HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-3 REZONE PLANNING 3 OF 3r
14
♦ s� w•rk•W.r.",+.,•..wewuwiw�.• wJ[ r�....• I ' 99
n
�� �� ` � ,err . o"-�,i'-•>'r f � t ..�--..�.�....z _,.1bp�
a flay`e Q r e l y G,uni{'y ltlldo �tG� " / U Qsi'
entlu) YtMISSI �'
n
C Raiyr�� & G Cryba St as
jp
0
IP o �,c ROAD
c ar b S
UU L° t y
ovcy O r a
Anti ;: c { _ -' dct
IFr.
pOw cqW nrr.r i v� Rm Grande Ro3eana�
vtv Sill Pt c 6 r --�rtvo^ Kc/%rf •.• 1
,� Ipnrr SIu5:1 Ellorn p �
Anita Road L '�, c>CI E 4 Landinatk
t L` 3
j1 .-
Rlb Baavo C: x i i dud
_ w _
I.1115i• I na. y C � l,rUfnmrn v
La e
).. ._ Sl bno Way
77 RarYrllrr'firive r•= i 0 SFr $
«
_ 1i o ,fin— — _
SCF05TA:41 St.ablif Lane
- F'.altly. Lane �I � J^ •J r
I a
Irmo Valley Ct. i ro � >td"
ted !J>r
INdsbn Landt'
Road
r
Our Wabw
x-
e.r'nnnft{iV,.�� °.
ala �f 's
- ..i. s. . ., i. r � ♦W+:...r. Jynr �•i
Qi
J
Wnlo
Caba!)O
� c Ny
pdN �fi�\.tr�rCo"1 tV A IPAI11 RT
s t
.. • _ z
vow"
Ga rnn
J c •�
ll ,
• " 1 Ct, s trrtNr. �o• C"100
qui d�Si�y YYYy`�i , w. -.f
tiOAb . Ni011W iPi.k LZ
Y r !t` 4� c .•,�%. i .. °nG '+,
rjill °'n '
w
1ii
p rei Gl• , i s , Aq &,910
td �ul�in it,
w wN
V I C (ti QM-/ MAP F'A l.1 L. LEVY .. 1 . �,,. �4 ,�.. •a',r` , v, �.'�.,,�.���,,,1� �.� �M�
A-10
F
• . s r s a
SR -1
R-40
:r
i,
BACH MAN
ASSOCIATES
November S, 1989
COUNTY OF BUTTE
Depattment. of Planning
#7 County Center Drive
orovilleA California 95965
ATTN: Dave Hironimus
Senior Planner
RE PAUL AND SADELLE LEVY
Rezone, File 90-3
Our Job No; 89-099
Peas DaWec
This letter is in response to your initial study Letter for the above
referenced project.
All proposed mitigation measures as staved, are acceptable An
archeological report has been ordered and a copy will be forwarded to
you upon our receipt of same
If you have any further questions, please .feel free to call our
office;
Very truly yours,
C . W' , BACHMAN
CW8.trb
cc: Paul and Sadell.e Levy
364 San Madele jkMCo. Pfat"IngC=M
Fresno, California 93704
'i?ravJta, �!i�orni
ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING DESIGNING
3012 Tht Esplanade, Chico, Callfotnia 95926 Tplephohe; '(916) '342-4136
- F, ., .n:Ja+-„ OAr. a♦ ...I.n.Ua r .H: 4. u.+.1 A.i t. .0-.,r I •:•-
i
APPENDIX I
cot.rrrTy o� 3�LJTTE
ENV2ROL`JN1F•N�AL CECKL`TS2` �`OtM
r (Io be completed by Lead Agency)
rile 490-3
LOG NO. 89-08-16-01
Ar No. 047-440-012
Z. gAGKG�20'C.TND
Paul and Sadelle Levy
1. Name .of proponent
Z.. Address of proponent and representative (if ,apolicable)!
364 West San Madele Bachman & Associates^
Fres-no, CA 93704 3012 Esplanade
Chico CA 9 5926_
3 project. ,,escription: Rezone
Ig MA1Vi7ATCaI2;iC I �ND2-NGS OF SYG
N=F2C:ANCE'YES MAYBE, NO
1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of thfa environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fiwh or wildlife species, cceateauthrse a fish or
eliminate
Wildlife population to drop below ,elf-sustaining levels,
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate _important examples Of major periods
of California history or prehistory?
2, Dies the project have the potential to achieve short-term benefits to the
dp-,riment of long-term environmental goals? (A shorn-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while
long-termacro Will endure into the future,)
3. Does the project have impacts which are individually iimited but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where
the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the
total of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
4 Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse affects on.human beings, either directly or indirectly?
y;I,;T7EFLMYNATON (To be completed bythe Lead Agency). on the basis of
this initial evaluation:
I/wE find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effwct on the
environment and a NEOATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
have a fect
1/w7E find that although
the
will not be aosed osignificant effectsinnthisacasefbecause
ect COULD''
the MITIGATION M t, there-
on tile envilGN MEASURES 3escxi.bed an the attached sheet have been added to thR
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I/WE find the proposed project MAYhave a significant effect an the environment)
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REMPT is required.
COUNTY OF BUTTE, PLANNING UVARTMW
November 1►
=LAI
av i ns
$eno�� P�.anner
Reviewedby!•
'!�•�;'
Paula ,S zeasure
Senior �l�nne
IV.
ZM7PAC MS
(Explanations of all "YES' and 1114AYBE" answers are required on attached sheets)
1.
FARTH. Will the proposal result in significant:
YES _ YBE NO ,
a.
Unstable earth candl.tions, or changes in ,geologic substructures?
X_
b.
Disruption, displacement, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
r„
a.
Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
_
d.
destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical
features?
)C
e.
Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site?
f.
Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream
bed
or the of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
g:
Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban
areas?G
h.
Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides,
X C--
mudslides, ground -failure or similar hazards?
2.
ATR4 Will the proposal result in substantial:
a.
Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality!
� _ X c
b.
The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes?
c.
Alteration of air movement, moisture be temperature, or any change in
i
climate, Locally or regionally?
3.
WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial;
a.
Changes in currents) or the course or direction of water movements in
either marine be fresh waters?
_ C-,
b.
Changes Jh absorption rates) drainage patterns) or the rate and amount
of surface r�.ucoff?
,XG
c.
Need
Need for off.-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation
ehannelization or culvert installation?
d.
Alterations to the course or flog of flood waters?
_V G
e,
change in the amount of surface Water in any water body?..
f.
Disc,krge into surface waters; or in any alteration of surface water
quality) including but not limited to temperature) dissolved 'oxygen or
turbidity?
[i
g.
Alteration of the direction -or .rate of blow of ground waters?
_
h.
Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawal's, or through interception: of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations?
i+
Reductio in the amount of Water otherWise available for public Water
,
pp
J,
Exposure of people or property to .,;, w-related hazards such as Plooding?
4,
PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result ,+ substantial;
a:
Change in the diversity, of species) or )lumber of any species of plahts
(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 sheciet of plants into an area, or :in a barrier to
the normal replenishment of existing species?
C-
d,.
d..
Reduction in acxea a of any agricultural g, icultural cro ?
y p
�, (=,
M
5, jMjMAL 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
YES MAYBE F10
or insects)? shellfish, organisms
b. {.eduction in the numbers of any 'unique, rare or endangered species of
animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to
the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration of existing ,fish or Wildlife 'habitat?r
6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial.-
ubstantial:a.
a.Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
7,. LIG HT:_.AND GLARE:Will the proposal produce significant light and glare?
..�.
$. I.ANDUSE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the
present or planned land use of an areal
'9' NATURAL RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
X
b. Repletion of any non-renewable natural resources?
10. MSK bF UPSET: Will the proposal involves
a. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but
not limited to) oil, pesticides; chemicals or radiation) in ,the event
Of an accident or upset conditions?
b.
v
Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
13. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or
growth tate of the human population?
12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing i:nt.sing, or create a demand
for Mitional housing?
13. `TRAI3SPORTATICIIS/CIRCiTLATION;� Mill the proposal result in.,
a• Gener"Lion of substantial addiLienal, vehicle movement?'
b. Effect is on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking?
c. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems?
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or
`
,goods?
e: Alterations to waterborne,,rail or air traffic?
f: Increase in traffic hazards tomotorvehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14- PtiBLIC Sg1ySGE . Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a heed
for new or altered goVertunent.
services;
a.. Fire protection?
b, Police Protection?
c, parks or Other recreational, facilities?
�
Maintenance of public facilities irtcluding 'roads?
Other governmental serviees?
A ¢ 15,
, l G'!. Will. ,the proposal result in:
ES MAYBE NO
r
a, Use of substantial amounts of'fw l Or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand ul:on existing sources of energy, or
require the development of new sources of energy?
r
T.C.
IMLITIES. Vill the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following:
^�
a. Power or natural gas2
b, communications systems?
C. Water availability?'
a. Sewer or septic systems?
e. Storm water drainages
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17-
HUMAN BEACH. Will the proposal result in:
a, Creation of any health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental
health)?
i
b Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
X"
19'
AEf:7rETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic
viiia or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the
Creation of an aesthetically oifensive site open to public view?
i
19.
ECRVj!LtEN. Will the proposal result in animpact upon the quality or
quan�.;ixj of existing recreational, opportunities?
G,
TURAL RESOURCES;
VY Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a
prehistoric or historic _archaeological site7
t WAW the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects
to A prehistoric or historic building, structure or object?
c: bdes the proposal have the potential, to cause a physical, change
which would, affect unique ethnic cultural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area?
bX8cTYs_ax JN 01" EN"V 1:A0NMEi\`"rAT., -VAT TO
See attached.
_4
DISCUSSION_ OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP * 041-440-012
Ib,e,3b,0,d,f,l6e: Development of as many as 68 homesltes on the
subject property would Lead to disruption,, displacement, compaction
or, overcovering of the soil whichcould result In changes In drainage
patterns, absorption rates, and the amount and rate,of surface
runoff. These changes could lead to Increased erosion, oth on and
off-site, and require off-site drainage improvem'ents.. Additional
storm water entering area drainageways could carry pollutants from
residential uses including pest J.cIdes, herbicides, automobile oi'I and
rubber, and other pollutants commonly associated with residential'
uses.
Ig; Approximately 68 acres of orchard will be removed from
production as a result of development of the subject property Into
homes'I tes:
Ih All of Butte Couhty is within a Modera•Ce Earthquake Intensity
Zone Vill. The subject property is located approximately 6 miles
southwest of the Tuscan Monociine a fault system of unknown
activity,, Construction of bUlldIngs to Uniform Building Code
standards for selsmicaliy active areas should provide adequate
protectlon to occupants In case of seismic activity.
2a:' Development of as many as 68 dwellings on the subject property
will Introduce vehicular emissions and other air pollutants In the
form of dust, residential bU;rning, wood stoves, etc.
3a: Most of the subject property
Agency (FEMA) maps, Qeacc.ording to
petty is subject o flooding according
of
the Federal Emergency Manage g to change the flow
homes Ites on the property Is likely
characteristics of those floodwaters.
3d: See Item 3a
30: Development of as many as 68 wells on the subject property could
lead to a draw down of area groundwater sources. The area is known
to be an area of abundant valley agUlfers. It is possible that
community water service supplies should by developed In order to
avold Indlv'�du draw downs affecting neighboring wells.
3h: Development of as many as 68 homesites on the subject property
could lead to Inf`USIon of nitrates and other poIIUtants feom eptic
tanks as has been experienced In other area In the Chico vicinity, A
groUhdr,A tee study may be required In order to determine that the area
groundwaters are In jeopardy.
3.j: Most of the subject property Is subject to flooding.
51gnlflcant grading and/or levee lmprovemerits may be regUlred in
order to develop this property, The solution to the flooding of this
property may in Itself require additional enylronmentai
documentatloh.
4a, c, d; The site Is currently planted With mature
producing
orchard. When the site Is d,®veloped the orchard would beremovedland
Landscape planting and ornam6ntals would be Introduced. The rezone
Is not expected to cause a significant effect.
4bi A portion of the property abuts Keefer Slough. the Ultimate
the slough. development of this property may affect the riparian habitat along
6b: Dwellings developed as a result of this rezone and located near
State Highway 99 Would be subject to severe noise levels from
traffic. It is suggested that, Increased
order to Insure that noise levels within the tbdwellingstlacks meetdthIn
e
Policies of the Nolse Element of the Butte County General Plan,
8: Rezoning of the subject property will most likely represent a
change from the- agrlcUltural character of the land at the present
time to one of suburban residential uses.
II: Changing the zoning on the subject property and the subsequent
development Into homesites could lead to
al similar
development In the area and an Increase In theaddnumbeorhOf suburban
residential development'In the Vic,inity. It should be noted that the
propertles Immediately to the north and south of the subject property
thhave also requested similar rezoning: This is the last Property of
e area of A-10 to request rezoning,
lSa,c,f: Rezoning of the subject
rto
development of '68 homesltes which would peadetoyancadddtloUlead to5the
o
680 trips per day to area roads. There Would be a like number of
turning movements off of State Highway 99 unless additional access (s
Provided to the east to Garner Lane. If access Is developed to
Garner Lane then additional traffic hazards Wllf be txCIOV61nced at
the intersection of Garner Lane and State Highway gg or at Keefer
Road at Garner Lane and Keefer Road and State Highway 9,8,
A traffic study of the area including the subject property and the
Properties immediately to the north and south has been
Is currently being study b performed and
recommends that only one accessafor athe threecomments, That survey
on the State Highway 99 and that circulation be
eoProvided through to
be permitted
Garner lane. If those recommendations are endorsed obydthe California
State Department of Transpai-tatlon (Caltrans then With nelghboein j h Some agreement
9 propertles. Would have to be reached In order to
Provide access to the property.
14,191 This project will represent an Incremental increase In
demands for publlc serVIC,es 1n a eUeai area:
18: Deveiopmoht of a subdivision on this property as a re;;Ult of the
eezoning Would represent the intrusion of residential 'uses Into an
area Where an orchard; how exists.
2oa ;, The subject 1 property Is located In an area Where archaeological
sItesntay occur. It Is necessary to perform a records check. through
the Department of Anthropology at California State` University; Chico,
in order to determine If significant sites may be located on the
property. If so, an archaeological survey of the property may be
necessary.
Recommended`MltLgatlon Measures:
1 No mitigation measure is recommended at this time regardlrig
archaeological Impacts. In order to assess the potentlal for
adverse impacts to determine what, If any mitigation measures
would be appropriate;, the applicant should contact the Northeast.
Information Center at California State University, Chico, for a
records search and ;sensitivity evaluation. Should the Center
recommend an archaeological survey be conducted It Will then be
necessary for a qualified archaeologist to perform- an
archaeo l og`i'ca l' survO y of the property,
2, Provide A 100-foot no-development setback measured from the high
water mark of keefer Slough.
31.- Any other mitigation measures that Would" be developed as a,
result of the traffic study prepared for the project a;reet
(currently being reviewed by Caltrans)
DRH:Ir
sor's Parcel Applicant; Paul and Sadelle Le'Vy Asses047-440-012
Log * 89-08-16-01
DATA SHEET
A. Pro ect Description
I. Type of Project: Rezone.
Z, el^iof DeScrIption: Rezone fromeast
sideIOofo state Highway 99
3. Location: On the
north of
approximately 4,000 ft.
south of Keefer Road,
Chico
4. Proposed D�;n�s t ty of [)evel oprrent •'
One dwelling unit per
acre.As much as IM6. Amount of Imperest public RRoads) Surfacing: Property fronts on
6. Access and Nearest o
State Highway 99 and Garner Lane.
7. Method of Sewage alsposalc Individual septic systems.
a. Source of Water S Pp y individual wells.
6. ProxIMItY
Of power
Lines: To property.s and development-;
10. Potential for
on
parcet as small as.I acre each could be created as a
p result of the proposed rezone.
B Environmental Set l ng
Physlcal Environments
1. Terrainland•
a. General Topographic Character -
b. Slopes: 0-2%. •a0 ft. A.S.L.
C. Elevation: Approximately
d.. Limiting Factors:_ Nene.
2. Soniceneraify Well
a, Types and Characteristics: Vince loam► 9
drained with moderate to, good permeability.,
b. Limiting Factors:: None.
3. Na'turai Hazards of the Land
a. Erttr'thquake Zona Moderate Earthquake intensity Zone
Erosionros. u : None.
bi f�+.;y�.s.rrt I a i
potential. None to 16VI
dLandslide Hazard Unclassifled.,
d Fire
e, Expansive Soil Potential mOHgate
4 Hydrology
Surface Water Area of 100 ai,d 500 year f lcac,i I hg
a. Gound mater: Abundant valley aquifers. Area of
b. Gr
heavy ground Water withdrawal, potential subsistence
area.
c. Drainage Characteristics. Land drains get•serally to
59 and
roadside
tb State Highway
the southwest year.
ditches, normal): 20-22"'Per y area and
d. Annual Rainfall i
potentia `{ sui3s i dence
e, Limiting Factors:
flooding potential, proximity of HlghWay
rorr►isIn the proximity
S,. Visual/Seen lc QuailComp t valley
Acoust10 quality stagnan
S. n9 aperiods of '
99. Good except dur
Slr Quality.
air.
Bio -10 icaE nvironments
birds and animals commonly foUno
Vegetatloni Orchards:
g , Sma I i
9. wildlife Habitat-
in valley agricultural areas,
Cultural Environment: Resources in the area: Area
1 ca 1
and Historical
10. Ar'chaeolog I - sensitivity• Hatton: Agricultural
of high archaeological plan deslg
11; Butte County General
Res ntial• A^10.
EX Zoning:
Ide
12. Orchards
13= Existing Land Use on -Site.
Surrounding, Area: rlcui`tura and suburban residential
14. Land i Ise- , Ag
a:
uses { and A-40• and
0, SR" ► Agr i �*u 1 tura I -•Res 1 dent t a i
b. Zonl �slgnatlon:
C. Gens Field Crops, ardbe l s .
r,rch`i'e�: General +Y 6~5C+ acre p
d. Wi c$- ural residential
+oWu'1 at i on,. R r cua tura i
e.Ag i
Char. ,�ctLr of Sit' �and Area CSA 67 and mock
15. of 1n,'.1uence Chicoe
16 . Kearest tjl-bran Area : Sh I co
17. Relevant Spheres
creek Reclamation q l Steds UrAre
1F3. I�riProvements Standards Urban aNo•
: Nord Station �a41
1 Fire Protection Ser vi State) Fire Station -
a. Nearest County ( 1/8 mile south.
located approximately -Fire tankers only
b.
li
Wates' Ava i 1 ab 1 1
It-
Chico Unified School District:
20. Schools in Area,:
4
ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE, MATERIAL
i, Map iI-1�
Earthquake and Fault Activity; Seismic SafptY
by CH2M Hill.
Element, Butte County general plan revised I--77, Se.,ismlc Safety Element; Butte
2, Map 11-2, Liquefaction Potential:
county General Plan revised 1-77, by,' CI-12M Hill: Safety Element,
Subsidence & Landslide: Potential: S y
3. Map III_J, by CI-12M Hill'.
Butte County`Gene:rai Plan revised-77
ill-2, Erosion Potential:
-safety Element, Butte County
4. Map
General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M HIII. Butte county
B, Map I1I-3, Expansive So1Is:
Safety Element,
General Plan revised 1-77 by CH2M'Hill.
Element,
Butte County General Pian
6. Map IV-10 Noise: Noise:
re-Vised 1-77, by C1-12M Hill.
o Highway Element Butte County
Scnic 7,, Map V-I' Ian�revijhwa
sed77 by CH2M Hill'.
Scent
General P Butte'
Safety Element,
Map 111-4, Natural Fire Hazard Cla
S. yeCH h1 H1I!_`
County General Plan reel I sed 1•-77, 2
Map by James ing>
9. ArchaeCalogical Sensltivlt i 1983 P. Mannfor Butte
County Planning Department,
Ip School District Map,
Butte County Planning Department.
11. Chico Nltra a Study Map,
Nitrate 'Coh entration In Shallow Wells,
1983, by tment of Water Resources, Northwestern District,-
1083,
The Resources Agency* State of California.
established by Resolution No 67=
(2,; Agricultural Preserves Map► visors, teCem1987.
178; Butte County Board of Superber 5,
Flood InsuraI
988: ran5;
i3: Fl Mnce Rate Maps► ent Agency. 1988. F
lood Insurance Frog
Federal ErergencY Manage_
14. CiSGS Quad Mapst Nord, 1969:
co (1926)%C�ravilte (1926) Ater., Department of
U'S.
1.5. Soil` Map; 'Chi
Agriculture.
Survey of Chico( 1925)10tbVI 1 iii ( 1926) Al^ea, U.S 06par�tlnent
16. c+o 1 I Sur y
of Agriculture.
17. BUtte County Flee Protection Jurisdictions and FDe'p�11'trEntMaof
fluffs Countyf 1 re Depa"rtn�ent and Ca I
Forestry, Butte County Planhln5 penartment.
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
NOTICE OF PUBIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission
that public hearings will be held on Thursday, January 11, 1990,
in the Butte County Board of Supervisors' Room; County
Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville,
California, regarding the following item at the following time:
REGARD I NG _ENV I RONMLN I AL I MVAU 16 _ MAVt . bl:C l _KrQ-Uiwr-Nuru
1:30 p.m, William H:uselt - Rezone from A-10 (Agricultural, 10
acre parcels) to 5R-1 (suburban -Residential, 1 acre
parcels), located on the west side of Highway 99,
identified as AP#47-43=03, north of Chico.
=OPPaul & sadeIIe Levy - Rezone from A-10 (Agricultural,
10 acre parcels) to 'SR -1 (suburban -Re identlal, 1 acre
parcels), located on the east. side of Highway 99,
approximately 4,000 feLlt south of Keefer Road,
Identified as AP#047-440-012, Chico,
1:30 p.m. Robort Liptrap = Rezone from A-10 (Agricultural 10
acne parcels) to SR -1 (suburban -Residential, 1 acre
parcels), located approximately 3'/4 mile southeast of
the Keefer 'Road and Highway 99E intersection, on the
east side of Highway 99E, identified as AP#47-26-138,
Ch'1 co_.
The above mentioned applications,,
with Mitigation Measures are on f ille and avaa IableD Declarations
rpubl is
Viewing at the office of the Butte County Planning Department, 7
County Center (Drive, OroviIle, California, If you challenge the '
above appikations In court, you may be limited to raising only
those Issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in thls notice or In written correspondence delivered
to the Planning Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing.
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
B:A K_IRCHER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
To be published In the Chico Enterprise Record on Thursday,,
December 28, 1989:
Butte Count
.+.c.. r fit...
LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY
J " PLANNING DEPARTMENT
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
TELEPHONE, (916)536-7601
November 1, 1085
Paul and Sadelle Levy
364 West San Madele
Fresno, CA 93704
Re: Rezone, File 90--3
Dear Mr. and Mrs., Levy;
An Initial study of your proposed project, a Rezone, Indicates
potentially adverse impai:ts to the environment (refer to the
enclosed environmental checklist). 'To reduce or eliminate these
Impacts, suitable mltfgatlon measures are required as part of the
project. Otherwise, an Envtrlonmental impact Report (EIR) Is
regU red pursuant to the California Environmental QUallty A'ot
An early response to this notification, sent to the 121mrining
Depar>tment, Will expedite the scheduiing of your project. Please
forward your written "respoh F. ; Within 1 5 days from the dateof
r
this letter
A 11st X10V local consultants Is included. These persons can
determine the need for a survey by conducting a records search,
conduct archaeological surveys or arrange for such surveys. In
the event of an E'IA requIeemeh't0 a subsequent jotter WI 14 be sent
out 11hIng the procedure for the County to select the consuItaht
to prepare the EIR
Should you have any questlon's regarding this matter, please
contact this office between 10,00 a.m. and 3;00 p.m.
Sincerely,
I
B. A. Kircher
Director of Planning
David R'. HironIin S
Sehlor Planner
DH I r
Enc:
cc Bachman & Associates
October il, is?BACHMAN &�� ASSOCIATES
COUNTY OF SUTTC
I)epartmertt of plar►rrir►g
'7 Co►: my Center Drive
Orovi l l e, Ca l i fored a'-4596
RE: '"'AUL LEVY kEZONE
at .;tOrie, File No. 90-•3
nP4 047-440-012
uiob. No. ag-05
ATTNk Mr. Dave Maronimus
Dear Dave z
Orr bee►alf of my client, Mr paUl. Levy, I wish to regUeZt a Waiver+ of
time limit as met forth by the CEQA gui_deliries f, r the sLtbjoc� t
rewc,rte} appl it:•at i�rr ,
t dwanti+ ,,, �� psi►ne limit is requested ir► order to review the traffic
Y tf , has. TMieeri eornpleted fOr° the Project, and allow time to
rmeet wi " staff, .arid Cal Trams to develrrp appropriate rnitiq,atirar►
meast-Ares 4_f ret ,z;sa e
Thw4 yoLt for y,z;itr t rt ci con►s det^ataori ani tt�as matter«
Very tr. ".y your -s
�..i�'t (.rJ ctrf
C. W BACHMAh1
CWB -.j 6 r
Co. plannir Cott
OCT 2 3 1989
Qnmllo, catomh
ENGINEr=RING SURVEYING PLANNING DESIGNING
8012 The Esplanade, Chico, Cali
%orhla 98M Telephone; (918) 342.4136
TE,COUNTYPLANNING COMMISON
7 County Center Drive
4. Crovill,.e, CA 95965-3397
(9;1.6) 538-7641
,., 5uttiz Count` Enviornmental 'Hdalth DATE: August 16, 1989
fiTTNs Howard Snyder RE: PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Enclosed is p
r(_,liminary data out office has received or generated
,concerning the following projects Paul and Sadelle Levy - Rezone From -A
(Agricultural,
11) acre parcels) to, SR -1 (Suburban Residential, 1 acre parcels), -
located on the east side of Highway 99 approximately 4,000 feet south of Reefer R°ad,
�
identified as API1 047-x+40"012, Chico, CA. Vile ' 90-3 Log1b 89-08-16-01
We are making an assessment of possible environmental impacts and will
be preparing 6.n environmental document, either a Negative Declaration,
Negative Declax:ation With. Mitigation M'�asures or an Environmental.
Impact Report (EI).?).
Please pravzde any factual statements, ideas for investigation, or,
opinions you can offer in your area of concern or expertise that re],r^ite
kL ;�ical socia)., or economic impacts that this project may
,.o
either phy r
generate.
ate. If Please respond, w, thin 14 days of the
tabove
nbeedL d.assumed thatnthere p�ree
is generated "by this inquiry, assumed
from the
no significant environmental impacts which are potential
project,.
appreciate any assistance you can provide.
We app �nvir�r�,arftd,�
'Sincerely, a�wI4en��o9
m� AUG'� �
� 155
Comments P
LI rt f r
l
d -
of the envirrinmental document
Does yoat agency wish to receive a copy ,
{ink tial study .for Negative� (with, or without Mitigation
Measums) or EIR fo . this pLoject) ,
�� r NO
E COUNTY PLANNING COMMISi1
r
7 County Center Drive, t
Oroville, CA 95965-3397
(916) 538-7601 y
PLANNING OFFICE
C�i1�'�`�
TOCity 0f Chico DATE August 16, 1989 CITY ai+
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927 RE PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I;.
Enclosed is'preliminary data our office has received or generated
concerning the followingproject; Paul and Sadelle Levy - Rezone from A-10
(Agricultural, 10 acre parcels) to SR -1 (Suburban Residential, 1 acre parcels),
located on the east side of Highway 99 approximately 4,000 feet south of Keefer Road,
identified ,as AP# 047-440-012, Chico, CAS File # 90-1 Logit 89-08-16-01
We are making an assessment of possible environmental impacts and will -
be preparing an environmental: document, either a Negative Declaration,
Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures or an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR).
Please provide any factual statements, ideas for investigation, or
opinions you can offer in your area of concern or expertise that relate
to either physical, social, or economic impacts that this project may
generate,
Please respond within 14 days of the above -noted date. If no response
is generated by this incruiry,: "gin it shall be assumed that there are
no significant environmental is which are potential from the
project.
We ,appreciate any assistance y'ou can provide, Buffo Co. planning comnu
Sincerely S EP 2 7 1989
0'6Vi1lO, California
September 25, 1989
Does your agency wish to receive a copy of the envi onmental document
(initial stUdy for NdgatiVe Dedlai-ati on ('with- or without Mitigation
Measures) or EIR for this project) ,
E'ESS� N
I
5
012.
FOR C Or'II"17E147C S
�=;STR,=13�'r=ON LZ�T
sovRp ��a NRe o res Department
Gnunty Public 'Works Stat .
aunty Environmental Health U.S. Forest Service
Bureau of Land anag. tet
City of Biggs _ U . S. mining
--- Ihico Butte County
rte_ City of
City pf t3ridley State Department of Fish & Game
-- of otoville California Native Plan attention
City state D-J'V. FOrestrY
Town 'of paradise Department Craig Carter
Planning artmerit ua1. Control Bd•
state Tran portation Dep Regional Water o
State Reclamation Board
j-VI sTrC crAr Richvale Sanitary District
Butte Water District
Dist.
North Burbank.Pub• Util.
_". California Water Service Co - — Skansen Sub . (CSA # 21)
_-" Del Oro Water Co. Ca.ty Sewer Maint. Dist•
;OWID. -- Stirlina
hermalitO Irrigation District Thermalto Irrigation District
T
Other (CSA 426)
'"......�
TA'
S-W.Gra.d'�'TFw ter District
_�g�GAT2(7N Gridley
1\toBigg
North (Chico) _ Butte Water aionyDstct rct
=.- PG&E Svil:le)
PG&E Pacific
(Mary _ Durham brig
Bell OWID ation District
state T1
Cable Paradise brig
_, . '� Richvale irrigation District
Viacom TV CableTable Mountain Irrigation Dist.
Thermalito Irrigation District
g'TRE FR�CJ'TECTYON
re Protection Dist:. D=sFrz=c'r
County Fird Department/CDF yoR,o,ri��E
r+iOS C7TTO p,�gATEMENT p- 5�--
- purham, Orovil e or Butte County
REGLAi1AT_SOr7 n=`STRZC
CT�ON
PdL]'=cam . PgOT� Patrol
>,,,- State Highway
cam.- County Sherif
CO1Y;X`!['y�STONS
SG�QOI' _ I� LSTRSCT,
paradise Pines Architectural
Xoi�rAcz �e.YTY District Control Committee
Chico Area Recreation Butte County,Farin Bureau
Durham Area Rec • & Park. Dist
Feather Rivet Rec. & park Dist.
other Rec &Park Dishy J Community P,ssociation
Pa
Rich"vale Re c» & Park Dist»
State Parks & Stec. Dept•
BUTOCOUNTY PLANNING COMMISSICO
r 7 County Center Drive,
Orolk"Llie, CA 95965-3397'
(91.6) 538-7601
.Butte County Public Works ks DATE.: August 16, 1989
ATTN: John Hendonsa
RE PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Snalosed is prel;.minary data our office has received or generated
concerning the following ,project: Paul and Sadelle Levy - Rezone from A-10
(Agricultural, 10 acre parcels) to SR -1 (Suburban Residential_, 1 acre parcels),
located on the east side of Highway 99 approximately 4,000 feet south of Keefer Road,
identified as'AP# 047-440-012, Chico, CA. File # 90-3 Logi{ 89-08.16-01
We are making an assessment of possible environmental impacts and will
be preparing an environmental document; either a Negative Declaration,
Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures or an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR)
Please provide any factual statements, ideas for investigation, or'
opinions you can offer in your area of concern or expertiGe that relate
to either physical; social', or economic impacts that this project may
generate.
P,Iease respond within 14 days of the above -noted date. If no response
is venerated by this inquiry, then it shall be assumed that there are
no significant environmental impacts which are potential from the
project.
Weappreciate any assistance you can provide.
UU"6C0.?1wMTn9CW"'
Sincerely, AUG 2 31989
p, o tlEei, CaIT
Convents :
Do -_8 your agency wish to receive A copy of the environmental documeh+:'''
(initial study for Negative Declaration (With- or without Mitia'ation
Measures) or Elia for this project)'+,�,� '� a
BUTO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISS10W
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965-3397
(916") 535-7601
O: Butte County Fire Department DATE: August 16, 1984
Forestry
'RE: PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or generated
concerning the following project:�Paul and -Spdelle Levy - Rezone from -10
(Ag cultural, 10 acne parcels) to SR. -1 (suburban Residential, l acre pazcels),
located on the east side of highway 99 approximately 4,000 feet south of Keefer Road,
identified As AP# 047-440-012, Chico, CA. File # 90=3 Logy 80-08-16-0`1
r{ are making an assessment of possible environmental impacts and will
an environmental document, either a Negative Declaration.
�f y. y -i JAa rIo,:-laration with Mitigation Vlaasures or an Environmental,
Impav t -;a µati r'- (E-UR"I .
Please provide any I.Ivq z'a.l. statements, ideas for investigation, or
opinions ,you can offer .n T.,6L-r: area of concern or expertise that relate
to, either physical, social, or impacts that this project may
generatz-
mlease respond within 14 days of Lhe above-nol-ed date. If no response
is generated by this inquiry, then it shall be as ikx-d that there are
no significant environmental impacts which are potenti,?A f#roln the
pra�,ect.
'r7.e appreciate any assistance you can provide.
Si=,erel.y,
rr,
i`
"' tmients
The convers!n from A-1.0 to SR-4has no immediate effect on the
Fite Debarthzent. 1 owever; once the-lotsare sold and house's .are con$tructed it- will,
P.iec'emeaa-1 - cieF=elooment (4. at a. tithe). in this area with no .chance fbr hydrant or -water
regaiirements is a problem.
Does your agencyccopy of the
environmental document
(n tialstudyfor Negative (Witlr orwhoit itigation
Measures) 'or EIA. for this project)
YES NO
BUT coU-N-LY PLANNING COMMISSIO
7 County C'en'ter Drive
Orovi?le: Cha. 95965-3397
(9i6) 538--7601
,CA state Highway Patrol DATE: August 16, 1989
TO: 'CA
Fir Street
Chico, CA. 95926 RE: PROJECT REVIEW &
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Enclosed is preliminary, data our office has received or generated
concerning the following project: Paul and5adelle Levy Rezone from A-10_ _
(Agricultural, 10 acre parcels) to SRI (Suburban ,tiesidential, 1 acre parcels),
located on the east side of Highway 99 approximately 4,000 feet south of Keefer RoAa,
ide*;tified as AP# 047-440-012, Chico, CA. File #' 90-3 Log# 89-08-16.01
We are making an assessment of possible environ;ental impacts and will
bepreparing nmental document, either :s Negative Decl.arata.on,
Negative Declaration with Mitigation Meas or r an Environmental.
Impact Report (EIR)
Please provide any factual statements, ideas for investigation, or
opinions you can offer in your area of concern tar expertise that relate
to either physical., social, or economic impacts that this project may
rien.erate
Please respond within 14 days of the above -noted date. If no response
s generated by this nauiry, then it, sha' 1 be asta
' med that there are
nes significant environmental impacts which are po+ ntial from the
projec
We appreciate any assistance you can provi6e-
Sincer
e1y,
ot'll\orc C.9
Comments: Should ,not matte, any -signimpact_ upon CHL' operations _.
- p; he environmental aodWnent
Does your agency wash. to re�ceivGe. a copy of'the
( .n tial study rot Negat-ive Declat-AtiOn (ttatYr or xttiou� Mitigation
r,.easures) or EIP, for this project)
i
YES NO
,I