HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-2 REZONE PLANNING 2 OF 3C31110rhla 011 bi utlll�oJUti'� R '0; Oepanmchl of IAnlhropptogy
4rChaoCllOgocal Catilainta Slalc r»i«.. v.es �. y , .. ..
tJnwcr3il ; Chit
o?@ f
Ir►4Pntory - ,_�:ci.. .�..,.. Chico. CA 95929
M (916! 895.0,40
Apr. 30, 1,987,
TO: Butte County Manning
#7 County Center Dr
Oroville, Ca. 95965
re: AP#42-14-73 , 74/BoIsteire
Dear County Planners,
A revie,4 of the above pro)ect has revealed the following:
Xx The area indicated as within the project boundaries is considered to be
archaeologically sensitive_ Present are:
XX- Easy access to natural sources of watt
Flat meadowland or flat land near vater
South and/or east f-r;ing slupe..7
Previously recorded sites in the vicinity
Others
J
We strongly reoaTrrend that an archacological reconnaissance he conducted
of the area by �t qualified archaeologist and appropriate mitigation
measures ptepared.
A knownsite or sites has%have hc>en previously recorded in the project
area. Project operations will have a rsegaLive impact on these cultural
resources: We reoamienr3 that a quaIi'fied archaeologis-, Ix don tad ted
to assess -i to components and prepare a mitigative pra �osal .
1
XX Other;' A survey is not recommended for the above project.. However, if
any pre istoric or istorl.c cU.LtUral materials are encountered a6ring
project operations, all wor s u ease imed !ate y pe crag an inspection
oftthe site and ora Ei ClUalitied archaeologist.
Than"k .Vw for the opportunity to review and comment of this proposal. Please
let us know what decisions are made regarding the project: i.
,
Sincerely,
w
Dr. k1koto Kouta
W)rthe.ist Information Center Coo'rchnatoir
' `�E G7 C' DE'TERMZ' SON
} X Office of plannin rid tsech y'"r�t�t Butte County
Planning Department
1400 Tenth Street;'t;oom 121 `r
7 County Center Drive
Sacramento, CA 95 4 SEP 8 198/ Oroville, CA 95965
or
X County Clerk CANDACE J. CRf:lE.M Suite Co. Clerk
County or Butte By G. EMEA0 D6puty
str33_7`T--c2 c Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 2110.8
or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
AP 11' 42-14-73 ,114 Name
Project Title Rezone/
General Plan Amendment File Na, 87-38A Jere Bolster
Telmber
State Clearinghouse Number
Contact Person ephone Nu
(if submitted to Clearinghouse) 538-7601
SC#87051226 B. A. Kircher, Director of Planning approximately
Prgject Location C)n the southwest side of Highway' 32 app.
200 feet north of Oak Way, Chico.
Project Descr Vtion General Plan ;jmendment from Medium Density
Residential to Commercial. Rezone from S -R to
*� ('ounty Board of superiors._..,,..---
This is to advise that the .� (head Agency or Responsible Agency)
ro ect on September 1, lcJand has made.
has approved the above-described p 87 j . (D
the following determinations regatding the above-described project:
1. The project _wi1•l X will not, have a significant effect on the
environmertt
2.
An tnvirot-dnental Impact Report was prepared for this project
pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
X A Negative Declatatior eras prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA
3. Miti were not; made a condition of the
gation measures };were, y_ _
approval of the pro,jo.ct,
4, A statement of overriding.
considerations was► . --)L-Was not, adopted
t:
p Sat p
for this ro dM
ith
This is to certify the table1to�theRgeneral public atcomments And
res on;ses and record of
projeC>< approval is avail
Butte County Planning Department
7 County Center Dtiv,e
otovill.e, CA 95965
Date Received for Filing and°
posting, at oPR 0/3/8.7 �---�
Sign tire
Stephen A. Streeter
�
Senior Planner
'Title rta„ixda ti�rch t.gs�
I
•�:r,d-lam ..C.��^:sL" {��'�'
�.gut
PLANNING COMMISSION
7 COU14TY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE,'CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 ,
PHONE: 539.7601
July 21, 1987
Jere Bolster
1503 Manzanita Avenue
Chico, Ca. 95926
Re: Conditional Rezan,:, Agreement
File 87-388
Dear Mr. Bolster;
thtiosed is the Agreement recommended for approval by tha Butte County,
Planning Commission on July 8, 1987. The signature must be notarized
d
before this Agreement can be ecot soffce Please gr
for s�ubmittaito the
signed and notarized ,and returned
to Board of Supervisors at the time of the Rezone public hearing of
September 1, 1987:
Should you have any questions regarding this matter., please contact
this office between 10:00 a.m. and 3100 pon.
Sincerely,
n. A.- Kitcher
Director of Planning
V-- U
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this day of 19 ► by
and between `17irst Party", as identified in item (a) of Exhibit 1 of
this Agreement, and the COUNTY OF BUTTE, a political subdivision of the
State of California, herein called "Second Party0.
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, First Party is the owner of real property, heroin
called the "Property", situated in the County of Butte, which Property
is described in Item (f) of Exhibit I of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Property is now zoned as specified in Item (b)
of Exhibit 1- and
WHEREAS, First Party has applied for a reclassification of
zoning of the Property pursuant to which application the Property is
being reclassified from its present classification to the
classification or classifications specified in Item (c) of Exhibit 1;
and
WHEREAS, public hearings have been held upon said application
before the Board iof Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of
California, and after having considered the matter presented, it has
been determined that certain conditions to the zoning reclassification
of said teal property must be imposed so as not to create any problems
inimical to the health, safety and the general welfare of the County of
Butte.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that,
inasmuch as the reclassification specified in Item (c) of Exhibit l is
being granted, the said reclassification shall be subject to 'the
conditions specified in the following paragraphs
1. That Exhibit 1, as completed and attached hereto, is
incorporated into and made a dart of this Agreement with the same force
and effect cs if fully set forth herein.
2. That First Party shall construct and comply with all the
following conditions;
2a, Owner to sign an agreement to 'partit.,ipate in a drainage
assessment district when and ifthe :local agency establishes said
district in the future and meet the requirements of the Nitrate Action
Plan.,
2b. Any new development or conversion of the existing single
fami residence to be served by Cal Water,
2c Both parcels to be limited to one common driveway access
easement from Highway 32 at the common property line,
ld4 Install curb, gutter, sidewalk and drainage upon
conversion of the exiAting single family' structure or development of AP
0
4214^114.
2e. Construct a two-way left turn lane with standard tapers
to Department of California Transportation requirements.
2f: Contribute a pro rata share ar determined by CDF for
commercial zoning to the cost for the new west side fire station fund.
2g. Clwner to sign a covenant running with the land that
noise mitigation devices including an 8 foot masonry sound wall will be
installed as necesaary so thatdevelopmentand operation of commercial
uses 'Will not generate more than 60 dB at the northwest, and southwest
property lines.
2h. All struatures shall be located a minimum of 25 feet
form the southwest 'right-of-way of Highway 32.
2i. Extericz lighting shall be shielded from Highway 32.
23. Applicant must also comply with all other applicable
State andlocalstatutes, ordinances., and regulations.
3. in the event First Party, any successor in interest of
FirsItem (f) of orofy person
lviolatesorfailsto
rsn possession the property described in
perform any of the
conditions of this Agreement, within thirty (30) days after notice
thereofasprovided in Paragraph 5, the Board of Supervisors of Second
Party may instruct the County Counsel of r.SecondrParty to institute"
legal proceedings to enforce the provisions of this Agreement. The
Board of Supervisors of Second Party may also initiate proceedings to
rezone the property to the Classification specified in Item (b) of
Exhibit I or any other suitable rlags 'if idati6n.
4. Notice of violation of provisions of this Agreemen�
shall be sent to First Party at the. address specific in Item (d) of
Exhibit l and to the street address of the property described in ltet
(d) of 'Exhibit 1. Any subsequent title holder, any lien h0 lder, or
party in possession of the property shall also receive notiCd of such
violation at an address other thait as specified 4.11 ltCZ (d) of Exhibit
I by filing with the Cleric of the Board of Supervisory of Second Party
Agreement and the REsolution authorizing its 0-xedtityh reference to this
the address to which the notice is to be sent, wi'an.
5. In the event suit is brrugh,4 by the County Counsel of
Second Party to enforce any of the prokt-,tsiots of this Agreement, First
Party agrees to pay to Second Party a reasonable suiu to be fixed by the
Court as attorney's fees.
5. tach and every snd of the provisions of this agreement
herein contained shall ind anc,,, insure to the benefit of the. successor
in interest of each and every party herete in the sama inanner as if
they had herein been ezpreutly named.
MIBIT L
Agreement
(a) "First Party" y as used in this Agreement, includes each and all ofthe :following: Teresa George
(b) The property is now zoned: 9�R
zoning tog C_1 tion of the property is from its present
(c) The tonin reclassification
p
(a) Notice to First Warty pursuant to Paragraph No. 4 shall be
addressed to: Teresa George, 1425 Nord Avenue, Chico, Ca 95026,
(e) The cbangs in zoning classification
shall be to: G -I pursuant to paragraph No 4
Property",
as used in this Agreement, includes:
All that certain real property situate
State of California more, particularly describedthe
asCounL•y of Bate,
Parcel I a:s shown on thvt certain parcel ma
p filed in the Butte
County Recorder's Office on the 30th day of Ociober
86 of Maps at Page 66. 1981 in Book
,•• ..c..v . 4 t ... T..., v. 1 rtr.4Ffi,u v- I /! .uv.rv,.vMk t i.:v ,A,..!i`1^:,
FLLE NO.: 90-2
BOTTV;:COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
S.TAFV FINDINGS - November 30, 1989
APPLICANT:
Teresa George
OVINER`:
Teresa George
REQUEST6.
Rezone to Modify a conditional C-1
zone on Assessors Parcel. No.
42-14-114
Ap NO, e
42-14--114
SIZE,
1.06 acres
LOCATION::
Along the southwest side of Hwy..
32 approx 200 ft. northwest of Oak
Way, in the Chico urban area.
EXISTING ZONING:
C-1
ZONING HISTORY:
Zoned conditional C-1 September 1,,
1987 by Ord #2618 and Conditional
Zoning Agreement Resolution #87-
235; zoned C-2 ,March 30, 1976 by
Ord #1701,.
SURROUNDING ZONING,.
C-2, S-Rj A-10and M-2
SURROUNDING LAND USE..
North: orchard with urban reserve
overlay; East: commercial and
residential; West- single family
and multiple family residential,
and South: orchard and low
density residential.
SITE HISTORY:
The project site was granted a
general plan atnehdent from medium
density residential to commercial
by the Butte County Board of
Supervisors on September i, 1981
by resolution #81--234. At that
i
BUTTE COUNTY'P%BANNING COMMISSION
STAFF FINDINGS November 30, 1989
0.
same time the Board also adopted
the C-1 conditional zoning with
1. Owner to sir: the following condit}'.on,s
an agreement to participate in a drainage
assessment lis'xict when and if the lural meet the
agencies
establishes said district in the future and
requirements of the Nitrate Action Plan.
2. Any new development or conversion of the:
family `residence is to be served by Cal Water.
xisting single'
3.. Both parcels to be limited toone common driveway acce
easement from Hwy. 32 at the common ss
develop to commercial uses. property line when
4. Install. curb,, ..
gutter, aidewa, and drainage upon conversion
Of the existing single family structure
Assessor Parcel # 42-14-114,_ or development of
5. Construct a two
way Left lane with standard tapers to D
ept.
Of CA. Transportation requirements.
6. Contribute a pro rata share to the cost for the new
side fire station fund as determined by the CA. Depteof
Forestry for commercial zoning.
7• Owner to sign a covenant running he and that mitigation measures including a 8 i at noise
installed as necessar :sonrY sc5und wall be
the commercial uses will nottgeneral ,,�. }I-Ire�ahartp6�adb�s of
the northwest and southwest Property ;, at
8. All structures y
shall be
the Southwest right of way
G.um of 25 ft. front
ofHwy32
9, Exterior lighting shah, be shielded 1 ,.
g g !� xwy . 32
10. Applicant mist also comply with all other c l.iceble
and local statutes; ordinances; and regulations,
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION;
2
Commercial
,
i
BUTTE COU
STAT' NTY PLANNING COMMISSION'
F FINDINGS - November 30, 1989
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
COMMENTS RECEIVED;
Butte County Code Section 24-23.8
,;4-26, 24-28 and24-102
i
Government code �
65862. Gectiotl 65860, and
• r • • y +• , 4n1S --... -�L ullmental Health: !!
public water ePartment prev ------ As a condition of
estimate supply` The attached California
connection to a
unreasonably expo sive toconnect 'the
require water Service Company
Public water indicates
On that basis, a revised o r quion c A4ec ion for
rtohis small it may be,
pray ect .
1. Either connect this Department
satisfactor to a Public water
Y well w.3ter from a well supply or Provide
meet minimum potable water supply Properly constructed to
nitrates.!! PP1Y requirements
incl.uaing
California
water Service
water service can Com ani '�In resPonse to o
rules and e s on e to this Property Your inquiry,
Comrnission.regu.latiO11s on file with the in accordance with our
A water California Public Utilities
a nearest facilities which extension would be
would expect that the well over 1000rftUiwa on
Hwa' 32 from
than $40,000.00. Cost of such an
e,;tehsion would not bey I
If less
YOU desire we wall.
extend the main and Prepare a written est;
With our Extension rovide service to your estimate of the cost to
further service to you,,,Rul, X15; Property in accordance
Please contact me if we can be accordance
Cit of Chico "Th
potentia t City of Chico has o co
ra fic impacts are ah'co ed n comments as lon
California g as any
Opportunity De artment of Trans orta
r light to review Assessor Parcel tion, u
for 1ght commercial develo Thane you for the
Hwy 32 would create further traffic #42-»14�11q to rezone a
near NwY• 32. Continued Property
recomme:+l that measures 'to red�icP t� Congestion o ro tewth on
oke Public- transit to t s congestion include a We
guest.ions or co 5erve CSU r Chico Student; h increase
mme.nts, Please contact Dat ; �, Vista ti ,ate there are
Butte Count 916-`74e ate ally
Public_ t�1or�Cs ne artme It..��
None',,
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF T-3:1DINGS - November O, 1989
to Cousty Fire Department✓CA-. Dept. of
iinart on Fire Department".
ANALYSIS'*
Prevention:
The applicant has requested relief from condition 2b of the
conditional toning agreement signed and entered into by the applicant
and the. Board of Supervisors on September 1, 1987 which states as
follows:
2b. "Any now development or conversion of the existing single
family residence to be served by Cal Water."
This condition was original made due to wells in the vicinity of Oak
Way being found to be contaminated with nitrates and the requirement
of the Chico Nitrate Action. Plan encouraging connection to �t.tbl.i.c
water supplies where reasonably possible-.
The Environmental Health Department has made a determination that
connection cow"s to a public water supply for this site were not
reasonable due to the estimate of $40,000.Oo plus to connect to
public water made by the California Water Service Company. The
Environmental Health Department recommends that condition 2b of the
C-1 Conditional Zoning Agreement be amended to read as follows:
2b. Either connect to a public: water supply or provide
satisfactory well water from a well properly constructed to
meet minimum potable water sixpply requirements including
nitrates'. I
It is recommended
rasoehsyPdeclaration
prepared
project bed ntheinitial dated 157for the �Jere
Bolster re-4on'e and general, plan amendment, new inforr.iation provided
by Califo-,iia Water Service Company regarding cost for connecting to
the water system, and the memo from the Environmental. Health
addressing the issue of connecting to Cal Wator dated October b,
1369.
RECOMM�:NDATYONS
A. Find that the requirements of the California Environmental:
Quality Act have been completed and considered in making this
decision and recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt a
4
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF FINDINGS November 30. 1989
negative declaration for the proposed amendment; and
B. Find that the proposed amendment to the conditions
consistent with the But,,�e Count 1 L1 zone is
Nitrate Action plan g �, Y general plan and the Chico
and specifically because
C Recommend that -
approving the Board. Of Supervisors
the proposed amendment adopt a resolution
conditional tonin to condition 2b the
read as follows; g agreement entered into Of 1 Of to
2b. "Either connect to a
satisfactrry well water fporbttlacwewater supply or provide
meet minimum potable water su l ll pr°perly constructed to
nitrates, pP Y requirements including
In the event the Planning
.findings in accordance to thButte lCount cannot make the re
Nitrate Action plan than the following required
Y General Pbeh and the Chico
motion would. be appropriate;
Find that the requirements of the Ca. Environriental u
have been com leered in ConsideringQuality L �Y Act
B. Fi�1d that, ng this decision;
not co the proposed amendment to
n maks
the
consistent with the Butte County General C-1 zone is
Nitrate Action Plan; specifically because
ar_d Y General Plan no the Chico
C Deny the re '
quest for an amendment to
conditional zoning agreement entered condition 2b of the
the applicant and the Board of Supervisors,SePteinber � 1987 by
I
FILM: j to
Attachments to Commission and Cjtjees
Location Exhibit
and 'Environmental. Documtrfs
5
,,�
, ,�
u.
?
`�~�,�
_
� h
, ,�
u.
.. �
_ �*
o
_
0
i
57,6 z
Sp
t
V713
LAND 0 F IN A T U R A L W E A I T 1-1 A I'l D 11 E A U TY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
r.
TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601
Novonber 30, 1,989
Teresa George
1925 Nord Avenue
Chico, CA 06926
Re: Rezone, File 90-2
bear Ms. George:
Enclosed is a copy Of the Staff Findings concerning Your
application for a Rezone to modify a cQndItIona C-1 zone for
property located on the southwest side of Highway 32, identified
as AP *042-140-114i Chico.
A public hearing has been set for December 14-, '1989 at 9:00 A.m.
This meeting w 1 1 1 be held I h the Board of SLIPery I sOrs' ROOM 26
County Center Drive, broville, California.
''he 1 anh I ngrComm I ss I on reommends thatthe theheaeplapng I I catontrespond or the to
I r
uthoritc
ed epresentative . be present at
,,any qUestlons the CommISS10171 may have. In the event that no one
will represent n t the applicant, please contact the Planning 'Office
prior to the scheduled public hearing,
Should you have any qUest'lons regarding this Matter, please
contact this office between I ot CIO a.m. and 3., CIO p -in -
Sl'ilderelYo
B. A, K.Ircher
I c'*O Planning
relit M 0re
Associate P I anner
FILM, Ir
End.
cd, Mark A I sso, A 8t Q EhO I heer I ng
TO
FROM:.
SUBJECT:
DATE
IIQTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
r
Planning Commission
Planning Director
Update on the Environmental Review of Teresa George
Rezone File Number 90-2 AP# 042-140-144
October 2H, 1989
This memo las been drafted to update the environmental
determination of the Teresa George Rezone project. The Health
Department has determined that it would be adequate to provide
potable water to your project by well rather than Cal Water
Service. The Health Department determined that the California
Water Service Company estimate to connect to public water
indicates it may be unreasonably expensive to require connection
for this small of a project. On that basis, a revised condition
is acce:ptabla for the conditional zoning on AP 0042-140-144. The
Health Department recommends the condition in question be amended
as follows
1. Either connect to a public water supply or provide
satisfactory well water from a well properly
constructed to meet minimum potable water supply
requirements including nitrates.
it is recommended that a Negative Declaration be ;prepared for the
project based on the initial study dated April. 14., 1987 for the
Jerry Bolster Rezone and General Plan Amendment, new information
provided by Cal. Water Service co, regarding costs foz connecting
to the water system, and the memo from Environmental Health
addlressing the issue of Connecting to Cal Water dated October 6
1989,
cc Teresa George
A & 0 Engineering
1.--� tt"1'tNlltti t"
till l'.t,1,
�-�,y -; tea- i AgOncy)' $x_03-13-02
• 1,NV� i l'li: 'AI�QCIIfiCK1.I-'f 1' l,� g ,,73 ,114
t to'he �umt it A2-14
AP
87P38A &' $
l , 9AC�C�JERE BOLSTER
r6 orient •ve(if applicable)
Name of Pp rep
'
1. resentatl
anti
Address of proponent ----
Oere Bolster Avenue
RRV!!5
eri entrx Re? leGeneral PlanProject descw M Mp1P9P
3. '
i:jNUtlyOt 5� CO to degrade the
11A1dDATcsRY
potential reduce L
ect h.►ve the P substantially cause a
Does .the ofirthe environment, s ecies$self_
aua]itiY or w1ldli�'top bel°w
a fii5h, a P or
ahe habitat
of ° ulation ° lana
or w.1alifie p P etimi.nat I trlct the
fish levels, threatthet�umber or
5ustai.nlnb reduce eyed Plant or animarl,ds
animal community� an ---
e of a rare or les of the mayor p
rang important examp rehist°ry''
el imina•tc xmP istor or 1?
of California h otentiat to achieve
e the p tont;" theerm
roject havto the detriment of ontthe
by
Does the P efi\ts term impart
toren ben short- in a rciatiVewll'
sh°rtj A Qccurs
environmental,'go 'LL which i"tarm impacts -:
►9 )nc lc long
environment time whi .,
brief period °t rut"rc,l ividu-
endure in the which are �.
acts ,
roject have 'm�': considerabierdsources
UoeS the P cumulatively separate.
t a11y,11m?ted, but on two or more is relatiVth
projects aaimpnactcon
each resourthe tetal of those
where but where the eFfect oCSibnyCicant)
crit 15 ,
smalls on environm which
imp act 5 the
mental effects
Project have padvepse effects on iti►:iman __--
d, pons ca P substantial , or indireutlY"
will �
cause d recti
beings , the bead: Agon.cv) ,
he Completed by
J� DiINktlJN (To evaluation; a .signs rictint a fifet.t
111. 111yi't`s1.- - initial
this NOT have rt:{�are11,:
(in lite basis
of ect Cot11,t7 will he P
esed prof . C1,Al2A` ION wi • gigrc `CL
jlvli rind the PLOP and a NPG„NTiv1; nt; a
envlronmentw
7°+ed h
r6j �t eob�d'a sc rjhetalnbtt3 s
.......,: °n the re°t
that al thin Lro�nmecttc T11TT w TON �11tiASi1R11 00
r5 tl �A'1`Sv{!i
shore
i/1vt tint GAT eoject. t
the
A
cant efifiet t �sr bet;ausc t11e p •4
this `� have been ttlalct► to ,
e fifert in” 1rct1, efifcit on
the a.ttachedi le he Plop i s;y;nific nis reWtltiirc•tl. ,
C1iiG1,Al1A1"1nN ,cd ttr°sect Mt YV 11avo .t . �,1, 1l�Un
+'l AI, IDIPA
}
1r1t% �� ;try"l an (101,f� r N(NG �1'�tAlt(tll,til
< <"1�tJ thta ltropti� t;;wii�
MITT
the
t•ft\' 1 A'O"tlittt nt , ct�liN�,�or, 1 AN + y v
gl nne14
l
It LN tt wed by
" I�~S'
IV: ENVIRONMENTAL
ZP "yes" and "maybe" answer: are required
x anatlons o all
A
on attached
sheet(s))
YES
MAYBE; NO
1, EARTH. Will the proposal result in :signii:icant:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
x
geologic substructures?
b.
Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
-
overcovering of the soil?
C.
Change in topography or ground surface
rerief features
d.
cvior cli•ficatian of .any
.Dnp.quegeologicor physical featurcis?
e.
Increase in wind or water erosion - o f, soils, "
either on or off-site?
f.
Changes in deposition or -erosion of;;beach
sands,, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion 'which may mo;djfy .the channel of
_
a river Or stream or the`bad-of the ocean. or
.;
any bay, inlet o"r. lake?
g.
Loss of prime•. agriculturally productive soils
otits'ide designated urban areas?
h.
Exposure of people or property to geologic '
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudj
slides,"ground failure or similar hazards?
2. AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a.
Air emissions or deterioration of ambient
air quality?
-
b4
ionable odors, creation of ob' ect
The creation
or fumes.
c.
Alteration of -.,air movement,.moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
locally or regionally?
3. WATER. Will the proposal -result in substantial,
a,.
Changes in current -s, or the course or
direction of water movements in either
marine or fresh waters?
.�
b.
absorption rates, drainage patterns,
Changes P
Chanor
gesrin v
amount of surface runoff? -�
c.
Need for off-site surface drainage improve-
nents, including vegetation removal,,channel-
ization or culvert installation?
JL
.d.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
e.
Change in the amount of•surface water in any
water body?
_.
f
Oischarge into surface waters, or in. any
"
alteration of surface. water quality, including
bt., not limited to' temperattire,••dissol.ved
g.
"oxygen or turbidity? _
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
..
of ground waters ?
.�.,
h.
Change in the quantity or quality of .ground waters;
either through direct additions or w.th-
drawais, or through interception o;f an
aquifer by cuts or eXcavation5?
i,
Reduction in the amount of "hater otherwise
available for public water supplies?
j.
Exposure of people or property to watt --r,
related hazards such as flooding?
YES
14AYSE NO
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Mange in the diversity of species, or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?,
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
C. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species?,
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
yE�
S ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: -
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shell fish,
benthic organisms or insects) ?
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare'
or endangered species of animals?
-`
_E
c. Introduction of new species of animals into
an area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or 'movement of animalsl
d. Deterioration to exist:.,ng fish or wildlife
habitat?
6. N018E. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. '"Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
7. LIGHT AND GLARE. AVill the proposal produce'
signs cant light and glare? ._._
8. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a
su"- atantlal alteration of the present or planned "
land usa ` hof an .areal
9. NATURAL RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in
su stantiai
A, Increase in the rate of of any natural
resources
b Depletion of any noxi -renewable natural
resources?
10: .RI'SX OP UPSET. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk o explosion or the release of hazard.
ous substances (,including, but not 'limited to,
oil, pesticides, che-nicals or radiation) in the
event of an accident or upset conditions?
b. Possible interference with an emergency
,.response plan or emergency evacuation plAll?
POPULATION, Will the proposal alter the location,
istri ut on, density, or growth rate of the human
population?
it, HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
I
DI Stn ISSION OF ENV IROWENTAL FVALUAIiON FILE NO. 87-36A and '9
Pro_ iz-h Descr. i Rt i on
Uaneral Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Commercial
on 2 acres located to the west of Highway 32. The project aI~oa is In
tkiO distinct parcels, oner of which is aiready zoned C-2. The other
parr_eI Is zoned S -R and w 1 1 1 require a Rezone to C-2 prior to
commercial development.
Q!'gcussion of Gheckijst Items
I'b: The property is currently developed with one single-family house
and an orchard. Conversion to commercial use is expected to disrupt
and overcover the majority of the soil surface.
le: Soils on site are of the Farwe)I Loam Series, whIth has a sllnht
erosion potential. Erosion is only of concern if drainage is not
properly accommodated and runoff is generated onto adjoining
propertids.
2a: Use of the properties for commercial activity can 'generate two
different kinds of air pollution Impact., point and noopoint. Point
sources Include repair, garages, paint shops and some food
establishments. Nonpoint sources include vehi^Ie emisslons. Point
sources shall meet the requirements or the Air Pollution Control
District at the time of building permit Issuance. Nonpoint sources
can only be controlled at'the regional or national level.
3b,c,116ee >onstructlon of a new commercial building on property -now
pie-t.ed in an orchard and development of parking lots will generate a
s i PL if i cant arrount of storm water runoff. There are no community
drainage facilities in the vicinity nor any community sarvi'de areas
for the provision of facilities. Drainage will have to b6' provldQd on
site. Drainage trenches are one means to provide a temporary, solution
to drainage. The ultimate solution would be to tie into aroawide
facilities.
Development on site will need to meet the, requirements of the Nitrate
Action Plan which w I ' I include signing an agreement to 'participate Iri
future drainage districts.
31hjlbc Wells In the vicinity of 06k Way have been tested by the
Regional Water Givallty Control 9nord and found to be contaminated with
nitrates. Nitrate levels In these wells have exceeded 60 m'iIII'grams
per U teri far I excess of the federal standard of 45 in1111grams per
I i ter. Ni tr ates pose a ser i ous hea i th hazard to ' if ants, pregnant
women and the elderly, The primary danger from drInkino watoio�
contaml'nated with n'Itrates is the tact that the n1trates IImit the
Oxygen absorption copacIiy of red blood CoIIt 11fornIa Water
Sery i ce Company i i ries shorn^"d be er,+-ended.
-6-
i
If Ca`iifornIa Water Service 'Company lines are not extended, there is a
potential to expose future tenants of the propertY to health hazards.
4a: Vegetation orr site Includes an old orchard on the northerly
parcel and urban landscaping at the homesite. Trees will need to ba
removed prior to development. Since the habitat on site is man ir4ade,
not natural, this impact is not significant.
ti
4d: A 1 -acre orchard will be converted to urban use. This impact was
full, < addressed in the Chico Urban Area Land Use Plan Environmental
Impact Report, 1982. Conversion of agricultural soils to -alternative
uses is unavoidable within the urban area.
5d: Surrounding development to the west of Highway 32 has compromised
the wildlife value of these properties. Further development of these
properties will have no measurable impact on 'wildiIfe habitat i;n the
Chico Urban Area.
fa,b: The C-2 zoning district allows a number of uses such as
cocktail lounges, bowling alleys and repair garages, which may
generate excessive noise levels. Absolute noise and 'peak noise levels
are one factor to consider in making a noise impact assessment. A
second factor is the duration of the and the time at which It
occurs. More benign commercial uges; including an equipment rental
shop or retail store, may generat* objectionable noise only because
they are open for long periods of time and may generate high levels of
traffic:
Single-family and multi -family residertiai uses are located to the ti
north and west. A-buffer"should be developed between the commercial
and residential lots so that noise ekposure is reduced. A noise
buffer may include a solid masonry or stucco wall or a large - -
1 and'scaped berm
7a• Exterior security lighting may spill over onto adjacent
properties. As noise and light levels in a neighborhood Increrase+
more requests are made for changes In land use designations.
8: The present land use is a sindie-family reside►ice and 1 -acre
orchard: The General Plan deslonates these properties for medium
density residential uses. The project is a General Plan Amendment and
Rezone to allow commercial uses on site. The General Pian Land Use
Element identifies six sato dies 1gnat 1dn criteria for consideration
in
a Commercial General Plan Amendment. These are:
4
1, Needed for commercial development within 20 years.
2. Good road accessibility to service area or traveling Public -
8. Ad,jacen� to or near utilities, walkways and commercial
development
4: Less than 20X 'slopes.
I
i
b" Adequate fire and polite Protect i on,
e. Adequate water supply and sewage disposal capabilities.
Gonversion of this land to commercial uses would not comply with site,
designation criteria 3 and b. C-i-iteria 2 and 5 can be met through
Project design. Specifically, safe access by means of
lett--turn pocket and a Providing a
approved driveway approach will be necessary.
SQe ! tem 1 3 for traff i c commznt;s r and Item .fi 4 for fire commertits. `
12: Single-family residential Uses are located to the northwest and
southwest of the project site. These adjoining residences may be
negatively impacted If both parcels develop with commercial uses:
Impacts to neighbors include increased traffic, nolse, glare and
general activity generated by the project.
13: Since the•de.t�lopment Plans are not known for this
traffic estimates need to be made from the range of Usesppermitt
the C- zoning district. In
Atter excluding those uses whichhaveadhigh
water demand (restaurants, fast-food establishments, health clinics
and hotels), Permitted uses are estimated to
1,573 vehicle trips per da generate between �F17 and
trips, A typical i off l ce Would gener3�te 417
Ps while a shopping area would generate 15o0 trips per day:
The State Highway 'Patrol has expressed a concern with the traffic
which may be generated by the project. They request that traffic
circulation patterns be studied and evaluated in conjunction Witl, any
future development on the property. they note that the corridor is
eavily tra->eled and at times congested.
3b: Off-street parking will need to be
provided at a ratio of one
space per 200 square feet for retail uses and one space per 30.0 square
teet for professional offices, Other parking standards are found in
8
utte County Code Section 24--35.
13c,f: Add lti'Ona I traffic generated by this Property onto the Highway
82 corridor could generate significant traffic safety problems. At
the very minimum# the applicant should consider the installation of acommon driveway, left -turn pocket or left -turn lana and a
driveway approach. Specific conditions of a approved
discretion of CalTrans, which has PProval will be at the
�
I f the, State i dent i f i es i., need t orother i 'i mP`rovetnentshOrStraf fH � 9hway
signals through the corridor, the applicant sha11 contribute a prorata share,
t,4 p l re protection Is provided by the C6 i l Porn l a bepartmerit of
F strv- they do not now operate a station west of the railroad
tracks. Federal guidelines allow a train to block an Intersect I on In
excess of 15 minutes. However, a standard structure can be enpuifed
in as +ew as 8 minutes. The lack of fire ProteeYerd,ction in the West Ghico
dress this problem, CbF has requested `a
Prolarata Area Is scontributionrtd"romer tallddeveloPers located west of
P Wado. Provision of community water and hydrants wouldalsoserve
to Offset fire -related ' l inpacts.-
i I'+b,e: ;1eveIopment and occupant of this
Y property W I i i resU i t i n
1
increased cal Is for police --protection and demands for r-oad
3� maintenance. Because this
property is within the urban area, albeit
on its fringes, this impact 1s not considered sIonIF 1 cant.
xi>
1 'ic Construct i on w i 1 1 be subje _.t to school 'i mprov %ment fees
16d: Individual septic syt,,tems have been
proposed to serve
development on these lots. Use of septic systems Will be subject to
the approval of the Environmental Health Department and the
requirements of the Nitrate Action Plan. Sewage will be limited to
1,000 gallons per acre per day. Nigh -water land uses WWII not be
permitted on septic tanks under the Nitrate Action Flan. Uses which'
may be considered include retail and general offices.
17b The ,Reglonal Water Duality Control Board has tested wells In
the area and found them to be contaminated With n otos
^„ " i ti .
extend i no Cal i i form a Water Service Company 1 l nes, fu;tlre ;tBY not
enants and
occupants of thepropert y Will be exposed to Potent izi health hazards.
20a: A records search wi11 be required from Chico St-Nte University to
determine- whether or not an archaeological survey should be
The a contact the University d'lrectl prepared.
" y :;'a'E the address
sent to the County
r quest that a copy rxf the result
included to the cover letter and re
ty Planning Department4
s be
I_I MANDATORY FINDINGS OF S.j_GN F G tNC'
a: There Is a iDotent i a'1
records i or^ impact tO archaeological ro°esources A
search will be required to determine whether at•- not a survey
shall be prepared
r Appiidant: Jere Bolster Assessor's Parcel #
42 1 4-73, 1 `1 4
Log # 87-03-13-02
File No. 87-38A and G
QATA ;SHEET
A. Project _Description
1. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment and Rezone.
2. Brief Description: General Plan Amendment from Medium Density
Residential to Commercial on 2 acres and Rezone from S'-R-
(Suburban-Res!dent ial) to C-2 (General Commercial) on 1.06
acre.
3 Location: On the southwest side of Highway 32 approximately
200 feet north of Oak Way, Chico.
4. Proposed Density of Development Urban.
5. Amoun't. of Impervious Surfacing= Low percentages.
6. Access and Nearest Public Road(s)= Frontage on Highway 32.
7 Method of Sewage Disposal: Septic tank proposed.
8. source of Water 5`upP1y: California Water S®rvlco Company C7).
9. Prow i m i ty of Power Lines: On ..s l te_.
10_4 Potential for further- land divisions and development:
Extensive.
B. Env
1 ronmenta
l a`stt i n-9
Physical Environment;
i.
Terra i ra
a
General Topographic Character: Level valley hand.
b.
C.
Slopos 0-2X.
Elevat or: ApproXimately 173 feet above Sea Level:
d.
Limiting Factors'. None
2.
Soils
a.
t
'Types and Characterist1cs' Farwell Loam, 1-3 fen,
granular^, �rlable, rota Ins moIstGre Wel Ii subsoil to 6
foots level and smooth surface, good surface and
subsurface drainage, Well Spited to agriculture.
b.
Limiting tactors: None:
8,
Natural Hazards of the Land
a
Earthquake Zone= Moderate.
b.
Erosion Potentlai= Slight:
c:
Landsllde Potential: Nones
d.
r1re Hazard: Unclassified.
o4
E?tpanslve 8011 Potential= Moderate.
4.
Hvlry 1 oQy
a.
Surface Water: N6r1'e in Immediate vicinity.
6.
Groundwater: Area 'of heavy groundwater withdrawal`;
nitrate coh6erh
G.
Drainage Characteristics: Outside of 'urban drainage'
8istrict;
d. Annual Rainfall (normal) 22-24".
e. Limiting Factors: Lack of drainage.-
.3. Visual/Scenic Qualify Urban.
6. Acoustic QLjal i ty Poor.
%. Air Quality: Foir to poor.
,lolonical-Environment:
8. Vegetation`: Urban ornamentals on AP 42`-14-73, old. Orchard, on
AP 42--147114.
9. Wildli'fe Habitat: Limited by development in area.
Culture -i Environment=
10. Archaeological and Histori'cal lResources in the larea: Records
search required.
11 Butte County General. Plan designation Hedlum Density
Residential,
12. Existing Zon`lnQ: C-2, S --R.
13. Existing Land Use on-site: One parcel vacant, One parcel
laveloped with s'i'ngle -family resider. s
14. SUrrounding Area:
ai. Land Uses: North: orchards. Northeast': rdm i dent i a land
commerc a 1 « l=asts commerce i'a l South`: vacs, it . West
residential.
b. Zoning: C-27 q -R, A-10, M-2.
C. Gen. Plan des i gktat i ons: Medium bens i ty Res `i dentia 1 ,
Commercial, Low Density ROsidential.
d Parcel Sizes.: 6,5GO sq. ft. to 10 acres.
e. Population:; Medium densities.,
16. Character of Site and Area Urban i z` ' corridor a l on�,�, H i ghWay
16 Nearest Urban° Areae Chico. -
17. Reievant Sphbtes of Influence CSA 424, City of Chico.
18,, Improvements- Standards Urban Area: Full improvements
required.
19. Fire Protectlon Service
a Nearest County (Stats.) Pira St Atl on a 044; 3-1/2 miles
south; 042, 8+ miles east.
b. Water Availability: Engine capacity, hydrants.
20. Schools lig Area: Chico Unified School Olstrict.
R-
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Gowrvior'
51A7@OF CALIFORNIA
551
PUBLIC IITILITIES COMMIS"SI.
T. S. J Q e
,05 VAN NESS AVENUE %
SAFJ FRANCISCO, CA 44102
June 1.5, 1987 FILE 183-4/EIR
Buffe Co. Planning Comm.
JUN
c Qrwgle, CaUtoraia
Norma Wood
Office of planning & Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento CA 95814,
Dear Miss Word;
Preference is made to the proposed Negative Declaration covering thle
Jere Bolster General. Plan Amendment and Rezone to CommerL,'.al/lac,
-Chico, SCH #87051226.
We note that 2 at -grade crossings, West Lindo Avenue (P.U.C. C-186.3)
and West 8th Avenue (P.U.0 C-185.7), would be affected by any deve-
lopment in. the vicinity of Oak Way and State Route 32 Since develop-
ment plans are unkown at this time, the staff cannot respond specifi-
cally. However, because of the numerous train operations through
the area; any traffic analysis prepared in the future must evaluate
traffic volumes, congestion and delays at these crossings. The
accident potential must1'also be reviewed and any impact: found to be
significant rjust be eliminated or reduced by proper mitigation
measures.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT W, STICH, Supervisor
Rail 'Projects Section
18il/Transit Planning and Policy Branch
Transportation Division
Cc* Laur=a Tuttle
Butte County
7 County Center Drive �,� e1�r
Oroville, CA 95965 g 1
tiy� 0 12
ti .\
M
fere Bolstert General Plan Amendment/ Rezone - Mitigation Measures, File 87-38A & F3:
1. Contribute a pro rata share to the cost for the new gest side fire
station fund as determined by the CDF for commercial zoning.
EUTII COUNTY PLANNLNG COMMISSION
NOTICE OF A PIJBL I C HEAR 1 NG
Notice Is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission
that public hearings will be held on Thursday, December 15, 19$g,
In the Butte County Board of Supervisors, Room, County
Administration Center,, 25 County Center Drive, Orovlle,
California, regarding the following Item at the following time:
ITEM DETERMINED T'O BE CATEt;ORICALLY EXEMPT
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVLEW
9:00 A.M. James J Januar +
of an existing church �Wpthmatlargerlchurch,
ow the replacement
Variance to the front and rear and a
yard. a;ethac;k, to a I I ow a
building 48 feet from -the centerline of E. 10th Avenue
and 6 feet from the rear property Fine; on property
zoned R-1 (Reslddntial), located on the northeast
corner of Labur,7am Avenue and E. 10th Avenue,
identified 4 -, AP*045-01-4-003,, Chico.
all
S
ieresa George'- Rezone to modi
(Light Cofy a conditional C-1
mmerical) zone, located on the southwest side
of Highway 32,, approXlmately 575 feet northwest of Oak
Way and Highway 32 l ntersect I on,
14-114, Chico: I dent t f t ed as AR t4 _
rNvrRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDEDNQ
9t00 a:m, Gi-aco Ag, Partnership Use Permit to allow the
segregation of a 3.5 acre parcel for agricultural
processing on prppdrty zoned A--40
(Ayr I ctll tura, t , 40
acct parcels), located on the northand south side of
Nelson West Road a
F'r I as Road and pp'roX lmate t y 1 ml
1'e West o f Aguas
iles Wst of
of Nelson, ldentlllpiedroxlastAP038�-114 0, 10115, 16, the Town
The above appilcatlohs, maps and Negative beclaratlonsr and available for
With/without Mitigation Measures are on fii
public viewing at the office of th
Department, 7 Ce Butte Couht ounty Center Drive, Orovlile, Callfornna, If you
Challenge the above applications in court,
o
raising only those issues you may be limited to
Public hearing described In this noticeeoriSwat the
correspondence dellvereci to the h ftten
to, the public hearing. Plannirli; Commission, at or prior
BUTTE COUNTY_PLA'NNING._COMMISSiON
t3', A : _ IC I RCHER , D I RECTOR OF_ _PLANN I N
To be published In the Chico Ehtee0eIte
NdVembeRecord on Thursday,
r 3o, 18639.
n
Inter-Dapairtmenfial Memorandum
To; Brent Moore, Planning Dept,
FPOM Philip Nelson, Environmental Health
i
zusJEcT= Teresa George, Rezone Application, AP# 4.2-14-114 (Revised Comments)
CAM* October 6, 1989
As a condition of approval, this department previously recommended
connection to a public water supply. I�
Zhe attached California Water Service Company estimate to connect to I
public water indicates it may be unreasonably expensive to require
connection for this small project. On that basis a revised condition
is acceptable to this department;
1.. Either connect to a, public Water supply or provide satisfactory
well water from a well properly constructed to meet minimum potable
water st.!ppiy requirements inclLiding nitrates.
TR/gl
Attachment
to. Manning i6�
OC14181989
Clrovll®, ��iiot�►i
A & O ENGINEERING
t vil Engineers AUffe Co Div. of Err. Health
1280 W. 9th Street
CUM Cil. 9.5928 OCT' 0 3
893.0631 1,98,9
kn Calif.,,,.
October 2, 1989
Mr. Brent Moore
Butte County Planning
7 County Center Drive
Oroville,r Ca 95965
RE: Teresa George
ReZone 90 - 2
AP # 042 14- 0 114
Dear Brent:
i enclose a letter
Water Service Com from Mr Gene Grant District Manager for California
Pe setting forth the minimum estitnat��d cost
extend water to the su'bj'ect property:to..
Please lei me know i f
YOU need additional, informat'fon.
Sincerely.,
Mark E Risso
MER/pm
cc= ter. Tom Reid
Butte County Health Department
Enclosure
Ut1LIrOIC NJA �A+rATFR'S-FPVIGJE COMPANY
1340 AHE ESPLANADE •-CHICO, CA, 95926-331, (916) 895.8486
September 29, 1959
Theresa George
C/o A & Q Engineering
12RO E. 9th Street Suite C
Chico, CA 95928
Re: Assessors- Parcel No. 42--14-114
Dear Ms. Georges
In response to 9 y, .
' P your in uir water service can be provided to this
Property in accordance with our rules and regulations on file with
the California Public Utilities Commission. A water main extension
would be required in Highway :32 from our nearest facilities 'which
are well over 1 000 feet away on Oak Way. I would expect that the
cost of such an exterxyion wound not be less Iro—%n $40,000.
If you; desire, we will prepare a written est;(;;ate of the cast to
extend the main and provide service to your property in accordance
with our Extension Kule 15:
Please contact n1e if we can be of further service to you.
'Yours truly,
E. n'
District Manager
8EC/cjh
,
s
4
ENGINEERING
Civil En ineets
1280.9. gt1j Street
C111C ,, CA. 9592$
89;?=0031
September 19, 1988
Planning Department
County of Butte
7 County Center Drive
Orovlle, Ca 95965
Attention: Mr, Brent Mvoe
RE: Teresa George Rezone
Dear Brent:
Our client respectfully wishes to invoke the g
allowed under the 0 da
regarding 'water suprovisions of CEpA until. the Y waiver period
PPIY can be roquireci ; nforma{,ion
supplied tO your office.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
8inC(;rely;
Mare B. Risso
MER/pm
tM
.......:.. .
A c& Q .ENG17VEERING
Civil Engineers
.1280 1. 9r1t ,Street
OWCO, 01, 95928
893.0631
October 2, 1988
Mr. Brent Moore
Butte County Planning
7 County Center Drive
Oro`ville, Ca 95965
RE: Teresa George
Rezone 90 Z
AP # 042 14 - 0 - 1.19
Dear Brent:
I' enclose a letter from Mr Gene Grant, District Manager for California
Nater ,Service Company, setting forth the minimum estimated cost to
extend water to the subject property.
Please let 'me know if you need additional. information,
Sincerely,
Mark E': Risco,
MER/pm
cC: Mr. To'm Reid
Butte County Health Department
Enclosure
O;h &A
Co4nT"s'
0
GALIFQRN°IA WATER SF,Rvxcjr, Gomp,e,NX
"rE q 1540 THE ESPLANADE • CHICO, CA 95926.3311 (916) 995+9486
September 29, 1989
Theresa George
C/0 A & Q Engineering
128G E. 9th Street Suite C
Chico, CA. 95928
Pet Assessors Parcel No. 42-14-114
Dear Ms. George:
In response to your inquiry, q y water service can be provided to this
property in accordance with our rules and regulations on the with
the California Public Utilities Commission. A water main extension
would be required in Highway 32 from our nearest facilities which
are well over 1,000 ,feet away nn :Oak Wa
y. cost Of such an extension world not be lesslthanl$40,�005� that the
If you desire, we will prepare a written estimate of the cost to
extend _the main and provide service to your property in accordance
with our Extension Rule 15,
} Eloasc contact me if 'We can be of further service to yot,,
Yours truly;
E• W, t ranE
District. Manager
Eti /c j h
t
Vol, Gd10
c
tb
�fl0•
a
A & Q ENGINEERING
Civil Engineers
128,7 E. 9th Street
Chico, CA, 93925
8)5-06.1
August 21, 1989
Mr. Brent L Moore
Associate Planner
Butte County PlanningDepartment
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, Ca 95965
RE Environmental requirements for Rei*)ne 90 — 2
AP No. 042 0 114
Dear Mr. Moore
Mrs. Teresa George has asked me to respond to your letter to her
dated August 9, 1989. I note for the record that a copy of that
letter was not received by •te at A & 0 Enngineerii1
that, in the future all CO espondente be co 9r and x ;request
applicat-ion,): pied to me (see rezone
I would like to suggest a possible alternative which Can solve
birs. George's dilemma. in so far as the wells in that area that
are currently contaminated draw water from the shallow aquiferst
perhaps Mrs. George needs oily to ensure that an
provide domestic water to the cotimercial property any
etheo
deeper aquifers in this area,. These deeper aquifers are, l believe
the same ones from which California Water Service Company 1raws
its, supply.
'The result, in teams of water supplied to this property. would he
the same, but t�irs. George would' not be required to make the main
line watdr extension estimated to cost $118t600.
Please give this idea 80MO consideration and let me know what
yob
thin?:
sincerely;
Mark E: Risso
MgR%pm
ku
oGV1ti��Agtio�tl
it
BUTTE COUNTY PLA-111NING COMMISSION 40
7 County Center Drive
Orc°will e, CA 95965-3397
(91.6) 538-7601
TO City of Chico DATE • July l7, 1989
Courier Mail RE: PROJECT REVIEW
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or enerated�
concerning the following project : Teresa GeorGe APO 42-19-1.1 9
c g --
P,ezone to modify a conditional C-1
zone, located on the southwest side
approximately of Highway 32, 575 feet n0rth4est of Oak Way and 'Highway
� -
32, zoned C-1 (Light Commercial), Chino.
We are making an assessment of possible environmental imparts and will
be preparing an environmental. document., eitbsr a Negative: Declaxation,
Negative Declaration with mit' ga ti.on Measure's or an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR)
please provide any factual statements,- ideas for investigation', eestigat on',ztjso o�elate
ot)inions you can offer in your. area oy concern o_
to either phys�tcal, social' or economic impacts that thispoject may
generate
Please respond within 14 days of the above -noted date, f no xesponse
is generated by this inquiry, then it shall: be assumeda hat.othere are
no sa•gnificant environmental impacts which are p
otOn project
We any assistance you: can pi 6vide, r,
Sincerely, � `
August 14, 1980
Larry Painter
Planning Technician
The 2g of Chico has . no comments as long as any„�oi-entialu�
Cc�ttSztents xy��_
traffic impatto _ars addressed.
jn+er hs,�an Planner
wish �'o i ° t° cC, ;` Or he. OnVi,
fN`G3f a C71,+ j
Un iti,:jj 4t:G' for t facZ'Li Q L�rl aii3�1L3n
(With o.- without iii tw� 4 % ' Jn
'tee, surtaS) Or Vll or t�1iu pY:C� jt�Ct)
MS aY
Butte, 60unN
LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND
BEAUTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 25965-3397
TELEPHONE. (916) 538-7601
August 9, 1989
Teresa George
1925 Nord Avenue
Chico, CA 95926
Ftp: Env ironmental"Requirements for
Rezone; 90-2, AP# 042-14-0-114
Dear Mrs, George:
The Planning Department has reviewed your project as required by
the California Environmental Quality Act. The environmental
analysis 3f the Jerry Bolster rezone and general plan. amendment
dated Ap-.�-il 14 1987 was determined to adequately address the
environmental issues which this project raises The Planning
Department ,references that original initial study in recommenc3ng
an Environmental Impact Report (ErR) be required, should ',°he
requested condition be removed,
The condition ofany new development or conversion of the
existing single family residence to be served by Cal Water was
placed on your rezone as a result of wells in the vicinity of
your property being contaminated with nitrates, The Regional
Water Quality control "Board found nitrate levels in neighborhood
wells to exceed 60 milligrams per liter, which far exceeds the
federal health standard of 45 milligrams per Liter'. At the time
of your rezone a year ago, you agreed to the above condition:
The nitrate levels which existed a_ year ago also exist today.
The condition remains applicable and. is recommended by the Chico
ITitrate Action. Plan. and the initial study referenced above.
Bas0d on current information, this Department must recommend
denial of your request; unless a focused E.1.R, can provide new
information un which to base a positive recommendation on,
you wish to appeal the roquirement for an tnR you, may do so
by submitting to the Planning Department, Within 15 days from the
date of this letter, a written notice of protest specifying the
reasons why an E1R should not be required and the requited appeal
fee of $200.00, 1f no written protest is timely filed, an 81A
will be required,
If you choose not to appeal, the preparation of the EIR may be
initiated by filing the following with the planning Department
7 .
one authorization and ,agreement form for the preparation of
EiivironmentzA impact: Reports dated and signed by all owners
of record and their agents (copy enclosed).
2 Your selection, in writing on attachment B, of five
consultants from the cou.ity approved consultant list to whom
request for proposals' (RFPs) shall be sent (z copy of the
county approved crw—,iltant l..st as well as the attachment B
on which said selections are to be made indicated are
enclosed with this letter)
3`. .A, request for proposal, and Contract aaministration ree or
$1,100,00.
4. t,_rj I IR admiijistration fee Of $225.00.
Upon receipt of the above, the Planni,rig Department will prepare
and mail, an RFP to the five consultants shown on Attachment B.
The Planning Department will. review all responses to the RFP, to
the consultant, and notify you of the firm selected. Upon
receipt of a letter from you indicating concurrence with
environment•.al consultant golectod, and funds sufficient to cover
the consultants fee, the Planning Department shall execute a
contract with the selected consultant.
A full copy c' the countys EIE consultant and contracting
procedures is enclosed for your use. We strongly encourage you
to read it in its entirety to familiarize yourself with the
process and the costs involved;
If we do not receive a response to this letter within 1.5 days,
the projetct will be set for hearings befo'zca the Board of
Supervisozs i`or denial.. I'.f you do not wish to 0ontinze °with the
project, please notify this office at your earliest convenience
so that the file can be closed.
if you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact
this office any weekday between lo:oo a.m. and 3i00 P.M.
Sincerely,
8,A:KIRCHER
Director of Planning
rNa " m
Brent L. Moore
Associate Planner
BLM:lr
tnclosures
cc: dark: Risco
FiORIZATION AND AGREEMENT
FOR THE PREPARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
Project Title:
Project Type and Application_ Numbers
1. I ;hereby authorize and request the Butte County Planning
Denartrnent to prepare and send Rernz�,sts for Proposals for
the preparation of On En�eironmental impact Report for the
above projeut application to the consultants indicated on
the attached sheet titled Attachment B.
2
3
I understand that the Environmental Impact Report
Administration Fee is an est-imated fee and that prion to
certification of the final Environmental Impact Report for
the above pro Jact application I will pay the County any
costs in excess of the estimate. I further understand that
failure to pay, or to mare provision for payment in a manner
satisfactory to ':he County, within 30 days of demand for
Payment, may be deemed by the County to be an abandonment of
the application az\dthe project.
I understand and agree that failure to respond within 30
days of mailing to any request by -Butte County to clarify,
mplify, correct or otherwise supplement 'environmental
information required by Butte County for this project may be
deemed to be an abandonment of the application a:d the
project. I also agree to pay the actual cost of any
technical, studies or reboresrequired by the Butte County
Planning Department and prepared by other experts or
Professionals provided I hate agreed to the preparatic,l of
such studies or renorts,
Sig tithe of Owner of Record or Agent
S� ignaouz'�'- of Owner of Record or Agent
Signature of Owner of Record or Argent
Signature or owner oz Record or Agent
Date.
Date
Date
Date
ATTA=4EjjT nS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT'
CONSULTANT SELECTION
1. Name
Address:
Phone:
2. Name
Address:
Phoney
3. Name.-
Address:
ameAddress
�j Phone
44 Name
Address';
Phone;
S Name
Addressr
Phone:
h
BUTTE COUNTY
Consultant List
GEINERAL SERVICES
1 CH2M Hill, Inc.
1525 Court Street
P.O. Box 2088
12• Oscar Larson & Associates
P.O.
Redding, CA 9609 9
BOX 3806
Eureka CA 95501
95
2. Biosystems Analyses, Inc.
Golden
13 LSA
Gate Energy Center
Bldg. 1065, Ft. Cronkhite
x57 Park Place
Pt- Richmond;
Sausalito, CA 94965
CA :94710
3. Mundie and Associates
4902
14• ECO -Analysts
114 West 7th Avenue
California Street
San. Francisco,
Chico, cA 95926
CA 94118
• Engine Orin
1,5 • ECOS Inc.
1600
P.
P -0,g -Science,: IJ4C
BOX 7107
Suite 236 Sacramento Inn Wa
5u�.Y•
Pasadena., CA 91109'
Sacramento, CA 95815-3462
54 Community Planning
16, Elgar Hill
Consultants
303 Potrero
P.O. Box 690
St.
Santa Cruz 29-1.05,
CA
Penn rove
g CA 94951
. 95061
6• �'lannin
Planning
a7• Duncan & Jones
Associates
662 Azalea Avenue
2161 Shattuck avenue
Berkeley, CA
P -O. Box .1527
94704:
Redding, CA 96099
18. Be radix EriVironmental
7• George
5 S Nolte & Assoc;
1730
Research, Inca
Fox PlaZa,' Suite 902
I Street, Ste 100
Saczanjontd, CA 95814
1390 Market Street .
San Francisco
CA 94102
• S`edway Cooke Associates
1.01 HOWard
19' Cook Associates
St:,, 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA
2060 Park Avenue
debVil.le
94105
GA 95966
9• Jones & Stokes Associates
1:725 - 23rd St,
20. Raymond Vail, &, Associates ,
1410 Ethan
Sacramento, CA 95Su to 100
Way
Sacramento CA
95825
10 • ESA
1390
21, Woodward -C1 de
Market St.
San Francisco, CAS9410221�
Ohe Walnut Czeek Cen.terntS
s
100 Pringle AveilUe
Walnut
11, Enviros phere Company
Creek CA 94595
440 Castro 8t., Suite 320
Mountain View, CA
22` WESCO
14 64111
94041
Drive
NcSVa to Suite A
CA 94941
23,
Wagstaff and Associates
36.
Lecnard Charles & Assoc.
2550 Ninth St., Suite 205
53500 Bohan -Dillon :toad
32.
Berkeley, CA 94710
44.
Ctzadero, CA 95421
24.
Western Plar"jing and
37,
E'I� Associates
Engineering
1311 I Street, Suite 200
11712 Quartz Drive
Sacramento, CA 9581.4
33:
r,,^; bu rn , CA 95603
45.
T88 Consultants
j
P.O. Box 249
38.
South. Coast Environmental
25.
Planning Answers
Comp=any
34;
5225 Lincoln Villa Way
46.
P.O. Box 944
Fair Oaks, CA 95628
prinda, CA 94563
26.
Quad Consultants
J9.
Dames & Hoore
35,
2530 J Stroet, Suite 302
47.
221 Main :Street, Su,! -'-,e 600
Sacramento, CA 95816
San Fran., CA 94105-191.7
27,
Research Associates
40.
Resource Management
1289 Stanley Avenue
International, 'Irv..
Ck 95926
Chico,Sacramentoy
1010 Hurle Wc-,. , 5ui 500
CA 958.25
28.
Ott Water Engineers, Inc.
2334 Washington Avenue
41
Jack M. Meade, P.E.
Rodding, CA 96001
2180 Jefferson Street,
Suite 120
29'.
Harding Lawson Associates
Napa, CA 94559
P.O. Box 578
Novato, CA 94948
47..
aawkins/Mark-Tell
P404 Box 31
30.
Planning Concepts
Recwood City, CA 94064
203-C York Street
I,Tevada City, CA 9595`9
43.
Bjergo. Planning Associates
World Trade Center
31.
Collins & Castrillo
350 South Fi ' 04.2"t
5225 Lincoln Villa Way
guproa ,, 4. ,
Suite 111-746
Fair Oaks, CP: 95628
Los Angeles, CA 9007i
32.
J. Laurence Mintier &
44.
8nvironmental Plarming
Associate;
Associates
81.3 F Street
880 W. 1st St.. Suit► 615
Sacramento, CA 9581.4
Los Angeles, CA 9001.2
33:
Community Concepts
45.
T88 Consultants
P.O. Box 249
8413 Jackson Road
Mariposa, CA 95338
Sacramento, CA 95826
34;
Michael Clayton & Assoc;
46.
Ralph J Alexander & Assoc.
5764 ParQdise Dr.> Ste. 5
591. Redwood Highway
Cort` Madera, CA 94425
Mill. Valley, CA 94941
35,
PranmeEn ineering. Inc.
47.
Community Dynamics
P.O. Dox 1240
780 North Euclid St,, #1o8
Grass Valleys CA 95945
Anaheim, CA 92801.
4.8
Thej n C pnteruj �.e
n�eCA 92660 100
1300 Dove Ce
New2Ott Beach,
�Metcalf and Eddy
126 W . 2nd St . , Sta
'
Chicof CA 95928
Converse tsuCal fyorni
Consultan e 500
Hawthorne St • , St4
Sax Francisco, CA
105
Simpson As,so. , Inc.
51. Charles
�.0. 6ox 74 960 67
rio_tnt 5has to
52 Eatth Metrics Inc Ste 300
2855 Cal*us Dr.'
San Mateo, CA 94403
53; ENTRIX, Inc• Ste 300
2125 Oak Grove Rd -,-
Walnut Creek,
,4, Dennis Dickman
E .0 • Box ,3Q0 to 95245
Mokelumne Hill►
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
CONSULTANT SELECTION AND CONTRACTI!TG PROCEDURES
.. The. County may retain consultants in the preparation and
evaluation of Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs if a
consultant is retained, all costs incurred for
administration and preparation of the EIR shall be borne b
the applicant for the project,
y
• The Planning Department shah establish a list of qualified
environmental impactreport consultants. The establizhed'.
list will also indic
expertise.. ate the firm's particular field of
Environmental impact report consultants wishing to be i
on the list shall submit a resume indicating the film's.
principal personnel, work experience, statement of
qualifications, areas of expertise, and eAY other
information deemed necessary by the planning Lepartment.
Selection to the list will be based on experience, knowledge
of the county, and available expertise to ensure high
cluality, in --depth and comprehensive environmental impact
reports
Consultants with a possible conflict of interest with a
project, directly or indirectly, shall not be considered as
consultant for the project.
3• Following the determination that an.F,;TR will: be required for
a project, a letter shall be sent to the applicant stating
that a consultant must be retained to prepare the EIR. The
].otter will also inform the applicant' of the issues that
will nOed to be addressed in the HP- appeal procedures, and
a generalized description of the consultant selection
Process. A list of Count a ;
Authorization and Agreement. Form`for the dPreparation nof�Ean
lRS
and ,any other pertinent information will also be attached.
4• The applicant may initiate the preparation of the EIR by
filing"the following with the Planning Department.
a. One Authorization and A g_r
eerrient 'Corm... for the
Preparation of Environmental impact Reports dated and
signed by all owners or record or their agent(s);;
b. _Applicant' s selet,i:ioin,
consultants from the count in writing, of five (5)
whom. Recruests for PrOPOtalsrvconsultant list to
shallbe sentu
C, Request for Proposal and Contract Mminist ation Pee
of Shoo.,
- - r F.
This
fee cover.: PlanningDepartment costs, including
preparation of the Notice of Preparation, up through
submittal of the Draft EIR by the consultant and
acceptance of the document by the Planning Department.
d. An EIR administration fee of $225.
This fee is estimated and covers the costs incurred by
the County for processing the EIR.. Upon comp3Ation of
the review process, and prior to the certification of
the final EIR, the applicant must pay the County any
costs in excess of the estimate. The County shall
refund to the applicant any surplus deposit. The
County shall not certify the final RIR and act on the
project until the applicant has paid the County any
costs in excess of the estimate. At such time as the
costs are greater than the estimate, the applicant
shall pay the additional amount exceeding $200.00
within 10 days of notice by the Environmental Review
coordinator by registered mail. In the event that
payment is not received for the additional amount in
excess of $200.00, the Environmental Review Coordinator
will immediately cease processing the EIR and notify
the collection agency.
All required fees may be submitted on one check. Upon
re-eipt of the above, the Planning Department shall prepare
tho Request for P.yor:.Ssal and mail. it to the selec ted
consultants and the project. applicant.
� . Bid proposals will be submitted to the Planning Department
by the gate specified in "the Request for Proposal. The
submitted ;proposals shall ata m'.nimum agree 'With the scope
of services and proposal. --opacifications as outlined in the
Request for Proposal, and shall; be valid for a definite
period of time_; Incomplete proposals may be -rejected:
The Planning Department shall review and evaluate the scopes
content and completeness of the bid proposals in order to
determine the bid which west demonstrates the ability and
qualif .ed sta:cf to provide the services regt.i,red . The
Planning Depai:tment may hold interviews with any or all of
the selected consultants to help in arriving at a decision.
the scope, +:Ont.ent, completeness and quality of services
provided vi.11. be of equal importance with cost:
6. The Planning Department's decision shall be contained in a
Letter to the applicant indicating the date of expiration of
4-.he proposal. Upo,i receipt of a letter from the applicant
indicating concurrence with the environmental con!ul.tant
selected, and funds sufficient to cover the duasultant's
fee, the Planning Department shall �tecute the contract
f less tha wo of the selected consul ni s submit a bid,
or if,, following a discussion with the applicant, it is the
judgement of the Planning Depattment that ;exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances exist that would preclude the
use ; f the shil.ected consultr:nt the Planning Department
phall, at t1ae request of the applicant, mail out up to three
additional- Recrues.L. for Proposals, Prior to `;he Planning
Deoartment tend'.�,Yg the additional Requests foe Proposals,
°the applicant ;shall pay an additional fee of X1.50 to cover
administrative -.os Z associated with the distribution of the
Request for Proposals and review and evaluation of the
responsive bid prono,sals.
8. If the project is st,tbstant.ially .revised during the germ of
the EIR contract, the applicant shall pay a $185 project
revision fee to cover the costs incurred in redistribui,ion
of reouests-for-comments, revision of the proposed
specifications, and additional contact with responsibl.e.
agencies.
•m -MI S S I ON
BUTTE COUNTY PLAren' r D0 O-ve
'7 County
Orov llee C1. 95965-3397
(916) 536-7601.
TO. Envrrnmenta] Health
DATE July 7f 1989
PROJECT REVIEW &
Howard Snyder ENVIB.0tjj.4E "TAL EVALUATION
data our o; five r,�ts recevve�dP� r� e14-11Ad
Enclosed i5 prel_minar`y �.. f r.,eja George------_"'�
r wing proJee... the southwest. side
concerning the folio located on
C-1 ztane, Highway
v a condi .-ona Oak Way and
Rezone to mods � =� �---
....575 feet- northwest of
`- approximately
Of HiyhwaY 32 , al)► Chirto�hr7
zoned C-1 (Light
32Cermmerc- acts and will
possible environmental impacts
either a Negative Declaration►
We are making an assessment of p Environmental
be preparing an enviroY�e!ntal datio nM
Negative Declaration witch Mi--
impact
it: gatian Measures or an
I pact R.Ilpext (EIR) investigation r Or
ideas for re --
f
factual statements, or expertise that.
Please provide any
in area. o concern ro''ect may
,,aur acmes that this project
Opinions you can . s,t al,, or economic -mp
to either Physcalrt XAo resp
generate. then are
s of the abhall be tha,
lease respond within 14 c1�;� then it shall be aotent3. fY"m the
is generated by this �.nquz'c' ► : acts which are p
no sig
ni :cant en.,r ronment4ll• imp ,
Prp� eG't .
We appreciate any
assistance You tan provide
Sincerely,
Lt�vitc�titr�ntat E{�G�Itti
Larryinter y
Plann nq 'fechnscian r �C cpr
r r
%) r
CO1t1ii1ent5: -_ ---- 1 I L !' — iJX. LI f �f
✓*' th environmental document
v o f
t wish to �:ece� a cop.
goes you.:
STATE L'If^ CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORT tlr�N AND HOUSING ;AGENCY GEORGE bElJK1,1EJIAN, Govamor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 3
P.O. PDX 911, MARYSVILLE 95901 ro�
TDD Phone (916) 741-4463
Telephone (916) 741-4573
August 10, 1:989
Buite Co. Planning Ccmft
AUGV) 1989 03 -But -32
Orov3164. Califartii ti P.M. 6.9
George Parcel
Y
Mr. harry Painter
Butte County Planning Commission
7 County C'Anter Drive
oroville CA 95965-3397
Dear Mr. Painter:
Thank you for the opportunity to review APW 42-14-114 to rezone a
property for light commercial, development near Highway 32,
Continued growth on Highway 32 Will create further traffic
congestior on the route. We recommend that measures to reduce
this congestion include an increase in public transit to serve
CSU Chico students.
If there are any questions or comments, please contact baryl,
Noble at telephone (916) 741•-4573.
Sincerely,
Jean t. Baker, Chief
Environmental Branch B
• •.,;"' 4u iYu ).%+:rMrJk, d,1Nii Jinui Nli ._..9 11. :. 1 eY l414 nN.i, %,; i -:z ,. Jxr., r
- � - LAND OF t�iATU?�L WEALTH AND BEAUTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
7 COUNTY CENTER
" DRIVE- OROVILLF, CALIFORNIA 95865»3397
"'ELEPHONC=: (916) 538.7801
July 7 1989
Teresa George
1,925 JJord Avenue
Chico, CA 9592E
RE: xezone, 90-2
APO 042-14-0-114
Dear Mrs, George:
This is to notifyyou that we have received your application for
a Rezan y
e to modifa conditional C-1 zone, on property located on:
the southwest side of Highway 32, approximately 575 feet.
northwest of Oak way and Highway 32- intersection, Chico.
initial study of potential environmental consequences
anticipated in connection with this project is being completed by
the Butte County Planning Department and will be forwarded to
you.
should ,you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel
free to contact: this office between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m,
Sincerely,
B.A. ;K R
Director of Planning
BAK : fcu
tct Mark Risso, A& Q Engineering
Buffo Co. fildnntng Corr�ri.
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
7 County Center Drive JUL I �,,,98
Oroville, CA 95965-3397
Araville, C-rlifornia
(916) 538-7601
TO: Public Works DATE: July 7 1989
John Mendonsa
RE PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL ;EVALUATION
Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or generated -
concerning the following project rTeresa George - AP# 4Z-14-119
Rezone to modify a conditional. C-1 zone, located on the southwest side
of Highway 32, approximately 575 feet northwest of Oak Way and Highway
32, zoned. C-1 (Leight Commercial) Chico.
I
We are making an assessment of possible environmental impacts and will,
be preparing an environmental document, either a Negative Declaration,, I
Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measu--Ea or an Environmental
Impact Report (=R)
Please provide any factual statements, ideas for investigatioyri, or
opinions you can offer in your area of concern or expertise that te.late
to either physical, social; or economic ,i.mpactr that this project may
generate -
Please respond within 14 days of the above --noted date. If no response
is generated by this inquiry, then it shall be assumed that there are
noosignificant environmental. impacts which are potential. from the
P 5
We cpprediate any assistance you can provide.
`�'incerely,
°r Larry P anter
Planning Technician
IRECHVEDD
0 COUNTY PLANNING CO14-gISSI°N JUL 111989
BDA 7 County Center Drive DEPARTMENT 0 FORESTRYoroville, CA 95965-3,397 BUTTE COUNTY
(91,6) 530-7601 Duffe co. Pfa" ll COMM,
JUL 19 1989
D,%TE c ,7uly 7' , 1989
Qroville, Califomie
T'OpoLzstry pRD,TECT 'REVIEW &
ErtV2ROZIMENTA'L,
EVALUATION
ION
office has received por42e1.4-11,4c-
Enclosed is preliminary data oux Georg
.. Ceresa
the follow�,ng projec-.__„C -"� the southwest side
concerning C_L zone, located on
a conditional. and Highway
Rezone to mr,difY Oak Way
a roximately 575 feet northwest of
hway 32, PP
of H' -g _ .�.----r�
i",-1 (L1_ght Commercial) , Chic
32, zoned
ossible environmental. ir�,1pacts and will
either e Neg Declaration►
We are making an assessment o£ p ai.i.ve .p" at
be preparing
an environmental daten easures OL ai..
Negative DeclatdtiOn With Mit g
Impact Report (L111) - ationo or
ideas for investig
provide any fa your
statements 3.
concern or expertise that relate
please p our area of acts that this project may
oPinicirs you can offer 1z Y or economic imp
to either physicals social,
generate. if no _respaLeonse"
s of the above -noted date.
and With n 14 day then it shall be assur�led that there
Please resp potential from the
is generated by this ingl"z ;
no significar,t environmental, impacts Which are
project. rovde:
any at
YOU can p •, ,
We appreciate '
S incerel.Y ►
..
1,47
•/ "� LaLry painter
planning Technician
Comet ` n
,� tS t
---- of the en',/ironmerital deacwren
Your agent` wish to receive a copy with or 'Without Ali ticsation
Does Y ative Declaration
a „�d�I or,eg prof
(initial E R €or this ect) `
t ec'3StYr�s) It C-7, o
County Public WI' t
ks
—.
Envlronmenta.l Health County
City of Bigg"
City o! Chico
City of Grid
City of Orovi.l'le
-- Town of paradise Department
planning Dep
azw State Tra Portation Department
-offto Water Distrc`
�
lifo�rnia Water
o.SVA -q ce Co
-�-�
Del Oro Water
' OWiL
Thermalito Ixxig tion District
Other
���'��✓ :Chico )
pG&E North Marysville)
pG&E South (
racy fie Bel.'l.
__..State TV Cable
_ Viacom _TV Cable
14,N' `'6;= -r Department
State Water Reso
sOvrc-t1rCes
--- U.S. Forest Service Management
`-
U.S. Bureau of Land
Butte County Mining Committee
ment of F18h & Same
State Depart:ion
California Native lanattOrItio
State Div' Forestry
Craig Carter l. Control`Bd.
Regional Wat'ar (21
State Reclamation Hoard
S"'"gy� hvale Sanitary District
North Burbank Pura Uta.. • Dist.
Sub. tC'i X21)
— �,:_ansen City Sewer Main
t Ais,»
'-`
Stirling Trrigation District
The'rma -
Watel:
DiStry
'-" Bigg, W G a.ct ct
Butte Water anon District
D,:rham Irrigation
OWID atiort District.
r parad.6se Irrig
Richvale Irrigation District
Table Mountain xa iI T 3.st; ict
Thermalita Ixrig
FIRE FRO'rECT=QN
El Medio Fire protection Dist•
County Fire Department! CDF
LJY ro
A'SP.�riT DSS2Rx+�
Durham, Orovil,le or' Butte County
P�c� patrol
State Hig
hway
County Sheriff
.11 S ed TE. 0OT _ D C ST'RS CT
-x 1: Fp,CZz��_
n ERAst
Chico prey ecea ypark1D St
Durham
Area & park Dist:
Feather River -ecazk Dist.
para.dite = Pazls Dist.
�..-
Ri0hvaie g c Feci.: AOPt
State Parks
DR-E'*?NfhGEI T� G
Fz�C�'T=ON