access to the future extension of Eaton Road should be provided via Bell Road. Intersections with Nord Ga nn and Alamo should not be encouraged unless future !and use intensification and related roadway improvements occur prior to extension of 'these roadways. - Pedestrian crossings should be considered along East Avenue where, P rimar y pedestrian routes and bikeways meet with East.,Avenuo. - The'foXl"owing measure is recomended to mitigate eumulaI'Eve traffic impacts expected as a "result of development in the project, vicinity and buildout in the project vicinity, and Chico Urban Area. - Butte Coudty and the City o'f Chico should acquire appropriate funding from developers, 'FHWA, and CALTRAM for long irange'traffic improvement programs as required by the : C,6unty Circ ulation Element and CATS, - The City of`Chieo and Butte County should review the Chico Urban Area TransportationStudy's-recommendation for extending Lassen Avenue West to. State Route 32 Funding for such an improvement Would be difficult without further density, increases or an "area wide funding district:. If this proposal is determined to be a long range requiro-menttt Butte County requires property dedications for'wright-of-way "prior tar development in the area, 3z�18 GEOLOGY/`HYDROLOGY F=s"ZTI'iG SBTTZNG _ SLea1s.�X. eat area is located on a broadThe proj alluvial plain known as the ar Chico Fan, 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 grained alluvium consisting of unconsolidated silt, sand, gravel and cobbles. The coarsegrained alluvium is overlain by a loamy surface soil layer and is underlain Sierra Nevada foothill metamorphic and volcanic rocks. SOILS. Surficial soils occurring in the project area are composed primarily of loams belonging to the Vina Farwell association (USDA, 1976)• The Vina Farwell association is characterized by. good natural drainage, moderaitely, slow to moderate subsoil permeability, slow o medium runoff and no erosion hazard. The Vina Farwell association also possesses a moderate shrink/swell a change (expansion) potential, a. measure .of .the volume change of a soil with rating, a measure In moisture content, and a moderate allowable soil pressure of suitability of a sol.for foundation pressure. The Soil Conservation Service identifies and rates the agricultural potential ' and limitations of soils into eight land capability abilit classifications. Soils in Classes I to IV are considered agricultural, and soils n ClassesV to VIII . and are better suited possess characteristics which limit agricultural uses, or recreation. The Vina Farwell soils have been for forestry, range, wildlife identified as Class I and II prime agricultural soils. Portions of'the project area also contain surficial soils composed of clay The Conejo Beeirendos loams belonging to the Conejo Berrendos association. association soils are characterized by good natural drainage; moderately slow to slow subsoil permeability, slow runoff and no 'erosion hazard. However, can become highly impermeable (Eiiell, When these soils are compacted, they 1986).. The Conejo Berrendos soil's also possess moderate to high shrink/swell potential and moderate allawablesoil pressure. The Cbneja'Ber are Class III rime a ricultural soils. SEISMICITY. The Chico area does not have a history of severe seismic activity faults (City of Chico, 1976). There are no active or potentially active or Alquist Priolo Special Studies Zones located in the Chico area which includes in Chico.' the project'area There is no record of sUetaae rupture occurring is no documented history of ground failure, such as In addition, there liquefaction# lateral spreading, lurching and differential settlement in Chico. The Cleveland Hill fault, the only known active fault in Butte county} is Movement along located approximately 30 miles southeast of the project area. responsible for the 5.7 magnitude (hdhter Scale) the Cleveland Bill fault was cake in Au ust,..1.975. The Oroville earthquakP vat fejt n Oroville easth q g .' Chico, but no damage 'Was recorded. ,A series of short, north/northwest ].boated approximately ten miles northwest of the trending inactive faults are ,project area.. 3.3-1 v' In additiOn to the 1975 Oroville earthquake, ground shaking from earthquake picenters outside the immediate area has been felt previously in the Chico arca. IHowever, the greatest intensity of group, shaking recorded in 'Chico was 5.0 on the Richter Scale and VWO is no historical evidence of any significant damage having occurred. A statistical estimation of earthquake Richter Scale magnitude, as a function of estimated return period for California, indicates Chico could experience an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 on the Richter Scale once every 40 years.. Other studies have, however, suggested smaller .macitnum intensities (City of .Chico, 1976). �drolo>? DRAINAGE. The overall topography in the project area slopes gently t< the northwest towt�rd Mud Creek, which i$ located approximately, one mile northwest of the project area: Lindo Channel is located approximately 0.75 miles south of the project area. At present, there are noL existing storm drainage facilities within the project area. Overland runoff in the project area ponds W 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' existing and planned storm drainage facilities in the projoi3b 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 Rail -road and. along Bell Road iii order to accommodate potential urban development of the storm drainage study area (seO Pigure 3.4-1). These collector lines would flow by gravity to Shasta Union Drainage Assessment )district (SUDA)D) channels which would ultimately *i6charge into Mud reek.(Rolls, Anderson & Rolls, 3985) The proposed collector lines have beer designed to carry 1GO year storm flows, i"i� "a�cordt�nee with Butte County Public Works Department and 1lutte County improvement Standards. The; development density assumption for the project area was two t,6 ti* a"Ilius P j units per acre One or more dwelling units per'acre'(or lot sites of less than 1.001 acres), is the threshold density at which underground drainage facilities are neoded (Rolls Ab,,1er�son; Rolls, 1`0851 Edell , 1880) . if storm drainage nfrastructure is required in the project vicinity, annexation to SUDAb would be required prior to the use of `416ir fae4ies. `cels are not located . et par„ In the 1�!Q yea'r floodplain FLOODING The sub�e (U.S. Depa.tment of .Housing and Urban Developmeat, 37�+)• Mud Creek and I,indo Channel'are modiried ephemeral:chanhols design�ad tr, provide flood control for Big Chico Creek. The ptojeet area Wray, however, b43 subject to, minor, localited b ormwater pond "ng 'due to the lack of drainage ;infrastructure and soil compaction. l3ROU2iD1ATER. The project area and. Chico vicinity is underlain by extensive r ifornia groundwater supplies roundwater basin ("Card roundwatt of`WaterRPsouhe Sacramento Valley g3.��..Public 5erviees Uti ftiea contains .. the Sneath Chi a di.s�ussion�of water�supplyeasndb distribut�oon iThese noires project area. There are whrde water bearing non are the shallow intermediate, and 'deep aquifers, Groundf.athe generally moves ~ westerly andr�wnward froi the shallow, to intermediate aquifer and .from the intercediate to deep agUilerg' The shallow zone contains, unconfined groundwater at depths 'less than 20 "i'ee below ground surface in thick alluvial material: The shallow Zane receives of domestic ., reeha rv,e directly for infiltration precipitation,,streamflow; reaha,4ter from leaehfields, and urban runoff from drainage wells. wasGroundwater in the intermediate aquifer occurs at depths 20 to 50 feet below, The intermediate aquifer receives the ground surface in older alluvium. incised in older alluvium, through vertical leakage from recharge from streams overlyingsaturated alluvium and possible subsurface inflow from the Tuscan Formation. The deep aquifer is'located in the sand and gravel of the .Tuscan Formation, II tuff and r;udf low- layers. The deep which is coich�yieldsless !!! largeeam amounts ofgroundwaterto deep irrigation and aquifer, v�h Y municipal wells., receives recharge mainly .:from 'streams that drain thefoothill skrea east' of Chico (;CDVIR, -1984) • - Since 1961, reebargt: of the load groundwater basin generally has exceeded to localities in the local discharges in the Chico region; in contrast other basin which have experienced an overdraft. Sacramento Valley groundwater tables in the Chico ares were.lowered by an estimated 10 feet Groundwater 1912 and 1.961 as a result of intensified agricultural irrigation, but between have since stabilizes, or have 'risen between two and six feet (;Butte County, 1982)" WATER AIUALITY. Specific water quality data are not available for project area the "subject parcels would' be surface water or groundwater. Runoff :'.wo►a of seditient and contaminants characteristic expected to contain minor amounts and turban development ,in the area. , of agricultural Groundwater in the deep aquifer is generally of good, mineral quality'T, waters in creeks which - reflecting the excellent mineral quality of surfs a groundwater is found in parts of provide kraundoate" recharge. Poorer quality with nitrate concentrations exceeding drinking water shallower aquifers standards of J!5 :milligrams peliless(than)threeA�:olsix)monthsrolds are toxic to humans, particularly children Each area. of high nitrate cone entrations t two of w)l oh are loealed 0.75 miles esidential northeast and; south of the project areata underlie; from►ered urbanrilevelopmentareas the di 4etion of groundwater flow from and alto: lies in drainage wells Cas discussed below). Ther numerous individual disposal and systems} .whioi ratvrn domestic wastewaterr containing nitrogen, .phosphorus major source of the elevated chlorides tot shAllow'groundwater^ zone, area also more than A1C knotrn drainage wells at nitrate Concentrato,�s. There are that return, to the 'shallow groundwater tone surface water Off site laxations C cD�tR; 1 q` 1084)i runoff from arias of shade cafe sarfaee water drainage systems.. To resolpe the exibUbg,nit"rate problem in the Chico area and prat+ant impairment of valu Ole groundwater resources in the Additional watUr quality the CD R recommended that ('I) unsewored residential areas in the Chita C2) area, area. connect to the e.'xisti,ng sewex'age system ; s soon as feasible: and be prohibited and all ecastr:ioLian of additional d"ainage wells•should wells shotjld be elitihated as dbon as feasible. Other `study eg�-,sting drai- ►age riboo tmendatioe,s pertain i appropriate well construction ani >x?onitoring of . shallow ..aquifer groundwater quality CCDM 1984) 7 The City of Chico and Butte County have adopted a Nitrate Action Plan for 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 the groundwater. The primary objectives of the Nitrate Action. Plan are to jointly develop a Sanitary' Sewerage Plan :and a Story g Dra,na e. Plan for the Chico area. The sewerage plan would include standards and requirements p q s for sanitary seFrerage 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 tempora"ry drainage facilities, such as leach fields.three The hButte County Health Department currently allows no more than Y dwelling P erved by septic tank/leach field systems, acre in the ,proje..t area to be s A feas:ibilifq study of providing sanitary,sewer service to the north Chico area, including the project area, recommended installation of a trunk sewer which would accommodate potential urban development of'the area. The trunk` sewericonnect the project , which would pass approximately 156 feet Northwest of the project area, sewe would p j area to the sewage treatment plant in'Chieo However, f (Tuttle financing for implementation of tris -plan is' uncertain. at this time 980, A position statement from supervisor-Dolan is presented in Appendix 16,11. IMPACTS Residential development allowed As a result of the General Plan Abeinament and amendment of the Chico Area Green'.L1ne Vould have no significhnt iapaots on, the. geologic setting of the project area: Would not present .significant ft development constraintsto potential resi htial development resulting from the General Plan Amendment. Potential impacts due to the moderate shrink/swell, potential and moderate allowable soil pre sure of the project area soils (the Yina Farwell and Conejo serrendos associations) could be reduced to insignificant levels With implementation of standard engineering; design and construction methods. The loss of prime agriculture soils ,Is discussed in Secticin 3.1, Land V66i Planning, and Applicable Plans and Policies. The Yina Parweli and Conejo Lerrehdos soill do not possess an erosion hazard due to the level nature of the project area. Potential construction related erosion. occurring with disturbance of the soils 'couid be reduced` to insignificant levels With standard erosion control practices, Potential urban development, on minimum one acre parcels would not involve unubual or'extensive grading, or 6611 redistribution, further minimizing potential Erosional impacts, The expected gradin$ and snit redistribution.taould simply involve cuts for foundations and minor fill for landscape purposes. (See Section 3`.1, Land `Use;'Planning, Applicable Plans and Poli'eies, for a discussion of potential agricultural impacts as-'a result of the proposed pro,jeet4) 3,3-, SEISMICITY. The primary, potential seismic hazard to the project area is Existing Setting, there is ,a high , ground shaking..: As discussed in the would continue to experience ground shaking in the probability that the area utres of ground shaking have been predicted for the future. Various intensiti ut depend on a combicaation of Chicoarea. The intensity of ground shaking,would to, the earthquake epicenter, the magnitude of the type of fault, the distance s.nd the materials between the fault and the: area, the earthquake, the types of thickness of the foundation materials at the site. Potential properties and ground shaking impacts to residential development and: storm drain or sewer eering-delign and and the mmendeconstruction, al Force facilities could be 'reduced by standard Cade Uniform 'Building In accordance .with the by the Structural Engineers Association of California. Requirements prepared The potential for liquefaction, a process by which water saturated, - strength and become liquid during cohesionl'ess (clay free) .coils. lose shaking, is moderate ;in the site area (Butte County, earthquake indueed'ground 1977). As discussed in the Existing Setting, the Chico area has no documented liquefaction, lateral history of" ground rupture or ground failure, including differential settlement. With the adoption and spreading, lui"eking ;and 'appropriate engineering design and construction utilization.of standard, methods which take intoormation account all knoweaew residential deve.iopinent in the project a uld befbe eonsistentfwithethe.Butte Element (Butte Couhty31 977), :and no significant seismii17 County Seismic Safety hazards would be expsoted. t o 0 lawable after approval of the roposed general Plan nRAINAGE.. Development al P in the area, but would Amendment would not a1A r. overall. drainage• patterns runoff 'generated in the project area. The incrementally increase stormwater,. Anderson & Rolls study, identifies one -,,acre parcels as thTechnicallyteif Rolls , limit between natural drainage, and subsurface infrastructure. than 1.001 acres in size (less than one all parcels w preequal to or greater -no storm drainage infrastructure would be required r dwelling unit --per acre), Under this -condition, the applicable road standard would be. (Edell, 1986). SRS- and no curbs, -gutters or sidewalks: would be needed.. Natural from eperoolatoncon percolation would be utilized to removeem�torincreaset6 implented tsites. tthisould _ developmen individual under condition.._ If urban standards are applied to this property; the RS -2 roadway standard curbs, gutters and storm would apply• Thin standard requires si.deWalks; The,requie d storm drainage infrastructure would be'. dxa?e infract ructure ''al.smot nnti cal to the infr..astt�ucderatture ; e decrease recommended far the area in the Ro11 s, �t tha mo:in dens.,. y (Ede11 r 1980 _ evso�R6l s study despite drainag responsibility 'Of' the e system would be the the Dost for the stOrm apPlic�its. FLOODING, The project Area is not located within the 100 year floodplain. create a minor increase DdV6lopment of tbe;area with impervious suefaoes would it' are g enerated from the min r additiostonal not in the amount of zrunoff unof f would runoff, t { constructed to Collect surfaoe red , d6wnstrea0 flooding. If storm drains are hot requi be expected to cause continue to oeau"r.; with development, Winor laealikdal stormwater pending may 'any localize8 storon,ir Development of the area would be able to diree� and roadways MdAsures to 'encourage on sbite ponding away Prom resiliences pereolatior should e6duoe this impact to ;�. i gnif3 cant levels. GROUttDWATER. By the ;year 2000, groundwater ealthoudhnreduced irrigated' is not expected to exceed the rate of rin the Ch co area echarg , acreage will reduce the gtrantiti of recharge (Butte county, 1982,)• Future, development in the project area would replace portions of existing vacant mental parcels with impervious surfaces, which would repdue to increased surface represent an incremental arge reduction in groundwater rfiltration uld notrbehexpectedeto result in an adverse runoff. The reduced recharge impact to groundwater levels due to the limited c�osutureodevelopmentmaree acre parcels. Potential sources of water supply addressedin Section 3.4, Public Services 'and Utilities. WATER QUALITY'. Develcpment resulting from the ,proposed Genera]. Plana Amendment would result in minor increases in urban pollutanrbonnt antities IIiron ), ff - generated by increased vehiet:]ar r and �"ertilzers DeKelopment would no.t and from application of p esticides introducenew Pollutants to area surface waters that are not already xpected present. Overall surface water quality impact�s�hebsp��graiscussion,are tot eadverse P to be significant. As addressed previnuslY i erosion 3mpaet`s and; associated water quality impacts from sedimentation are not expected to be significant. P e proposed General Plan Amendment could also Development resulting from the the'release of°wastewater contribute to water quality degradation through effluent. The Butte County health Departmene1hdag stemsashouldanot evelopment te increase nitrate contk/leaehfi1 1. Y eases never, of one acre parce7.s with septic to substantially amination iii local graundincrr gowev as'tho nitrate problem Of and further arity seweresystem�jmay become necebsary �- approved, connection of deeradation orithe aC�'egional basis (see Section 3 ) to reduce water �quality g - Public Services. and Utilities). P - -. effectiveness ofzseptic tank Se tie systems in reoharge areas are not expected to 'result In potential and public healt1i impacts,, The feasibility and such as soil leaehfeld systems are dependent upon several constraints, high groundwater, percolation rate, soil depth, slope, the level of seasonally and development density. Thi septic system s�tould be located 3n soil's with adequate percolation rates for the. design hy1.dra of the 'system: The soil should be of sufficient deptritegkter�or erslopetshoUldebevAdequatec material and microorganisms in the'was to minimize oversaturation. If the groundwater rises to trie lower 'surface of the leachfied, the soil would become saturated, the effluent would n �. contaminate the groundwater and effluent may accumulate on the ground sUrAac The �aaximum number of sail "absorption systems which mays operate sudcessfullq in a given area is dependent u0on the ability+ of the soil" to absorb septic su to control tbetment, y of Oil sites of tank effluent To en, re adequate wastewater tree density of on site disposal developed areas must be established systksms, In, general, a standard minimum develo Pt ahe gpilsizOthero�nformation, reconun+endc:d to prevent ;hydraulic overloading Iealtb suggests that b .5 to one acre contained in a Journal of Environs lineg 01* ani fc�r leachfield disposal ba s boen determines, to be reasonable or en toe exceeds three septic, tanks.in nitrate areas (Reid, 1986) These general gu he Nitrate Action Plitt which sets a rbid tial density. not dwelling units per acre (BU and City, of Ghicn„ 1 5) 3 ►3-6 Groundwater quality monitoring as outlined in the Nitrate Action Plan should be continued to detect potential groundwater quality impacts from on and offsite activities and to ;identify and implement appropriate mitigation.' - Future mitigation may g y ultimately involve connection to the City sever system. jTIGAIQN M.A5URE5 aAniogy. Residential development of the project area is geotechnically feasible. The following mitigation measures are recommended to 'reduce potential geologic ogie and seismic impacts to :insignificant levels. - Specificengineeringdesign and construction techniques recommended by the soils engineer should be incorporated; as '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 the Structural Engineers Association of California, - Foundation supportsand utilities should be designed to resist and withstand earthquake induced grotnd shaking. - Standard construction methods and erosion control measures should be implemented (including dry weather season gradin;, erosion control plans, revegetation,and devices to retain sediment within the construction area) to minimize; potential erosion impacts. 1 Drainage/Flooding. The followiq,,measures should be implemented to -accommodate-stormwater generated on the site., If 1•dral !A,r�,tdards (SRS-1 "roadways) are 'required for site development, a natural stbion, drainage systeth should be utilized and individual review .of subdiv s:,q.,,,s and site plans should focus on measures to reduce ori. Performance`-standards for ,,,ecommodAting �tormwater during ,the�runoff." 100 year event sYiould be implemented on a parcel by parcel basis. Semi eryiaus walkwa s and,.stormwater s ersal strategies should be p- ,. Y _ � p -g considered. Tf urban standards (AS-2 roadways) tte required for siP.e development', a storm esY drainaggstem capable of accommodating the 10Q ,year flood etr.ent from the site should 'be constructed, The cost for such a, system would be.appro�cimatelY r e �� 592 133: t-pr ouaiijy. 'Tho following measures are recommended in addition to those, measures identified in Section 3,.4; Public Services/Utilities to maintain water quality in the 'project area: Individual. septic tank and 1eachfield systems should be designed to satisfy county 'health standards and the requirements of the Nitrate Action Plan. w � q y `onitoring,,as outlined in the Nitrate. lotion Plan, Groundwater quality m should be continued to detect potential groundwater quality degradation and to identify and implement appropriate :mitigationt'if necessary: +�s7 alt Pt1AI.IC SE �rTrcre eND UTILITIES XY'�TTN SETTZHC. Public services provided in the project area include services such as water supply} sheriff protection, fire protection, education and road maintenance. Most public services available to resident of incorporated areas of the City of Chico, such as street sweeping and regular ;ject police patrols, are not Provided to unincorporated areas, such as the plain area. The following di.lcussions' describe the primary services available n the North Chioo Urban Area, Watei, is supplied to tide project area primarily through private wells; California water Services Company (CWSC), a private wat utility, i serves the, southeast side of the project area with eight ch water mains Cussiek Avenue. All of Chico and its unincorporated areas receive water from ke11s; CNSC is cuIrrently looking at 'the purchase oft new well. site near Guynn Avenue (Grant, 1985); ti ,Pr SArvi e. The project area is currently served by septic tanks. The nearest sewer:matn connecting the project area to the; Chico Water Pollution Control Plant ifs located on the'north edge of East Avenue: This sewer main can only serve the area located '600 feet north of East Avenue. The Chico Water Pollution Control Plant is currently operating below capacity, but the unused capacity already has been allocated for other areas of expectod ty of 'Chien and Butte County are currently addressing capacity at the treatmen re Pring �a rowth. The C3_ t plant and nitrate contamination in groundwater by p p sever Master Plan, impl;ementation of the` city and county Nitrate Action Flanrequires Butte County and the City of Chico to develop thio Master Plan. The Master -Plan will I-beludet the area to be served and the standards and requirements for sanitary sewerage :Facilities; the area to be served by septic tanks, with ination of :septic tank ime Useand maximum densities for non designation of 1"and tis e for re uiring sand connection 'schedule' q sewered area, and a t:and sanitary sewerage system.. The Nitrate Action Planindicates that the city county will develop a financing plan by January,1, 19861 and determine the= loq interest loans for the extension of +z�ier, availabilityof grants or drainage andlo11,Frater facilities to unserved areas to minimize and avoid Financing Plan of the groundwater. The Sewerage Master Plan and Pli�n.have 'not been completed or approved at this time.: The overall financial,-feasibil3.ty of this Master Plan is uncertain at this Ut4 (Tuttle, is6` p ed in Appendix ). A position statement from Supervisor', Dolan is present or Rolls, .Anderson, Rolls Civil Engineers completed, -a saaller.scale udy fof` the Butte County in 19,84 which include the 10raject area., A summary graphic Robs, Anderson; Rolls plan is 'presented in Figure 3.�-1. The Host 'for a system to serve the project area and study area-tc-) expected to be million in 19$t+; The option. �to elfin"irate service to the approximately $4.6. y eatn (740 acres) would project area; defined i,the. study as, Bell Road Ar have saved approximately $225> 606, Payment of three fees would be required to obtain a eoncieCtioh to the city sewage collection and treatment system. (1) :a water poll 1 plant ution control .�•--= — ���At • 0:195 • 00 v� 44 O � .`/� a �•%� —�•- •L0. � .:a• • ` : s .• `d 1 �t ,v. I l• ••i • 141Poo ., a ai t it � I .•r.' �; 1 '�—' tit �� �� ��� i� t'e i�l �: �a��' •/, �.� go /� IF �:.� ,_-_�_�++..i��..tJ� - � i ,.{ tN �N 1 ���. ,�r •- F.r'`r .a � .w. ,Y�. ` - • -C� � .,,. a;�l;°.?�I �•" 4������ �off•+• ��� ' ...� O • � ""° � I • (�•~ � •.i- • `fie•! � � I •r. �.� r • j+ff • C�•sul , y �•'r1•tt1 4 f r - `' v. r �. ` � ,moo ..t .• fYi • `• �•, • lt ��n �� ""•` • + Vr t�_ i � ret lai + . , r �a • r M •• •: + z— 'PROJECT AREA (BELL rttilR AREA) t.• .. rr p t; ,,�.- r� •"i BELL ROAD AREA 4 �rrrrr ROLLS "ANDERSON ROLLS STUDY AREA , N AREA REQ MP ci URES UiNG PLAIT s� t _- rte' ,r;r , • .,+ + TRUNK tl'NE j . 'SCALE 3 bOi rIGtJRE 3,4 1 POTENTIAL SEWER EXTENSION'PLAY. N fee, (2)�a trunk line capacity fee, and (3) amain line extension fee. The rates may vary between residential and nonresidential, areas and fees may _ y change according to. ,implementation of the Sewer Master Plan. In order to connect to the city's water pollution control plant, the project area must be annexed to the City of Chico, or affected property owners would be required to sign' an annexation agreement. The annexation agreement waives the right to 'opposei i• future annexation actions (Reid,1986, Nunez, 1986). Storm Drainage. There are no storm trains n the project area. Butte County - requires' storm' drains on lots witha gross area of one acre or less. Water es,sily percolates into the sandy loam soil in the project area :and runoff has not caused significant flooding, The project area ;s not within a 100 year floodplain, according to the National Flood l.asurance Program (FEMA, 1977). The cost of storm drain infrastructure generally is paid by either the property, owner or the developer (Edell, 1986). Since storm water runoff has been �listed along with septic tanks as being the - ' most contributory and the controllable sources of nitrates, the 'Nitrate Action Plan has required a sewerage plan and a storm drainage plan for the greater Chico Urban area. The drainage plan will ineludec the standards for the elimination of all of the existing off site drainage wells; standards for the installation of temporory.drainage facilities and leachfields and a financing plan for construction of ew .drainage facilities. In 1985, a Storm Drainage Study was prepared for the' North Chico Area by Rolls, ,Anders«,in and Rolls.This study included 1,338 acres of land in the northwestern portion of the 'Chico Urban Area., The study area included the project area and pr6vide,1 description of tpecific projects and related costs. The, storm drainage G� improvements proposed witti`u the project vicinity are shown in Figure 3.4-2. The costs for these improvements and. others- identified in the. study exceed; $9,000 000. the Drainerga Master Plan required as a part of the Nitrate Action ] Plan will supersede 'the 1985 study. The Storm 'Drainage 8aster Plan study ,is / currently in progress. Police Serviees, The Butte County Sher iffts Department provides police service for imincorporated areas of Butte County. Ten deputy sheriffs serve the northern half of Butte County (approximately 800 square miles), using a beat patrol system. The nearest station is foul to five miles from the project area at 475 E. Park Avenue and Highway 99. The avera8e response time to the project area depends upon the priority of the service call. If called for a life and death einergeney, response time could tie less than five minutes. - ,A department is ^severel tunderstaffe mwit�honly� two patrol officers A nonur ent call could take as to as three or The count y d, at any giventimeserving 65,000 people. Por minimum staffing, the Butte y , p. County Sheriff` s Department would need to have �0 Patrol officers based on s standard `of 'one deputy per 1,000 population. Presently, 'butte County Sheriff is Department' has only 21 officers (Grey,, 1986). The sheriff's department has a mutual aid agreement with the City of Chico Police bepartment Arid the California Highway Patrol (Grey; 1986) Future service expansions are anticipated, if appropriate funding is (made available. Fire Protection. The Butte County Fire Department .is respohsible for fire protection within unincorporated areas of Bttte County: Station 42 at Frontier Circle and, Cohasset Road serves the project area: The depat-tmehi operates frith one paid firefighter per station in the winter and an additional 3 `4x3 NORTH CHICO AREA r _ paid firefighter in the summer. The Butte county iFire- bepartment also has volunteer firefighters who are radio dispatched to'assist paid personnel. The Chico area has approximately 40 volunteers. Station 4.2 is one of the twelve "paid" stations in the county. The service ;area of, Station 42 ha- an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of Class 5 when within 1,000 feet of A fire hydrant and Class 9 beyond 1,000 feet,. Fire department service levels nationally are rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (best to worst) in an effort to determine the cost of fire insurance for property owners. Any area not having fire hydrants is automatically rated a 9 on the scale. If` the fire department can pro vide a water tender, that classification could be reduced to an 8,. The county fire department is currently unable to serve the project area because of the lack of fire hydrants in the area. Anew fire station, 4 adequately meeting fire protection standards (No. 43), is planned near he project area at the intersection of East kvf3niae and State Route 32. The new service area is called the West Chico Firs Station Benefit Area and a mitigation fee of 7r7 dollars per parcel collected from new parcel. divisions to help support the cost of the new fire station. This sta¢ion is estimated to cash $400,000, with personnel costs of approximatii).'Y i10;000 to $150,000 annually. Response time to theprs five ���~t area is estimated to be three t 0 ' o1• minutes (Ha skins 19$6; Tiller 19 6 The Chico Unified School Iistrict serves the tiity,of Chino and its unineorperated areas.' The school'd•istrict has 11 mediuwn sized elementary schools land three small rural schools offering kindergahten 'through sitth grade education. The school district employs 400 teachers, 250 staff peg"sons, and 5.5 administrative or certified mbnteaehing personnel (Greater Chi00_ Chamber of Commerce, 1966) s two junior high The district also operate schools and two high schools. These four schools are currently operating below 'planned capacity; however, several elementary schools are currentl;� operating above planned capacity. Reloaatables (movable classrooms) are. used throughout the district at elementary schools and i't is anticipated that 60 - eeloaatables will be used in the next five years to help meet the demand for primary education (Matthews, 1966). With the current and projected demands for educational faeilities,_As a result of approved but not yet built subdivisiohsylelementarychools studentscould Wathews ,J�BGdate the expected 1,500 to g,000 additional The tyY 'of Chico` 'and Butte, Count, have 'ad-' ted6�ordibaneedr to ''generate revenue �l Thew fees ar cti""'ti'e n 10*_bcr 9f ro0s i n to meet future school ;dethhds. new deVeopmehts (see Appendix 16.10),. The Chico Unified School District hag reoammended a fee itxerease to inset projected demsnd. The cit?/ and county will review the recommehdat�ion in. August and September; 1966Y Neal Dow El'etnentary School serves the project area and s1:L'dents are bused to ytudents ileo away on east 5th �ivcnue: Neal batt its location approximatel three miles School cV.rrently has 411s and has a capacity of 465 students„ fled Bidw611 duiior'High School serves the 'pro ject area and presently has a total -W 880 students and a capacity ,of 1,1'i0. Bidwell is localted at Sunset ithd Third Avenue approximately three miles from the project Area, Chi eo Hitth School, located at tincalt"and West ispianade Drive, is approximately t, to miles from the r&ojeet area. With an 6nroliraent of 1,103; Chico High Stihool r .__,ice■: ._. . -_ .. _..