HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-36 REZONES 2 OF 7ORDINANCE NO. 2696 (REVISED)`
r'
r
t i ,
AN ORDINANCE 'ZONING A PORTION OF ' TiE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE.<OF
Gq
'CALIFORNIA, "'FR-5 (FOOTHILL RECREATIONAL) DISTRICT., i?URSLIANT`TO .
.j
CHAPTER 24'29.
t
The Board, of 'Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of
California, under and pursuant, to Chapter 24-29 of the Butte County'Code of j
said County, DO ORDAIN, as folloios:
3
F
SECTION 1a 'The hereinafter described area situate in the Goun"ty '
4
of Butte, State of California, shall be and itis hereby zoned as an FR-5
(Foothill Recreational - 5 acre parcels) District,, and such area ,shall o
o the restrictions and
subject t' restricted` uses and,' regulations pursuant to ,
Butte County Code Section,24-112.1.,,
Saidarea so zoned being Iodated in the unincorporated area of
;9
Butte County, Chico,, more particularly described as follows;
10
;
All that certain real property situated in the County of Butte,
7�1
State of California, more particularly described as parcels 2 and
3 as 'shown on that parcel map filed in the Butte County Recorder's
12
Office on March 9, 1976 in took .55, of Parcel Mup.s at rages 70,73,
13
SECTION Zi This Ordinance shall be and it is hereby declared to
14
be- in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after the data ;
15
of its passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (1.5) days after its
16
passage, this C)rdinance shall be publishedo�ice with the names of the
!'I
members of the' Board of Supervisors voting for and against it in the Chico
lg
Enterprise 'Record, a 'newsphpet' published in the County of Butte, State of
1,9
California
20
PASSED AND: ADOPTED by the Boatd of Stip.ervisors of the County of
21
Butte, State of C;alifornia� on the 2hd day of,August,; 1988, by the following
22
'vote:
AYES'. Supervisors Dolan, Eultonti McLaughlih, Vdtdkuse and Chairman.Rclfitutf
24
NOES: None
ABSENT: None `
"
P.'! i,• iF��: � A {1`'r
.n .«i ,2 " !: f
r -1
�, , .•...,.;err
•`tia
vj—t
Date LLs s a nr�g
•
,,�,
Board Action Oaf c, , 8%2/88 MO##88-459
►� t,;�ltfa�rnia�
c
'�.. �+ •,,,°" ,`
Route,..., xx
Referral _
OFFICE
OF CLERK 0P THE BOARD
Department
Document
Action., Requested
Administration xx
ent(s�
"r emersion s).
it
1nf6
1__.Fil�.rmat7on
Agriculture - ��
Budget iransfer(s)
_
„Necessary Action
Assessor
Auditor
Certified ldinutes
y Obtain Signatures
`�Recommendatic�n
CoManty Clerk/Elections
Claims -
CAunty Counsel
Correspondence�'yRecord
Deed(si
-Report to Board
0i strict Attorney
Environmental ealth
Notice(s) of Completio►,
Return Copy
Eire Department
-penalty Abatement Requests
y �
Returto Fn Ori Tnal
9
Libr�tr�
I4ental Health
C7esolution(s)
to
W/0'Lnclosure
personnel
�Planning/LAFco
Probation.
Public Health
public Works
Purchas;in
Recorder
Risk Management
'Sheri ff/Cormr r
Treasurer/Ta`< collector
Wol fate
_
�r�`kA'1 �`kk4k7kKh�k��lr�e�r'lk��4'ak5kkikak�*74'74Mik�ikil`drickdr*�:*�'1r/�1ek'�r1"k'k'�t4ie'k1t*�r'k*4'k;k�r5k�ka4a4k�r��+!k�rakkki�r•kk�l'�'�i�'74kiN�kk;kkk'kic
Ad0,4+�,anal_ tnformat i oct
DAVID MANTHEI W INDE MNI7Y AGREEMENT
77777
p random
Inter -De artmental Memo
TO:
Board of suP ervisors
j
tr
�{
FtOM:
Planning
SUBJECT:
Dave Mainthei Rezone File 87-36, Suggested Motion 4
DATE: July 22j 1988
The
• gg� bject tezone is as, follows:
suggested motion for the su
A.
Find that 'the requirements of CEQA have been completed and
considered in making this decision and adopt a Negative
Declaration with mitigetion'measutes; and
B.
Find that the proposed rezone will conform to ;all the policies,
including the text and map, of ,the, Butte County General Plan if
the mitigation measures and ,indemnity agreement are made a part of
the rezone; ;and.
C.
Adopt an Ordinance rezoning to Flt -S that property identified as AP
47-23-59 and 60 '(Dave Manthei); and
D.
Approve the indemnity agreement and .authorize the chairman to
sign.
lr
+,AVE
MAN HE
ATTEST:
Approved as to form:
SUSAN ROFF
Butte County Counsel
ft .IN J. IOLSa
Chief Administrative Of,fic6t
"
unci Clerk of the Board
of
Siipervisors
r
STATE OF CALF
On this � � >h day of`. �ui� in the year
�.�
COUNTY OP t0
19 8 8 before me
- ,
nim a Notary Public, State of California,
duly commissioned and sworn personally,appeared.
Davin Manthe�
personally known to me Cor proved to me on the basil of satisfactory
OFFIC1A14 SEALL
evidence) to be the person, ..,.Whose name is
1EANIE M WARD,
F m •4 NOTARYPueUC I cauFoaNIn
subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowleo',;ed to me
SACCWAFNTocouNV
Mycdmrn Eapitel tept-9,1989
that,- be. executed the same,
XN WITNESS 'WH'EREOF I havo hereunto set my hand and axed
my official seal in 'the ._ Coun'y of
rte., Saeratttento on the dgte set faith ove
in this certiFcate,
Thal doaio.ni ii 6* i Qaes+rk w.mrl. h m0y ue propel,M ua M unp4 h.nlxm�xs� n++i in ro
..�.;as,..ab.�...►w�«iMw�.�..>raI..i,: NotaryPir lic State of a
mn. 01 an.i .m.►. � � � #. � V.I� � An a� « � ' . Cali nia
hI11-0-88
mmrsstor r
y td . e. Aires
" dowdsty'e l:orin No. 32 Avknowlndgemea to NotaiY Ppb11c•Indlv(dUals(c.c. kc, 110.)
3 _
46
N
+ 1
REZONE 'REPORT,
APPLICMIT' Dave Manthei, File. 87-36
DWNERi Same ,
REQUEST: Rezond from FR -40 to FR -3
LOCATION: Lots^,2 and 3 of Richardson dills Subdivision, approximately
1/4 mile north of Richardson Springs Road on the east side of
Cohasset Road and the west side of Panorama Drive, north of
Chico.
DATE ACTION REQDESTE D 12/21/87 AP NOS.: 47-23-59 60
ACREAGE: 81.12 acres
PLANNING.COMMISSION FINDINGS:
A. Note 'that the environmental documents have been completed and
considered In making this decision; and
B. Find that the proposed rezone L to FR -3 does not conform to the
policies of the Butte County General. Plan beo'aUse it requires
compliance with conditional zoning criteria which q,aAl not be
found s, ecificall Cgnds.
, ` P y tion^ 0t2 ` and #5, and it also violates
Department of Fish and Game Criteria for critical deer "herd winter
range as noted in the. letter of March, 1987; and
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
C. Deny the rezone of 81.12 acres to FR -3 for AP47-2-59 and 60
(Dave;Manthei)
VOTE: 4-.0
AYES:' Commissioners Peabody, Lambert, Walter and Chaikman Lynch
NOE5.' No one
ASSENT: Commissioner` Forbes
AMUINED No one
DATE OF LAST HEARING WITH PLANNING COMI5SION: Jaary T4, 188
Q r+ v `S , l�- -
GCALIF6RNtAd+�1 Yar .ern -0tr ,E
e
OWN
IOWNT
UNIVt11SITYE
C111,
" enduu�Lark a:r CHI
����
Tfq
E gatl' ''� itaw� I�v
40
be'
h +nll:r
m G® rlttvglarl PAHA li�'n it - r .
M, if (4^ieu�
■ a .�-. � Rei■Y � Nrka, 'i�d �,: i�r yr�a"
W
ls1m
•1 aWrww+ a.r.rn�eanu: - iY44w.•W'f , ' Jy
l� �� �,{�„ � �` li ����ro �•• - ms ��'�►
rte• =e WEST -- 2nd - .+TREET F~ L. 2n
`' � � N ^ ':¢ �' Sid SiYar•1 !
Mun ar Ran 32 n N °
f 1< 1=ll 0 1 ^•mak �� ytrpMl O .. 4^ .hhu• 1001
�Irr^rl � �� ��, •fY, �1�
wz ,2 C 611 We , tlr_i:t Ped IAcd m'. ■ hsmF , of mmr+C
i
c 4e+Y 1, N,cr r•rnrl r"K I1C51rery
r LL t yh
i' p ,•
1N1I1 T / AST 0111 ST.
- EST: 11111 ST EET i
F a]e1 w v �""' "r i a V ST 3i 9111 4T EET. i� t> � EAS 3Z Afh ST r/,i �taak - i i
��.n.�•.+a��:.-re,a.n.��r�.x„R.+. rx �:-�rwe*wrmare;,rs:.roF.es+a.*wr.+w�v'e«�e.+>wA:+w'aiwux.-ar-w.weeda.*w �+irw.irnwn� ': � � +— ""hYr.:r: � "i'9
Pad
., r' ��'///. ' .,-_.. _i d f •\ Str t?//V4 1.11 ._ '1_-� 'hw� rrMv� rri;r,�,,,,t,..�h:,4nts�.._,. �i•�-+F � , ..fin d
V-° aka._....
Rork
�Q� t�
c/
y
tn
i
1
�
4#" �J�.ae mi4:.�+k'.C=:=�a+M' �»:.e.warrerwJewwiarr..nYtNz.r�r:.M:.a���xaK�.+�aF�•- row.uew�u�w...,x-+.r.+it+N.+.czw:.w�ss+«rw r. _,«.,tar. ,,,,,. � � 0' ,a^
0
v�untjyi�rlda10 nMinB{L
,�" 1�,►,n ntl ��. / l 1 ick SILO
ROAD
At I
E > Ke 1 moa inna°
G YaV � n ;, � aIp
u�t. xn m Lhgdrrinrk a q _ `� ✓'
P k 1»ti l nom'
In 13rnntle os nrra
thor 641
03
Alk,yD
_..
imuneecksseue,rfrr�e
r
Interpepar,tmental. Memorandum
TO:
Board of Supervisors
VROM:`
Planning
SUBJECT:
David Ranthei, Appeal of 'Requirement for an Environmental
_.
Impact Report
DATE:
November 10. '1987
Motion subject to County Coun'sel's agreement with provision for
condition toning and a Development Agreement:
A
All potentially significant environmental impacts identified for
the,project have been adequately discussed in the Chico Area Land
Use Plani$IR, 5Cii �►SQ09231G, and various ;other elements of the
Butte County General Plan;
B.
That although the proposed prt$Ject could have a significant effect
on the environment) there w 1 not be a significant effect in this
case because the mitigation measures described below will be added
to the project. A Negative declaration will be pxepared•,
C.
And imposition of-theh
tproon
zoning
vsionstiof tHeasuCountyres
accomthat
lishedutilizing ng
ordinance for conditional zoning.
D.
Also that a Development Agreement should be applied for that
contains idemnificatirn provisions and incorporates by reference
the conditional zoiiing'agreement
Ftitiization
Measures_
The
followin miti ation measures, if incorporated into the
g g
e
P j pp. .. ucejthe
design or attached a,s conditions too ro eat a royal, w�1X red
11
a ent all significant im acts:
p g p
i?ldoding/Drains ai Provide for ons -site 8etention of storm water
for later release when peak flows have subsided in existing
drainage channels (page 04j' Chico Area Ldnd Use Plan EXR):
2.
Soil/Brosion/Slope Stability: Revegetate all soil surfaces
okposed during construction (Page 711 Chico Area Land Use flan;
Pagel, Item G:5 Land Use Element).
Water: Water supply► to be ' verified, .at time of subdivision
approval. Data from area sells to be consulted3 as appropriate.
(Chico Area Land'Use Plan M1 Page 14`i:
r
a
t
4,
Wildlife Hsbitat: The logs of wildlife habitat in the north and
east is a trade-offs for saving riparian habCat,s on the west - a
goal found; by the ])apartment of Fish and Game to be
C)
'environmentally superior" (Page 168, Appendices T and U, Chico
Area Land Use Plan EIR).
5.,
Noise:- Noise levels for the Cohasset.Road corridor in the project
vicinity should be determined, and, based upon the County noise
EIR, appropriate
elementand the criteria in the General. Plan
(Chico Area Land Use Plan EIR;,
residential setbacks established.
Page 133)
6,
Land Use: The project 'requestwill require the imposition of
conditions in order to meet the conditiona'1 criteria .in the Land -
Use Element. In accordance with Section 15064 of the State CEQA
Guidelines, air and water discharges will be presumed not to be
significant if they meet. current standards. Project conditions
can impose meeting these. standards at time of subdivision
recently, adopted will
approval.. Fire protection standards
mi"tigatie the fire,danger.
'i`raffic: Cohasset Road will not experience any significant
decline in level of service resulting from construction of
area (Circulation Element, Page 54);
homesistes in the p'.oject m
traffio safety considerations must be incorporated 'into project
design;, including appropriate acce,,s restrictions, inteaRsect3on
improveQents, safe sight distance sitingj left Curie, deceletation
and acceleration lanes. The determ ation of the
naccompli
shed atcc+tract
cosnbinat:ion of these features Shall be the time
_ s.,...
the tentative subdivitjbh map is submitted for review.
'
8
public Services. Fire: Pay water tender fees pursuant to $utte
Schools: CUSA currently
Fire Department Regulat'ons.
C1ounty„ P
tilized for the Districs Capital
Collects builders fees to `be ut
facilities needs No other significant impact to publi» services
for police,
Ate aittitipated; hence, there Are not mitigati
o
„
k
E 4.,
,
Wild life :Iiabia. ' lie loss of wildlife habitat in the north and
east is a'trade!„f Ix for saving riparian habitats on the west - a
goal found by the Department of Fish and Game to be
"environmentally superior” (Page 168, Appendices Tand U, Chico
Area Land Use ,Plan EIR).
5.
Noise: Noise levels=for the Cohasset Road. corridor in the project
vicinity, should be determined, and, based upon the County, noise
element and the criteria in the General Plan ETR, appropriate
residential setbacks established. (Chico Area :Land Use Plan EIR,
Page 133),
6.
Land Use: The project request will, require the 'imposition of
conditions in order to meet the conditional criteria in the Lend
Use; Elemer►t. Tn accordance with Section 15064 of :' �►e State GEQA
Guidelines, air and Water discharges will be presumed not to be
significant if they, meet current standards. ii Ptoj'410t conditions
can `impose meeting' those standards at time of subdivision
approval,-;, ,Fire protection standards rtbently adopted will
mitigate the fire danger.
i.
Traffic:' Cohasset Road will not experience any significant'
decline in level of service resulting from construction of
homesites in the project area (Circulation 'tiamdht, Page 54)t
I
traffic safety considerations must be incorporated ',nto project
design, including appropriate access restrictions, intersection
imptovelents, safe sight distance siting> left turns deceleration
and accslerat on lanes.. The determination of the correct'
combination uf, these features shall be accomplished at,.the time
the tentative subdivision.map is submitted for review.
$.Public
Ser-v_ ices:_ Fire: Pay water tender fees pursuant to Butte
County Fite Depart.-lent Regulations. S,chools7 CUSD Currently
collects 'builders tees to t'e utilized for the District's capital
facilities needs. No other signs inapt impact to public,6ervice-s
...
°p nce, there, are tit" mitigation;!: for police,
are antica.ated; he
water supply,, sewage disposal, solid wasfe, electrical, natural-
gas) and telephone services.'
.
e disposal Willof the Butte
� is required
Ciount,t, HealthgDepartment. No Additional
10,'
gpen,Space., The project proposes to establish L grazing easement,
coviring appt6ximately 50 acres, This easement; in addition t1�
mainttt ining the agricultural' use of a portion of the site, will,
naintai,n the rural, open-space character of the area while
providitq; rural homesites. No ,.additional mitigations required.
7
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigatl`on measures, if incorporated into the project design or
attached as conditions to project approval, will reduce the p�tettially
significant impacts.
reoease when}0e60:flowsvide havefor subsidedtindexisting drainagntion of e water for later
`~ g g channels (page 94,
Chico Area Land Use Plan EIR).
;Soil/,Erosioh/Slo a Stability: Revegetate :all soil surfaces exposed during
construction page17,T `i'i`co Area Land Use, Plan; Page 41, Item G.5 -, 'Land Use
Element).
f
Water: Water supply to be verified at time of subdivision approval. Data
r"om area wells to be consulted, as appropriate. (Chico Area Land Use Plan
EIR, ,page 74.) _
Wildlife Habit�,�at:.. TKU, loss of wildlife habitat in the north and east is a
tra,e-o f"�or saving riparian habitats on the west a goal found by the
Department of Fish and Game to be "environmentally superior' (page 168,
appendices Vand U,"Chico Area Land Use Plan EIR).
'Noise; Noise levels for the Cohasset Road corridor in the project vicinity
MM d be determined, and, based upon the County noise element and the
criteria in the General Plan EIR, appropriate residential setbacks
established. (Chico Area Land ise Plan EIR, page 133.)
Land Use: The project request will require the imposition of conditi6ns in
with Section 15064 of the S�tate;CEQA.a in the Land Use Element. In accordanceor er to meet the conditional criteri
Guidelines, air and water discharges will
be presumed not to be significant if `they meet current standards. Project
conditions can impose meeting these standards at time of subdivision approval.
Fire Protedtion standards recently adopted will mitigate the fire danger,
Traffic: Cohasset load will hot experience any significant decline in level
o -service resulting from construction of homesites i`n the project area
(Circulation Element, page 54); traffic safety considerations must be
incorporated into project design, including appropriate access restrictions,
intersection improvements, safe sight distance siting, left turn] deceleration
and acceleration lanes. The determination of the correct combination of these
features shall be accomplished at the time the tentative subdivision map is
submitted for review.
Public Services
e
Fire: Pay water tendRegulations. er fees pursuant to Butte County Fire Department
Schools: CUSP currently collects builder`s fees to bye uti`lizedfor the
01strict's capital facilities needs.
Butte,00. Piavming
SSP a:i9$7
September 15, 1987 OrOVIII0. Cali OM14;
Board of Supervisors
25 County Center Drive
Oroville., California 959.65
David Manthei Appgal of 'Requirement for Environmental Impact Report -
Rezone 87-36
Honorable Board Members:
Having received only last Saturday the information I requested from the
Planning Departmenton July 28, 1987, I' am unable to address today all issues
in this appeal.
To keep the process moving, however, and'with the Board's concurrence, I am
prepared to focus on three distinct issues today. The tenor of my
presentation will be more on a policy level, as opposed to a detailed analysis
of the County's environmental review of my client0s project. ThUt'more
11
detailed review may later be required, depending upon this Board's policy
inc'IINations
I would begin by asking the Board members not; to view Mr. Manthoi and me as
adversaries of the f�lanning Department staff., Wewall share, the .same g'� ° a
jt" ti t proaec l;�i�it da nod adversely 'ampact the :envgl�B-" Our ��Bbsi a
sagreem'ent"".is �boted"°in »`'iie`marttierMof�"acliieVing t.?iat gaol.
Y iP .�°"` 'K'H' *W�r r, ,y y;'rs �r ti �'K p 1'' � Yw,u-ar w,, i •e ^ro- M
M� o ,fie_�thve today s t4vv �aefi rii tt� ve hi t7 a'I , suy Ihirh gopi ys wti1;
..rte +.'Y - w.w +(.)ui•mr1,+:
y ..
dott the spi ritt and' the hiteKt of "4" x`� 6 5, Al ons I e ��ecMi o
n µ ul y.l`h sign
repare;w. _ n i , ecl arab cn�'ib d"' be ai t�Y1 coc1 usi on t'a�ir�'`
EIR or egat ve d ;
f,rora that stbdy:j T Sn.»EI[2 ti,s regd red,, it would e, drye �cleayi focused inV
's `p +and; consegtleii't1y� Jt mo►rq,,pert nest
y t}il—T:o 1..low ...e.p+e....,, -,... m..,., n, .+waw ;;.-M1:,rna•e'.,4 ey, .., s+
I will addresscohcernnr ie 7►�1»»#tudy4
It was not completed` in accordance with State guidelihes;,
p. g
m „�•� The sco a off enVi rontnental i nvesti ati oh eitceeds the intent of the State
guide"lihege and
enumeratioh of the projects impacts i`s unclear, and the study is
i nter`nal ly i ncohsi stent
i�
7c111
Policy Consideration
Shall the Board recognize the commitment previously made by the adoption of
`the Chico Area Plan, along with the anticipated impacts associated With that
Plan (and the benefits derived from the trade -off of developing to. the east
instead of to the west), or shall each andevery application for zone changes
r g and`devel.opment permits be put through the "environmental grinder" to show
that' yes, indeed, eachi and every one of these projects does in fact contribute
ills share ,of "impact" to the overall area
The requirement for an EI}l on',a,project.`within the General Plan area, when
that project is consistent with the Plan, should provide new information' and
N-'
not :rehash or *regurgitate that which is already known.
By way of example, consider the following:
V` Life). The 'initial study for Mr Manthei's,peoject states (page °3, item 5 Animal
Life) that a substantial detertaration to existing fish or will"dlife habitat
will result frons this project (deer habitat).
The letter to Ms. Kathy Kellyyfrom the Department of Fish and Game claims that
"development of lands on designated wint(o range into parceis''lest than 20
acres minimum will adversely affect migratory deer use. The cumulative impact
of the proposed rezoning request will result in a significant adverse impact
upon, p deer use of their designated winter range,"
The final EIR for the General Man (page 168 - Department of Pish and Game,
Appendix T and Appendix U) shows that the Department knew of the JOSSL of over
• i+ originally believed
1,4000 acres of grasslands on f�;ht i'�orth and east, that
this loss to be significant, but that upon reconsideratldn, it agreed that the
trade -off in the 9eneral plan of saving riparian habitats on�tbe west Was a
` su eHor -environmental goal and "losses of wildlife _ -
p g_ . i habitat �n the. grassland
area east of Chico will be, less significant than would occur in riparian
areas or other critical habitat t res.
Appendix hII) yp �� (These i
excerpts are ncluded in
The same type of argument made above wov`d relate to traffic; air quality,
Public services (economic impact)% fire protection, noise, growth inducing,
impacts, loss of open space`
Area 3 - enumer-ation of the Project's Impacts Is Unclear, and the Study Is
IntArnally Inconsistent
nvirorl;nental effects and environmental impacts are 'syhonymous However, a
significant effect`is defined as "a substantial, or potentially substantial,
adverse dhange in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by
the prosect including land, air, Water, minerals; floral, fauna; ambient noise,
et... 15358µandy
and ob ects of historical or aestheticc significanca
15382 of the State NCQP guidel.ines� ��aee .A pendix ITraIt
kei�t
s'ibt syhorrymous�iith�eith� an en�Hnmialimpaot o" n i�nvroiihent,"
d
'r
Vl
s APPENDIX T
Pro , iption`er
This project is; a single family subdivision developedapt the rural density of
one Ohit[four acres, it is located on Lots 2 and 3 (80 acres +) of the lands
of Dar, Manthei (%see, attached Map 1) in an area of Butte :ounty known to
contain soil of the Aiken clay loam type (USDA 1925 Soils Survey), which is
the same classification given to soils in the Paradise area. The exact extent
and ,depth of this soil will .be explored anti, mapped during subdivision
processing -located on the east side of Cohasset. Roads 1%4 mile north of
Richardson Springs road in north Chico. Phis` land was designated as
Agricultural Residential, on the 1.982 Chico Area .and Use Plan Amendiment.
X
The subdivision. will contain three acre building lots, whose access will be
from two new roads,.develo,:sed to County st:and6eds and dedicated to the public.
` These roads Wji'1 in�ersect Cohasset Road,; at or nearly at_exist.iing grade, in
accordance with sound highway engineering;' principals and with adequate site
r; distances and deceleration lanes for safety. No building lot will have direct
Access to Gohasset Road.
Bach building site Will have its awn water (well); with sewage disposal via
septic tank and leachfield meeting the then current Health Department
standards. Fire Department standards for fire control will be met (see
Map 2). Each -cul-de-sac street will Ma,� emergency access via Panorama Drive.
Prior to subdivision, the Butte County health Department (or other authorized
agency) will, approve ail proposed residential ots for on-site septic systems
and lot sizes will be determined on the basis of' this criteria, except that no
lot shall be smaller thah three acres.
One lot will contain approximately 15 acres and will have access either from
one of the two cul-de-sac streets to bo�built or from Panorama Drive: This
lot will be used for gtazing. There Will be grazing easements over all of tho
Undeveloped portions of all residential,lots, which will be utilited'in
conjunction with the grazing lot. Cattle guards Will be installed at both
dui--de,sac street intersections, so that the existing "Chinese wall" will
remain as an effective fence. �n addition to establishing the °"ranch')
character of this subdivision, the grazing easement will provide the means to
control grass fieet (see Map 3).
0.rivate covenants, conditions and restrictions will prohibit accumulation of
nuhooresidentially appurtenant build higsw equipment; supplies, etc: to maintain.
a very high quality residential environment.
All additional run-off from impervious -surfaces, and, any erosioninduted as a
result cart effcctively•be mairttaitied on site; The grazing parcel currently
contains a resevoir, which can easily be converted to an approved Storm water
r p`
detention and i f County analysis indicate,! that downstream rob emx would
p
occur as a result of this roject.
p
h
t,k
7-7
fote'af California, ;, '
ihoRMsautcss pgwncy
1. Jim Burns, projects Coordinator Date = May 10,1982
Resdurces Agency
2. B. A. Kircher, Planning 'Director
Butte County 1d 15
7 County Cante- 'Drive
Orovill a CA 95`965
MAY 1 1 082
from i Deparlman! .:1 Fish and Gam* bl4o 4106Mgh0L1J 0
Subiecti ChicoArea Land" Use Plan, Butte County (SCH 80092314)
r. - -
I
�. Department of �xsh and Game has reviewed the Chico Area %and
;,uAlan, An Amendment to the Butte County General k'lan Drlixt ETR.
The proposed zoning will have significant adverse impacts oh habitat
,:.
and Wildlife should development occur 'at all:Wed densities'in the
,.• grasslands, foothills, and riparian areas, and if drainage
is
directed into stream channels
, r 14,000 a g ,
The loss of Cres of gxassi.and would be sx nifxcant both
". locally and statewide as this habitat is ,being rapidly lost to
` commercial, resiaent%'dly and ageJoUltural deVelopmentw' VerntU pools,
which ata ,areas of Special 8io1,og;ical importance, would be last.when
the. , ominerc3,al, or industrial z0hes.
i
lie -in xesident3.-al c
> Anadromous fisheries, other aquatic life,, and riparian habitat,, 'woulr
be adversely affected in B,g Chico and Butte creeks by drainage xntca
area stream channels. Water, quality in the ser-airs could be
degraded by run-off containing pesticides; petxochemicals,.
and.nther
< <f: waste products associated with residential; and industr�',tl devy�lcipr�ekt.
xnareaseci runoff r�rom drainage into Stream, channels could 9enera'te
§5 ` the need for floeid co itro,l moasures which would threaten ripari4-n
A'q habitat • (another Area of Special Dioldgical, xmportancwith
"ctostructron. , ,
j Since much of the
projected open lands may be bordered by developed
areas on two or more sides y these t.. h be expected to stiffer 'adverse
Y�. impacts; Chief hazards to wi dlif'o Wou1,d be dogs, 'cats olluta
p i1ts
noised harassment, and illegal Meriting Wildlife habitat •could ,Eae
affocted by el or fire prevention proceettares, erosion `,and lowered'
'.
w0tek tables
We recommend what the above concerns be mitigated bV: the adbpti:on of
Conservation anis Open Space tlements to the'Biatto Count Geh'e'ral_`,t�l i
E
.:'for the project area
- 5
„r�”
.
pp
IdV
,v
nor
iSDMUNDG. tkowN JR:; _ �Y
SCA1t of CAIIFOi,NIA—ItE•'+OURW AGENCr
�F
DEpARTlVI�NT OF FISH AND GAM_
�z>�
1701 01WUS ROAD. SUITE A
ltJ,NCtiO C0900VA, CAIIfOgmok 45670`
(SIC f 355-70130
n
Jude 28 1982
j. s Senior Planner
CharlesW Department "
County Planning
Butte
7;County center Drive
oroville, CA 95965
Dear Mr'. Ods:
nt df Fish;and Gam. has re»eval+aatea,i ct6 to fish ar�1
The Depat�. (SCH 80092314) alzd believes
Use Plan
Wildlife of :he Chico Area Land `tat in the grassland,
jo
ethic W3.
that While there will be
A r eawil l beyles5 significant than
,
alba east of Chico, lO .., es.
c riparian areas Or 'Other critical habitat tY1?
it, ripar
would occur
A r
ty rhe su�ort butte Cbtanty's effc�rtS to addres:� these issues, in conser-
the Butte Cowrty General :Plan. -the
n S ace F .e- tt o£
vation`and Ope "� aVailab +e informv-
in ptoviing an
14parnr�nt also offers assistance
tion on sigh and wild ',ife resources.
`y
If the Department ran be of further assistanceo'p1k'�ase oortact tlerry
5upetvi6ate at the abo4e telephone
VSensch? LANiVOnmental'Services
„
., numbs .
Vp
SincerelyK
pauI Jensen
Region,il Marlagex ,
y4
t, PtotingCAM&
ry* JUL I1962
�� pr,yy111a, G. ali�vmin
�.r
APPENDIX V
Project Time Line
February 25,,1987
Submit application
March11, 4987
Receipt for application
March 17,--1987-
Request for "archaeological survey
March 27, 1987
Archaeological clearance
April 13,•1987
Letter, requiring EIR
April 26, 1987
Submittal of information to clarify project'
'
description
April 21, :1987
Meeting With staff to discus cl'arifi"cation of
Project specifics
April' 24, 1981
Meeting with staff to discuss project and mitigate
impacts
April 30i 1987
Submitted draft developmentagreement to mitigate
impacts
May 20'187
Meeting with Tom Reid to discuss soils constraints
'37
Submitted revised draft development agreement to
mitigate impacts
Noe 24, 1987
Submitted further amendments to draft development
agreement to mitigate impacts
„July 17, 1987
Letter from 'staff rejecting development agreement
as a means of mitigating adverse environmental
impact, requesting EIR
.duly 28, 1987
Appeal to Board
July 28, 1987
Letter requesting' clarification of impacts and
supporting documentation
Aug4st 1,9, 1987
Board sets hearing on appeal'
September 12, 1987
Received information requested oh duly 28, 1981
September 15,"1987
Nearing 4
a
For the Boards information, A guidelines establish time of 05
one,
days for negative declarations and year for Ms: At the current
- rrent rate of
E'
ro t
,gess, neither time
,,
limit is achievable fotN this project.
4 '�