Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUTTE CO. PLANNING DEPT. 79-11 5IV - (b) Environmental Review Direc;cr�sresponse to the comments from the California Department of Parks and Recr.eatign, 'Resource Preservation and Interpretation Division. o 1. The ultimate development potential under the curron4 rezone proposal:, is approximately 2400' `total parcel`- 1800"``ziew, parcels in addition. to the existing 6'10 parcel r, �1 r, These land divisions may never occur,°' considering individual site-spec .fic environmental limitations of individual �� op,eredthe oty•�,er of the ax'`,a. Tow=- ' ifthepotential is rzal�.,qd and subse(J;+Ient de- •, ve'lopn:3nt of created parcels ii generated, the visual and aesthetic quallitty,tind4 .i.ntfigl+ity of ,the area as, V4 ewed from Zakd Oroville and "from dther nearby'- lands (p'U.blr c and: private) in t7 .o area may I ,torknegativel.y affected. Craig Iltec'reational Area use (boating as well as u,� ar) may be aff ected by increased residential use' 6f adjacent project lands, 2. Detailed. ,soil stability and slope analysis of the area is not necessary at thii: le'Vel of project consideration. ;,division and dev,Aopment of individual 1 =' ,•t, properties in the future would entail consideration of „,these factorseai3 pparav divisions, 1pemaps dtggeaimvthan 306 ' slops: areas; 20 to 30 % slope areas, and less than mol slope areas have been included in the draft E.l R. ,,. The soi -: stabilie'ty criterion for development on slopifig terrain can be used as a 'nide. Without detailed soil data, which: is rat i r infeasible at this level of specificity, the Soil Conservation Set vice recommends th�t '15°/a be the limit for development in �� order to rQ� nt generatit�n bf eevelye erosion problem.o p or paten'tiailtles. :The majority of the land Brea involved in this/,-broposal lies on tl;e Craig ridge area the Moore Wii Mdge area where 10 �- '15% slopes h, .dominate. Nl'bee areas are f"or the most part pro- posed- for two-acre minimum parcel zoni.ng.... The re- mainder of the rezone area has steepe,c slopes where development should not take plaGo- xiowevor 1' some specific more gentle-sloping areas •within generally stooper areas may be f'o'und wh ,Ii could be suitable for developjuent. These areas hav,Lsig generally seep r termin are for the most part propozed for lbsi�e ^- „ lot ,zoning roquirin­- ten and twenty a'cr'e par,•el , �,��• ., � ,� f� few spooiHc areas avi. generally s Gey �, r' ` �� .,p% terrain 4y r r .. are 3roposed, howevor for le,; s restrr ctive 1 zoning such q.ls the southeast porti8n. of -the sdbject i ;`a.rea just above Ponderosa Reservoir which. has been A �nposed foie FII R-•2, two -acre minimum parcel;., Two acre=`parcels may not be feasible or <lesiroable in such axons, and" -may impact Ponderosa Reservoir as a result of development. . lot / und divisions could be approved,, -y, subdivis o n,ordinances1 covering sewage , disposal (including slS' e soil depth, percolation r rate, and available afba considering specific lay. -- out requirements nor leach fields),'" access,, water, etc.. would require compliance. Also, environmental review and. analysis of ,specific land divisions and development would be required. The potential number of land divisions menItToned is ;a theoretical maximum and may nw r'be practically feasible on an. inditfii-iaaa:1 �Yprrestbycgarr6el basis. The proposal is an p4 -tempt -'to - development of the area more thaw,,s''currently done by present zoning ,since A-2 zoning the6r,-dtically allows development of 8125 square foot parcels and essentially allows unrestricted use of the area. The oal of rezoning the area, whatsver final proposal is accepted and adopted, is to provide reasonable zoning districts that allow utilization of the properties while protecting the subject land as well as surrounding lands and water bodies f1?m degradation. 4, The impact of `xcreased vehicular traffic on the Craik; RecrPdtA( nal Access road is noted. This road is the only access road into the westexn portion of 'the rewoz to the Stage Recrestic:, . Lands. ye area as_well as,' .,° In the eveis.', of a major wildland fire it this western portion of the rezone area, evacu�Ltion of residents and access into t�,'a area may be dlifficult. Thissin ` �oeople and.le eas -road equipme�xt� anduld Gcould.ause d��ays in mc�ve�.enn�o�� ' y restrict file S'l.X re8sion, particularly from congestion rc:-sultir.g From movement of .residents in the O,rea. ;Curren°'wly, the road is a ones lane dirt roads preeenting dif9icult dircul,ation if ultimate development were realized.,, The need for fexicing of private �,,,esidential develop - mint adjacent to State lands is not'etw' riencing would be _at the discretion of adjacent: im7,,,! owners. Large- scale fencing to pl.1ote�,t State Janda would need to "be done b� the State its is done in other areas. . MitiGation measures cannot be condition d"of pro- Jeot approval for rezonings Only the res'triotinns of the` zoning cla5eif"cations can be applied,,., ,i Detailed n� t�. 'fat' 01). measures can. be applied to future land division and develolment proposals where needed. Since these future(,proposals would: require environ- mental review, more specific analysis of possible topographic alteration and ,,,,,oil IJdisturbance on in- dividual pr : perties can. ,be addressed. at that project level. Th.s proposal aiid ;the environmental analysis of its cumulative„effec�trs has ,identified these various potential."impacts from total development. Detailed stixdyy of site-specific impacts is not feasible at this level. '�. Potential water demand is esti.mated to be 500 to 800 acre feet per year based on the 2400 -parcel development potential. Specific groundwater data is not available for, the area. 0°eneral water availability information was addressed in the B.T.R. This limiting' factor i.� very likely the greatest limitation on develop- meht in the area with use of individual wells. An altern-�tive oource of water pog ibly could be developed such as a community water system beylng supplied by water from outside the subject land area, such as Oroville Wyandotte irrigation District ;supplies. At pvesent a community water system seems unrealistic. At full development, based on tho potentialh au :h a system may be feasible given tho demand generated. "The groundwater source is not an aquifer and isnot a true water table. Most abundant wells tap rock fractures aT a zo euu 2 oo-u aepzns ana tiucn sours, s are Limitea. S. The impact of effluent from septic tank -leash fields on the area was addressed in the draft B.I.R. on page 32. The Butte County Environmental Health Department does not believe that sewage effluent from properly placed septic systems having adequate leach field area will reach groundwatol, sources or ;cake Oroville waters since the effluent treatment of the soil occurs at shallow depth and that transpiration of water, in the surface soil prevents thin water ll,-om percolating to any great depth. The believe that eT±luent waters do not percolate deeper than ten or fifteen feet: The Environmental Health Department is charged with the responsibility of assuring adequate control of septic systems when the division and development of properties is proposed (prior to approval: of divisions) and rp. the placement and amount�,of leach field limes and amount of replacement line require when sewage disposal permits are :issued. 0 9i The ultimate development potential. of u& land u1-id'er the proposed rezote is 2400 total. parcels '(610 cuviently exist). This would generate a density of 0.3 dwelling units per acre (3 aores per dwelling unit) if the full. ,;rlevelopment potential' were realized. l .rte o ' However, such ultimate evelopment m ,y ne`r' `X be «realized Y and was used only for estimation purpospc,,, �Zot asgoals which can be realistically achieved: Lf hder dens of use were realized, this level of Voogd' x 4,,* use in this remote area adjoining Lake Orov:, �o 8,t,& 11,Je Recreation Area may not be compatible with the ;rocea.tion lands and lake resource. since a sbo ��plxne of the S ���Howe-V r, csi lake is s p p ty, e ,t on ii ,ers of the lake water body and shoreline would bo red<<�t fid. The Department of Parks wnd Recreation X(,e;ls th46t "�he ultimate development level resulting,,from';i. -ozone ' incompatible with cauriex�tt,�1� anti ri x•o osal would be.,.-uncom proposal cipated rearea=ti 'na� use of Lake Oroville. 1 S 10. The f a�xlal rezoning project that is eve�,'c'ually' ` � approved may entail aspects of various'` �altern.ativE proposals in order to ach 9;%,,e the most viab", ;1-�viron- mentally sound rezOnLig of 'the subject areas°; Th6 actual ` rezone project that is approved will by at't}`�`e discretion. �J of the 8odrd of Supervisors based on all irif'ormat on submitted to them at public hearings.. A cot,!inat on.; of portions of sc-eral proposals is,, poi%able. i1 t} 1 t i `Cho State of California Resources Agency emora ndu To L. Frank ,Goodson +July 5, 1978") Projects Coordinator ;= "pate: The Resourc-ias Agency. Earl D. ,_Nelson` Butt : "Cou'na, cy, r C-1 47 County Cantk�r Drive �,r Orovil.le CA 95965 From Department of Conservation Envision of Wne6'and GnoloBy W6 - 9th Street, Sacramento, 95814 ' Subject: SCH 78061914 EIR for the Craig-Mooretown Ridge Kezone. The Division of Mines and Geology has revii�wed, the s bjeclt report atld finds .that geologLcjseismol.ogic concerns are adequately discussed for the,-Jtype,of proposal being considered. The proposal is to rezone 7250 acres of'--..'and''in south- eastern Butte County; west of Feather Falls, to create. several, mountain rural residential zoning districts allowing minimum parcel sizes of two '`and- fire acres. 7.'his is expected to reduce and limit: the potential intensity of uses and to accom- modate rural -density residential uses of the land. r;') Forrest Bacon; Assistant District Geologist a, APPROVED: Jarde " F avisy t to Geologis RG1# 48 APPIAOV7H;D ; Cl" wl.f 4; PIP � L81 Rego tde P totec t ion Unit; ` Uad'e. <? �' JUL 1'8 C�U,my State of California The Resources Agency matandur To : Honorable Huey D. John8on Dote: Jul 7, 1978 Secretary for Resources y Resources Agency 1,,16 Ninth Street, Room 1311 Sacramento, California 95814 + At._enton;• L. Frank Goodson Projects Coordinator From,; i Department of Fish and Gorse 13 I Draft EIR for the Crai Mooretown Rid' 5u6'ec�: g- ge I tine (SCii 7806197:4) The Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the subject draft report and found it inadequate in its treatment of the wildlife resource. The draft report isN,incomplete in listing the occurrence of endangered species. The southern bald eagleis a permanent resident of the subject"sate. In they Witter, up to 17 eagles have been observed within the area. Peregrine falcons also utilize the area during the winter month,;'"^.. 'The proposed rezoning allows development to occur�\down to tvo acre minimum parcel size within the Mooretown deer herd's prime winter range, thereby reducing the carrying capacity of this critical deer winter range. in addition ,to creating an adverse impact within the project `site itself,. the su'rrouridiig lands will be subject to increased human-associdted harastmefit factors (people, 1 domestic pets, etc.) which could eliminate some of the use of these Lands by deer and other fo ms off" wildlife this rezoning and subsequent development, like many others in rural settings, reoresentst,a land use change whose individual effect may seem insignificant but whose cumulative effect results it significant losses to wildlife and the many public uses associated with those resources, Currently, there is an ever increasing de�iand £ot recreational use of wildlife while the opportunity for this use ins. decreas;i;g,; ;Linders+andab7yy we are concerned about the long-range implications of out°t, land use L-hangesi the final EIp. comply withSdiscuss 5143 of CEnA, the Department recommends'that h., In order to com 1 with .section 1 adequately , (1) the proposed project's impact upon wild- lila resqurCes, (2) the '64mdlative long-term impact that this project and future ., development in the winter range will have upon the survi,`xl of the Mooretown.,4-b�,;p r . direr het4� (3) includean adequate discussion section on the alternative of estsblistirb a 20 acre minimum parcel size,¢ (4) the projects adverse impact upon the endmtgered southern bald eagle ari&�peregriiie falcon, and (5) preQpnt adequate ivi.ti"at on measures to„compensate for ther,projectrs adverse impact upon the wildlife re§du_cts. p ”' Y Becauseo£'`thi5, proposed projeWs potential"long ;,cerin adverse impact i'poft the vildll,fe resources, the Department recommbenrls what-tthn'� Cour t� put.0%4e the CI JUL 13 tubo county o u - Honorable Huey D Johnson -2- alternative;of establishing a 20 acre minimum size for the flatter terrain with larger: -,acreage size for the steeper, sloped areas. This, alternative would provide more protection to the area's sensitive fish and wildlife resources. It appears that this alternative could achieve the majority of the objectives sought by the proposed project, as stated on page 4, Director �.1 JUL I S 1978 Cs t ;M.e:iSdtari�tl� �Evitlw d�JrnE%}, Md . Gdln#y STT (b) Environmental Review Director's response to the letter from the California Department of Fish and Game. 1 It is acknowledged that the subject land area is habitat for rare and endangered wildlife species, the Southern Bald Eagle and the Peregrine Falcon, and that specific individual eagles and falcons have been observed within the area. Thj''rezone area i4 -.-prime winter range for the migratory Mooretown deer herd. This herd ranges_ throughout the mountain areas above -the-Feather River and hake Oroville canyons. The range includes 1extensive area, approximately 150 square miles, the M)'subject land area being only a small percentage of the total range (approximately Ol). However, according to the Fish and Game De oa.rtment, this' area is critical deem.•gintev range. This,'., rezone proposal: and subsoquent development will reduce the carrying capacity of the land for this deer herd.. In addition, increased human-socie ectssfromadevveloted impacts) including 1direct s jectlands( ncrea sed ; access to formerly remote areas, increasod use of ad- jacent or near!,,:T lands, etc) as well as actual wildlife hunting and hart-assmen.t (including problems from domestic pets), will occur not only on the subject lands but on surrounding lands. Wildlife use of the subject area is anticipated to be reduced since residential use at a density greater, than one residence per twenty acres is considered incompatible with and detrimental to wildlife populations. ' The emphasis on the cumulative effects and long-range plications of land use alterations of wildland areas is ;doted 4. ,. Aie 'proposed project will generally reduce most wildlife habitat, causing displacement or loss of wild" f e individlial.s and possibly wildlife populations, Some`L5pecies tolerant of human populationt (starlings, sparrows, etc) or fostered. by development e9fects (such a its more open areas resulting from clearings) may increasei nopulationo of uri"Ldl,:ite may become more dispc;sed as developmeAlt occurs in areas currently free of human alteration, and. actvitieS. Generally, habitat losses and consequent wildlife losses of individuals will increase as well as reductions in population sizes, or at least the populations will. be more restricted in range. The carrying capacity of Land for wildlife will be reduced since food, cover, nesting and watering sites krill be reduced and restricted in area 5. The cumulative :Long-term impact that -this project (and future development bv► winter range lands) will have' on the survival of the Mooretown deer herd is esti- mated to be a 20% reduction in the popu�ation due to loss of critical winter, range habitat according to the local. F,' 8 and Game wildlife biologist, James Snowden (ref er he next attached letter" in this Appendix E). Rowever -�s estimate is based on the -theoretical develop potential which may never occur. 6 An alternative to -the proposed rezoning is -the establishment of PRG acre minimum, parcel zoning districts (TPI -20. FI -:R•-20 perhaps) in order to preserve and. protect ! A dlife habitat. The steeper sloping areas could be Toned for twenty acre minimum parcels also o,,, larger minimum parcels (TM -40, 111-160 perhaps). Twenty acre parcels are considered by the Department of Fish and Game ,to be the minimum parcel size acceptable from a urildlafe and` habitat protection standpoint since developient of smaller than twenty -acre parcels is believed to seriously encroach upon wildlife and wild- life habitat. Twenty acres or larger per residence is believed to be 'the- more des-Ireable density of human' use acceptable for wildlife. Because 'these raptor bird species are very intolerant of human devolbpm.en♦t and use of their habitat the project may result in adverse 'impacts on these species by forging them elsewhere or by actual loss of indivi- duals. This would only occur if actual land divisions and residential development were reall'zed (with all the associated effects such as noise; vegetation removal., human activities, haxrassment by pets, etc). Sri A rezone propos&L, canno't be conditioned :-.sth miti- gation measures in an effort to reduce environmental impacts. The restrictions and conditions of use con - tamed in the proposed zoning cl.assii'aca'tions, :Lncluaing minimum parcel sized allowed, are the only limitations or "conditions" that can be considered in a rezone proposal. The only viable way to :reduce anticipated effects resulting from as proposed rezoning would be to alter the specific z6ninAg districts to provide more restrictive zoning for a specific area j,:f land. Mitigation measures to reduce environm ntal effects of future' de- velorxemt can also be placed on y,_ Lure land division and development proposals upon environmental review of t;-.ese later proposals. However, it is recognized that on a project -by -project basis, the application of T I r measures on relatively small areas of lend will. not 5 salve the real wildlife habitat„problM,.,which is one ''..,of cumulative, long-term reduction of habitat. 9. The Department of Fish and. Game recommends the ecta l ishment of twenty -acre minimum parcel zoning on the flatter ridge -top terrain and the„ establishment of 1.arger-than-twenty--acre minimum parcel. `zdhing . on the steeper terrain in order to provide adequate protection oo the area%' 8 sensitive fish and wildlife resources. r .a Me. tR+c�M��� ipYtWii �`►'� STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY _ Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 7, 8arl D, Nellsom,bir�or ;? .?-ung Irk, 1177,3 EMvirvome.t) aI 'Reu;ew rite, foj1c' k'n3 C+fil?7m4'mfs 0-11c. o 1t14A 4:�`!:� `/'4E%E%T'C'1-0wo 1 pez �l S iy Y►'�i �a n`j" ct.d. U�1.5c;. 1'►���'f'-� lu i I l o'�Gtt r 'j•'d i-t �.bi'��r."�' �v� ca w i" lei I c f� 6 � � �, �-he Ye�►trrn� oetotry aS tAe' eser �ed- 3eeausc o� ke- /,roe- at" t'xvv1uc-,1 wi 2 /,f es �wj'1t lns - m i-Aer - -Aam dr ; pjae.&-d as ca.d jac.e-kl- Aufb'4,z i-s 6 ra �k hear y Yc cl �i'1 Q. � /�! a t� c � � l v r ►`r;� W I b �- o �)Sc� v t� lce 7�' � %'1S ,.-. v oe J I p pul�,4-,,on6 may hover !r't�.r�as�. � r'Q" o-tk )"s user► dor lc?1c�1t`�'� c�l��auc�% r�tQ:esc 5�-a.h ctS ,%►ct.v�'_ �ira�rr` i" d Gl fir~ ► �3� .l�i�alr,Yr, ,1 s �t Y )761L Ole, � �� r✓ h�ma.r� ���r�l►���h� t��rK biy�a�s r.�i-e f ;. gage, 9-1, ilaYe axr Fhda.hoeWe . '664 sp:ae's Gi"�e�l aYe krrvty ? i-o bn ea t'�a . r'h . i►abifAh�"s, Seven�e r, kiald eafjlez were. c.ozLh+(2,.j j"r fhe a =cr bl ped., 19177 Sty► ►e cty !1C-S'i' jri h c1Y i�ctltic� a `Few are. res'cd, e4t,'j, f�w}�endi x-C y payer ! f l ldcl � y aye r If s3+v `�'o a Pr"etbl redrac. �a� /,aa© t6 'hrr �ercl� tr Ver St`Jihtl�`cct,j;`Z` "41 P )P o C-2, only tha exo+k' 'fA►-t►ft1 �h� hose J jb0t1f ,b,oM � ';� y b, r'�'s 4 o-1 ` �'°l'uta�-�"nhs A�,1y Ij� dull r,�ev�ID��,��" �b�raj ►s jao�- r�..�j,L��d ��d� , mi-►6&+6 The to,'l 1 Pet6e. C-.3) Xh*peke+6A YML�i er Mdetdi' >x pe, <0-6 7e) mr %neD *e, 6'e.iA6�-'thy we.jl donor t)?d ��� -yucde- ell-r, 7't14,� k s dor �n �t.� a ','eacnnH#nl �toviow p�,�1. JUN 1 X97 a Ut�� tau VII - (b) EnvironmentalDirector's ��� __ Review Director s resp��xir.�e to the '.letter , from James. Snowden, Wildlife Biolog;i ot, California Department of Fish and ,.Game. The comment stating and emphasi z'i nE that signifi- /I cant adverse impacts will occur to wildlife and V ; habitat as a result of this proposal is noted. The reader is directed to page 34 and Appondin C of the . draft E. Z J�. , and to the previous Oommen`ts and re- `aponses made in sa tion Vl of this Appendix E for further A onmat.ion and discussion. 2. ,.-,It isPnoted that diffgrent species of wildlife require d1l, erent en ironm:ental factors, some needing more "nse chaparral/brush areas while others require more open ;fear, depending on their specific food and water, corer, and nesting requirements. Thernf.ore, modification of vegetation, such as occurred frcra .past logging activities and which will occur from possible future residential development and Wei wil'� affect different species differently. Some populations 1� Will decrease, some Uay increase. 3. Tan oak is suitable habitat for some wildlife such as deer. Rowever, dense stands of this vegetation may restrict these wildlife popula tions. 'tan oak is considered a "weed" species From human use and is,'' known .to consume great er-thakwaverage quantities of water. 4. Birds and mammals- have variable adaptability to human encroachment, de pending on the species. �i r` 5iThe Southe n 8al_d Eagle d the American peregrine g rare s ecies are known to be winter inhabitants of the subject area, either nesting in the area or resident. 6. Mr. Snowden estimates that significant lass of deer will occur as a result of lass of winter deer habitat, with a probable loss of 1000 individuals from r.,•, the Mooretown deer herd,,. a 2QA reduction. '%. A few native birds may maintain stable populations, In general; native bird popuAtion,s will decline. .1 00 t, .r 4 PF1 filR't..d;r ^t aR}xt circ t t o , t.t v , ar sin rc ♦ ,t : P f;,' 7V Y,v �' ; 4k'r .t r •}. f ,�_` �' w e'?.`}n , ;` q ru �,�, d ��,, I' i >,r,. k'i '" ;.•.* , ,: rw R'ii t `' "t t" r4 'd q�` dr , v� n a1 i k rp . '� C .E7 , .. r q .,., s + -J b >t• � � a r e "r i., ,.,, 7'., t t 7. A r, i '� R,3v 1�+ r r'�;�5i} a�'"E. {I» � f� `�- •f� f + NJ � P1� 4 � !. t , 7 t + . 7 �K f ,t� '.f, W /�A ,pi � rY' I CiY k+1J �i Y'f• 'N�'` Q y ` r �,y}a„`.• k�t1, ,d ` sat ,:p � 1`� a , c: 17 �I.,,, I� M o. +v Mpard oi` S>�pervieor� itt$ 032'lint�"�„,,,-.r` 4 1040 acs '6port for' the Craig ►�ocrr8lrnxs� � � r, �11 r ��.d�� .[��.ii��P. i •„ t'. .r ,r' f1�+�1 '..^ ' \1 ' tleutlemeny i� ' it hao been proveu that 'withx_A ,the described ct,#4 of the snl jct regoxt�' drilled xe1Xa acre iio#, t� guarantee of o uffioieut: water for40064ic pfIrosei with :no rostrai_nta. Otae resident hixt the aa�ea latag to tYmexio' a �rit, 'oa Iiotsebol.afund"i,o's bercA.oklk� << of the trickle of wator•in his -Voll,. fhe averago` cosi, of a` " drill, " ed vtell within the ' are-sso'botvee rr$ ,1600 ands 43a 00Q• I m auto any future ch er f n the aeon *ould appreciate this infokmation,; Anytme:�jnr`?,narc�ase; of residenodss• within the do4cklyed ' < area would eve ritually necessxt���e' theformatian of kaLe>r r' disfirict to :oeir'viee the ares,: The logical Source of supply tot a water district xxthiri,,� a the area would be tli pureb9l Ad of V&teir from the Ponderosa and pumped uphill to m.stora a facility and. then Nivi,t fed p p p b' i''Y ` g diate, bution syeter � A typ 'caI ayf'tem was receu ly, completed in n x earbf county a t that �tWie elav�atiain grid type o£ tea:rttin� T tray a momb�r of � {;. the water board iii that area 'And it tcnh neairlY 90 yenrs of dcnsziort alad tr;:^�'� mathodabefeire the dliginal WiditiittW p � g . i pj y � of ilio &Vemi In ;the ipi'ea &- �1ea n trna a ra ved b the r+nsidents r-, �"l -time,selfish intoresto vote swrVed -at tctpeyere obat'. r, lc►a' orig,hal cost "d this �pro,lect was; estimated'at �P501000 aatd' ,; bodaut�N.: of doloye) the fibs ed prriduet cast $ItCib0,tl00, Plus tueterThere ittd�.ertaxnio�icl4ectl�``oi5 6i �y notenioug t' -e r ueture * thi;u the " P,t . d l laar '•�.rzsly +601 that de�cril�ed are'tt o£ a �r�b sot rs jbrti,�an , the � oters of Btit`te .dQitn*y could fit; '�,�t�tistthe�jiv, � c�.,�etie ca►��'o a, � Ites eotf �.ly, 'oub' it etl fbr o i�s EiyAi 't;f _ y 1641 'N ,y ct �'v U4M t1°w• e, 3. 0, fi a 4 �j fir': ,r TTI - (b) Environmental Review Director's r08ponse to the letter from Behrend. von Dascher. q 1 The cost and uncertainty of providing domestic water supplies from p,.rivate individual wells in ,this area are noted. Water from local groundwater sources ma' be one of the greatest limiting factors involvod in the de- velopmeat of the subject lands.. 2. , It is possible that .a ,more rel i.abl.e, source of wwter may be regii•ired, particularlyy ,if the develop ment potential is `r. ealiz'ed ,, Formation of a wager d:,.strict and. utilization of wa-t-er from outside the I project land area may be necessary at some unknown future time. Considering the existing dispersed residential use, the lurk of a true "commuhity" , and i, the unlikely extensive development of the area in the �, near future due to lack of derki•and and the remote nature of the properties, a community water system at the present time or in the foreseeable future f, seems in,easible. f? 1� i A,. � a t ., 0oumients ,`.;i 'the Craig-llooretrwn EIR re`i Ecorao`mica, Costs and Services The c ocumeni' Ijand Use, Energy Flow and Decision Makr.e.K.in Human" Society brif.6% up �imporbant points. `As rural develop ant inciiea� � tie cost or services increases in excess of the tax reveiities 0011e4tedO,: 1113u,sed on statewide average costs and tax rates and trod tax revenues, tho'per-dwelling unit value required to break even or provide revenue equal to service cost in `7.979-73 was "$41)403for municipal services... 63 percent of current residential conatructi`on in California is:,below this break-even level for municipal services. Most 'urban residential communities in Cal' f'ornia with er e averag �, per-dwel'lieeg unit value of $18,000' are ,in a much poover fiscal position than the projects studied„ They are kept solvent, onlN� by substantial :subsidy from taxes on commer-- i _' cx•., '�I Reid industrial property) utilitiest railroads, business inventorsest G. 11, an& other sources of revenue. 'elf,. they* wish to protect themselves from fiscally debilitating r'esiden- tial growth) the eitiesi counties-= and school districts should e6quire that :fiscal impact reports be prepared to show that the proposed pro- rj jects wn'ald provide suf t'icf ent revenues t6'offset ' adtded f -,osis," ;1 Sgecifi.c information is included ift;&Lernatxve Laud- Uses in the Feathe# Falls Area and Their-tiffect on Buttei County Cost and Revenue Strea.416.."In 1873 it was estimated that a. home wpuld re.'Ju� t n an eyerected annual def'i ci t to the County of ipl x,150. Fest homesAu the Cra ``g Mooretovn area exceed;'$35r000/m The typical home in this area is uoAsi hebly impact less, eof proposition 13 his expected to show a reduction of 'property tax ir:cvme ,ane,,. a correspondingly higher deficit. This impact less and less value to 'Count,l- taxpayers that rural � housing is of is difficult to determine. It would at large, Lumber production is the PRIMARY coettmerciLd and employing enter - "prise in the entire Craig bNooretown zoning area. Currently there are � 2 large lumber sales in our, aroaj, area'there is concern that dividing the timber lands 'Weill reduce eeoxiomic and taq;,revenue potential, as recog- sized by the SIR. Can an estimate of Goui'rt 'revenues from these sales be wadel Who,; were total' County revenues! Crow logging and lumber:, sur area. production an concern to Orosion) sedimetita,tion and sinaller water Thee a is concern tea ` a supplies will substantiallyeffet:t timber downhill from those divided areas, This includes lands` within zrnd immediately adjacent to the rezone urea. Our concern lauds us' to the following: IN be,,, eve, tho County rah uld compare predenfj County revenue and expenses relating„to timber f4uds it the esti eo area frith the, pro jectod revenues and expenses if such laftils are divided as mould 'be perwitted by the WR proposal, We believe the County should addt6as tho effect of the division of-Ahe timber lands themselves) and the effects of o"ros,ione sedimeiitatiou� and reduced wines• tables on adjacent ].ands„ asedWill timber revenues tie decredsed as expeoabs irrcreaso if the pii'o-- P' redone developn�ent, i�I reri;lized� :.l'reserat sea•vioe to the area is mini, 10 which is saitisfar:t, y with' residents, Revenues NiA.Y now cause el.ose(� to payieig expensed: As the tIA pe`ints out) alditional development regw,,rea greater sorvices) and therefore a groater percent of County rewrenues is spent in reeuote areas compared with �tban and suburban ureas,. We thoreforo request that a, ) � comparison be made between present County revenues aiitl anticipated -_ :• full development revenues.(xemembering Proposition 13) Please compare:, e litnxted coat and contrast the of services toda;,.wth the substantial cost ,j of aervices required with full CUR proposal potential. What would the " coat of services be if there -were 80% development out of"the total development potential? On page 27 of the draft EIR there is a sta ;event that "it is ` anticipated that private development �,., shduld bear the costs of such improvewents.�' On page 36 there is a statement that ''Such improvements and upgrading may become the responsibili.t,� of bJAit,etounty.'r Liapl'ica#done are unclear. Alternatives appear to be: f: 1. No services fnrovidod — the result if the County or Special DistriOts'Xcljrld not pay. ". County provides the surview. Givan the lack of revenu* .to meet preseut service demands in tp a County$ ,antigiven, the' further limits 'caused by Proposition 13, can the County provide the anticipated s,erviaes? Will deficits he even greater? {}� 3. special. Districts provide eervices,i Present redidents have eipressed ri�siatanee to such. special districts. It 'appears that t.ie costa of Special districtA are prohibitive. ithei^e have boon 'very felt subdivisions in rural areas. Generp`lly, u development is piecemeal6 There is cOncern that piece:ineal rlevelo th,ent � w Old require the County to bear the costa of improvements in services. We are concerned that expenses will grossly exceed revenues. It is 4sawned in tie !',XA that services would be provided. 6s development an,' dreases, Obviocsly, a crisis would reault. What would the environmental •,,, impact be if nd services here o provided. If aervicea were provided, what , would be the impact on the rest of tho County? On the Feather Falls area'? Fire Protectxoiiiinty and to CDP now?, What is the cost to rile co u At what density will mare persouiiel need be added to the LVi<D or the CD" 'What considerations should be given to access roads, accessibility, and fire e,isx went? � What is the cost of Mice Polite Protection: 1 p protection nowt :Flow :Ouch will a heir officer ''cost"? At what density will a substation be ��dvi s able? hnada What doea the Public Works study, mentioned in the L'Ill9. say about thin? the study should='be ready now. "Please give tits the results in your analysis. Will -the Craig Access 11oad be maintained by, the State larks dyateai for increasing private development? At what level; will residents demand tho, County to maintain adcess iou"as'? Should tho County demand an access toe and/assessmeiit in the sale of development of aacli nf4 pa,r'cell heal t2i Servi„^.esWhot are the current costs and source of revenuos for the 1,1e40� Falls health Clinic? At what Level will, the Health Clinic roquire wore personnelf equipmentiand the Costs of these? �Vaiber._ gali.tj and l uailtity,t ,At what density$ admand, 'or crisis 1pollit will water districts and crater treatment fadiliti,ea be hedessary? Can it per unit cost pir, eater district ole hater teeatwent facilities be predicted) 'usii g Other foothill and mountain areas as examples? See hili•. 'von Doscher's letter. if the durrent,644 parcels deve;,ap only,, 4t will watar t�oatmeni be sucessary?, ;, _ J a St�Iid IVa,4te "Di os,l s That are CEQA requirements regarding this? Khat duldd be toe cost of a solid waste:, transfer station! Can recent i'xper ncod from the Berry Creak or. Concow areas be applied here? Recreations Currently there are no 'Feather R ' er Recreation and Parks District funds spent in our area. What are Craig Mooretowh revenues currently to this fund! Px�:E-Tate Utilities,AServices s Can any more specific ii orpmat,ion be Givenab t the carrying capacity of these systems? Other County Offices ' Many departments will have to increase their perssbneel to issue more permits and mare more insspectionsy, Will Preposition 13 preclude ttse hiring of more personnel in the County's �5 officoal What could thismean to the County' itt largo if this rezone area requires Fa, greater perce', t of; tho Countytss se 4vices? 4 , Ir, 'f`Jr r. ii i IX`Environmental Review Director's response to the letter from Leslie Steidl and Judy Wheeler. f 1. 'rhe potential impact of rural residertUal development in this locality on county services and the costs of providing services is noted. If full service levels normally associated with residential development and use were required in this rural relatively isolated area, this ecoAomic hardship on the county service structure may be potential., However., "'the development that occurs in the area would not be urban--density development. It is not certain that future residential development in the area would be' of the lower value type;,houses and improvements that would genarate greater than normal. tax revenues is also potential. It cannot be flatly stated that development of tie area would involve low-cost housing types. if existing types of rural residential use, which require and demai'd only minimal public services, are the norm of future development and use patterns, improvements of properties can. be expected �� al for value levels. However, if existing patterns are . 1 to be �J` oWeor futxre 'us.e patterns, it can be expected 1 that the level of public services required i1gures residents wo.d.ld be less than the average county-wide s would 4,Adicate4 In fact, people who build in the area and, establish residence here may by necessity have to expect lower public service levels. Typically, rural residential use in .such isolated areas of the county require less-than-normal public service levels. proposition 13 will reduce, property tax revenues from subject,Yproperties as it will from,,all properties throughout aha state. 2. Lumber production is the primary land use 'in. only ,portions of the rezone area, such as the northeast corner. Crazing use and rural residential uses pre- dominate on the subject land area. Lumbar production on adjacent or., nearby lands (Louisiwia ,pacific timberlands to the east) does provide a major employment opportunity for the area. It is aclmowledged that soils and climatic factors of the subject laxed area b s greater timber pro- duction potential that is currentl ,_,,Vi.den.ced in the area, under prosper timber managementi IS erosion results from development of subject properties and created parcels under this proposal, and consequent �;adimentation of sower lands occurs; poter:tial and existing timber�,.,prod+uction within and adjacent to the rezone area may bei' 6ersely affected as a result of loss of nutrients and top�Lsoil, gully-cu t'ting which undermines vegetation and cuts 'through root-zones, compaction of roots from and rook build-yup on lower slopes,"',,nd the physical loss of vegetation from:, plass movement of soils. , However if the recommendation ,6r6vided by the Soil Oonservation, Service fon general development criterion is respected, which con- siders 20'© slopes the maximum ,for development and 15910 slopes `. the maximum without specific soil stability date, and proper grading techniques are followed (dry seasotL grading, follow- ing contours for road alignments, s•t:abilizatibn practices, " channelization of drainage,along roads, etc.), the erosion and. ,sedim.entatioA is anticipated to be minimal. Further, the ultimate development potential is not likely to occur t due to limited water supplies Division economic oroductir1proand1viability ertosthesedlanduce the p ?z. ty ds for . timber production ,p. -,=poses. I` 1 ty i % ° PETERS, FULLER, RUSH, SCHOOLING 8 LuVAAS ,A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 0. PETERS, 1881.1953 NAT LAW ' CLrPHoNE y JEROJEROME AhEA Co6i 916 S (-> O. 414 s 'LEMOsT`R� h O EiOX �� � 3509 34a-3593" ` r `/0AV OMR pUPETERS,JR L'LER,fNC. si OAVIO H'PUSH CHICON CALIFORNIA 95427` „Y1 ppHN W. SCHOOLING,INC. JOHN L,LUVAnS,JR.�' July 10 1918 i .9 aNelson ) E mental Review Director E (r' , County of Butte County _center" Drive Oroville, CA„ 95965 Re Coiiiments on Ynv�ironme`ntal Impart Report for the Crag_r7ooretown Ridged rezone �. ?, Dear Mr. Nelson: We are,, submitting these rather substantial.W'mments ,�;n one report,,Which consolidates numerous comments of individuals and organizations coi'cerned With this rezone. mhe,single`'' coot- dinated-doc�umeht is presentee. in LieU of many i�d.ividual state-„ -' "-' vents so that it will 'be more comprehensive and readable. These cominentp are in two part's: F, The first ''so a summary "which of general pl: n language. , with cosrments, prohibits most of _. proposed Zoning and requires,, much urger minimum parcel, s$,zes`` the second part consists of "comments on the BIR and, ualansWered questions, with parti ula_r strew on the most si gnxficant ai viro'ti- mental impacts', 8y way of prefacoi it should be noted that r'c need .has . been shown for the poteni iql 2,000 to 2j3'`new parcels which this rezone woiald permit, `wllsawing a possible population increase from the present 200 to 9,000 to 10,000 people. In the t,bsence of 'a serious' and si�bstant .al foothill housing`- xieed ,=j-;,e potentially devastating impacts indicated in`'the run cannon be �ustafied. (3iXr comment, s demonstrate, st�i 1-7. more than:) the EIRt the seriousness, c, `�thesc iinpact�s i We .lave attached and submitted with these comments a map tettneog .we feel Obuld tubstantially mitigatd t'he �"severe pactsofthepresent proposal. We believe no further parcel's; should, bo permitted; but the proposed alternative may be " ` r t1 °"-pest -Zoning we realistically can n tpect and is a'nbhl tted as: a" coinprbi�ise Ij 0 11 , • `7 !,i JVD �/ V J , SIGNIFXCANm GENERAPLAN PROvxS2 ONS A. LAND: USP ELEMENT OF 1931 $,0: "The i6gation of the various urban uses �-dh ul,d atrive t-8 avoid random 'so:Lated developments that cause un. :�ac;c+mic` ensign of public Vtility srvicas and facilities through ik premature :3eveiopment of vacant land. xt Was the intent of the '(!or, ral plan to QhcoVrage,_ dove lopment:• _n the areas depicted for urban development, therefore avoiding the extensionof pt,., serr vices into rural areas " 2. �Sect`ion 5.4.- ''The areas 'designatedfor 'r1 n -urban lana useseitlher;.are not expected to b'a needed for urban expansion c�uring the lifat'of the plan {„ are not ! MUited for urban development, Qi, are neadod for conservation purposes. All projected population and(, economic growth :can be accommodated in the areas designated for, urban Uses." 3. Section 5.Be "Areas that should have been reserved fo r, permanent open space are depleted or lost for such use,, The exis- tence of some or, all of these conditions results in an increasingly inrficient, uneconomical, and°y in many cases, u-n"ghtly `usage of ouil 'land resources." 4 Section „5 : 9 t= `r'Agri cultural land includes the areas " being put to�intensive culture for ground and/or tree crops."" 5. Section 5:11: "The ge d al plan suggests that every effort bb :Wade to preserve those ,ikoAq Where conditions are aonc`lu, cive to 'sound a_ gricul:tural development, 6`: Section 5, 12: "Growth should be the, orderly expansion outward from uibaniued centers, thus avoiding tax burdens that are , sua14 the oo'nsareas�. e of unregulated and scattered develcipmentift � r, 7. section $.14; "The populatiUri Molding capacity of t"o areas designated for residential use should'he more than adequate beyoind the year 2000,0 B. HOUSING EUMEN' .._....ate, I . ��, Sec ..� ti,oh 7:15. �2o�i.l.e homes and mobile home par}c._ are concentrating further and furt�ier from the urbani2ea areas .• xn the moudtaifious areas, it has the si.m ,lop affect of• trahsferri,,;g forest land to urban usee. These 'me;C[Jitc� l areas are riot equipped, for urban services." ti -r �( (J" Co CON$H'RVATION BLEIKEN!I" a is ` 1' Section B . 0 ; rrmhe purpose of the., oonservatipa element �)to foL r c.1,s on natural wealth, bath physical, ani 14Vrins�ic qual.itaies , of", the raunty arid, before they are lost for, 'f)pt ire generations, male. mein prGr1ar preservation. putte County is an.area of high hunting 4 � Ohing intproats and it is import-,ao to identify d �.he,' n jP n pacths1 elioate �.��,���,�rel�tion etwoen animal, ar:d man and 'the I►1a atural environment, n has on then areas of2theSCountn when �r�n many of the foothill ,and Moutatainb`�x always available and ere development is bound to Occur,„Water,iis note y refore, impractical on an i.nd- vi dua l baa s 4” 3b, -,.,Section 6.5: "Economic and papulation growth note cinl mtiltiplie�, the demand for Watery 'it simultaneously tr�ells vo]ume X of waste materials reaching water courses, The downgrading I,'2'rteF quality is to some extent inherent in gse. 4. Section 8.6: "In the f ut�tro, the agencies 0 arg�d with the responsil �Uity of re -,viewing the development of the county should f) review proposa� s on the basis of their potential afar waters' use ,and ante water disposal � 5i Section 8.124 Th � imp'�At of erosx on �edirnehtatian and " flooding that arise from urban zation anchor subdvisio; Yoonst:acucti ons are in man cases not limited �� t e-,deveIo meat s3.te .y j . rir P 'tt i s es. pooia,lly disconcerting th4t the ovpt 11 effect of a dovip,lopment is y considered before the develo m nt is ermi:tte�i " not fullcans developme Any i'hbalance of this di licate edo -y s stem either by urban sprawl or intF,nsiVe land rise dir fitly affectwsthe deer„'population ,+ and shc:,xld, Pith; thesr� factors in minareceive oritic,a,l revie v 8. section 8.14 ,„h ' r'' reseryq., and lakos nutrients }.7orne by siediment result: in �aodeler4ted eutrophicat o! a process resu to rig ;(ln an overabundance of a1 c h s, and ev"Orktual loss of fish' life '1 it yg n - as man ai. kers �-h�. soil" v�-tation ,.and r y�` 801,” erosion roccu�.ss naturals but unoff ,fie roble is are vzoolerated— , ihte�Ioi.fiec , land use w %. hjn areas of sevexe foil execlity gr ati.y iii'c eases o * the sediment;dtion conditi oris tri wat'OrWays . ' x, oads, 1 hi.dh,are a concomitant of intensifi e(: (d .land �xse r xaqui�:�:'�4�egeta'�; removal creation of impermeable ';surf oes,, and tho i;ndtal�,atior� of the necessary drai Rage faci.l,�tie Ano therefore ore accele;�atp sola. ere" Sian by lQ to $8 til-4e:s the natural rate o This aed-14entation depo;)ited in waterWa s � damaging if ,not totally 488 itroy i.nq the ability of the water to suppo'a t f mh li,fQc�r �''7. �e��tio� 8.15: "Th` . acativit es which contribute Y o soil an ve etat ,v,� problems luted �.ax� their•`drder o.E importance are. o �.) roan; j (2) urtiani7a ion, "Mountain subdivision r`ads,Usually associated with second, home or recreation subdivisions, an(k unpaved back country roads j have unusukilly high,a ps3on raEes, d46 to the mounta�.nous area 001.1s, topography and- comate. O.'E,,ai'AGE ELEMENT OF JC7tTE, 1973 „ �----- ;+ . Page"two The development of small isolated residers- ll areas -,creates --se' gyral public problems other than the reduction r Q o�Qn space. Some urban ` development dir�rupts rra activit. es ` � ���pramaturesr eationdof lots which don t seA and rean I t , be bui, t nic ualities. t Lrpan. Many isolated resident,' al developments are diffioult,r to provide public se'rviops: � r t Page two k ". ecom dndation8 1� , a Tt � A.e The County jrzou d Set large min,.mum"parcel sixes for open space lands outs�ida the urban area ihd�.cated on the lard use plan map. Page three. RecommendatiOA E "The Count" should } di cou��age urban c�eveopment i;solater from eXi ting development: < a and urban canters unlsk:, such a nEind ca� be deiermind. h. Recommendation F a 'IT4e i ounty` should petthi't the „ o eation of residential parcels n6ar x,arge numbers of Vacant sites �.� ,,. be,, r�emo��tra,ted.'� ref simi�,ar cltiaraGterr.stic�, only �.�' such= a need can 5. Page sic. Where are sav�,sra poosiblr.� ways to preserve prehihited velopment can t'e regulated# limiter, ax " urban d a protect t,, mk�er lana... A . 6. Pago six + Recor mendation C.'; "The Counter should not � g, allow in timber�mot�ntair, ares the t-:onstk�uct,�,or3 of atiy road or c� buildings. which arF, not necessary, to open+space trees;;" t 7. Page seVen, water Resu't Ar�9as,. "Sa`veral of the t.. coloty t s waterw&�s have been designated as sigriifica t water re- so.ixrdes by the Stater .. h Pe ither, Raver and �,ts ,M� dcll.e fnr�.. M� ,T "The management of watersheds is �`4s impttktaut as the control " of waters to the preservation ref Water,resourde5 r� w+M41.111 aetivities;,often upset the eColog."Lidal; balances of stood waterthbds., Pates of water `evaporation and tYrtnspira�ion dei change when tt"sae are out, Roofsy pavement and oLher 3,mparmeable sUrfaoes prevent natural ,�bsotpt4:on and incroase 1,U (,ff. any r dove lorment: in mountain erp:as that requires site clearance or road !`r' oon,struct,ion can create heavy sediment loada that can ruin fishing i( w�� io,sro, and filil up channels and reservoirs:" o a '��- page e3.gh't.r+ Water Resource ,Areas Reca�lme`fxdation, 13: "NW-'rban AevE,10 rent shu .� be permitted on highly arc�dable sand. of )� u `9 Page eight. Wildlife Habitat, waA suitable habitat fbr.:,- wild animals must include sufficient ver and space: Butte County has an abundance cif sultabld`natural areas, but their -i value as vrildl�}`f'e habitat is det�ex ioratina j�es,urban development continues.�,The ,argest habitats shown i' the wildlife map are the seasonal arranges for migratix2a`' ;leer herd,.. g braville and a 1,0. ',Pae nizle: "Laked c the County's larger streams., ars- highly valued, a.'s lj bitat for such fish 6,s trout; salmon, striped' bass, shad and was.,tin water species. The mairteviahce Cif their premium classification depe4ds on the s: irround -- r'Cand,,us6s . 4' 8rosion caused by urban de �ei;opmeht✓� cif dr, --creates wateib&�ne sedimentwhich ca"n destroy spawning/ beds axil *xy,ua ;ic insect prod", i ion. 11, 14111.141JUe Habitat Rec\\\bmi»",endation `B ; lithe County. should r►sgul.ate re'sic7er,ti.al development in the fbothill: - 10 faci,li+:ate, the , /�survi Jal and ml,`4ration of;' deer herds 12. "Recommendation n; "The Colnty should not allow any, urban developM nt which would incroarzel' ediment loads ih prime fishing waters, �13* a pa eleven. rgas With Development gA�� p t Hfazards ".Some open space lands should remai 1, open ; not, to protddi! environmental resourcdbj but., -,because of the presence of development hazards. Clistiilg unstable soil areas and areas of high fire risk]." Page ' r i` �, p The a 1 pa e eleven. rt �.s known that chtians of the Sierra Foothill.;` gave a high ra.sk of fire damage, ,i preparation of the'�safety elemeint will also require t.ha designation of; fire hazard a.rea,,-j c'r I ( ' ' E i ►7�ii.C1��.L h, h erosionGha2ardos'i est d3.call.s underl.aef bl -l.l :. �► vera 1. g g• T :areal o E. g yP . ' by granitid°° rocks; 3 The areas, of„high to`wery high erosion hazard typically have,.,a l g h ,6 pp l.y 30'60 inches) ra�,ni' erai,e to high annu4 1 all C a ro��.rt�ae "'the eastern t'W,o�thiras of thy, County is typic 'the high to very high erosion-olaso, 2. `irena2ards. age xzr�l5; 'The 3tnmecl ate impacts o a Wil].and fare include lt�s�* of valuable fdtabts o wi,l.dl. e,, tater, sheds \,.and scobto resources `al;Png w 'bh the dastruction bf homes and :-.., ....,_... L. w..,.._ a .. .;<.:.: <, _. s' ,:.: .. ...:. _. ,.: _ v. ... .-.. -. .. • ..... _ . _' ._ . _ ,. o t) It There be or of imhaca er ra�nclude'a reductioninthe valueyof landsand the further condary, degY :r3at 'on' of natural, resources., Erosion, for example..',_ esul.ts in siltationof-:lakes and rivers...." l ' 3. i?rage,111-�16: '"There has; been�a disproportionately r higher number of fires per unit of populalaion in the foothills ar,4 mountains. This condition is probably du�\ to the more ha ardous natural combiYiat on of dense vegetation°, drr,weather, and,steep topography whsch encourages rapid fire spread..., The number of fire incidents a.: 4he foothill and mountain areas can be expected to increase along with an increase;, in recre'at_ional.` 'activities and residential uses ' 4 to life and structures "A. s�.gnificatnt haz•��id ores fromwilClaaid fa «re does not exizt,Jtinti�l a wild land area is developed and occupied. N . only does the i�htrodurtion of human activity „into wild lands increase fire occurenc.es,"'it also increases the demand for rapid response and control, of thcss fires." 4. YIz=l9 "Structural fire protection for the mountainous�. " communities is ­either marginal or nonexistent.... Areas with no structural fire protection inolude'Bal.d,.Rock/Berry Cxeeky"Feather, 5. oe, the rezone area is higt.- * %� ',extreme. �re �� s' -severityf . b rn page 111 -21 the claltlsificW� ion of hazard 6. Table 111-3,rinding is ' ti,� y all oy tt;e foothill and mountain areas have hazards of high or eXticotne'L severitykk,, implo- -; inentatioti: `Consider fire hazards in all land us`'e ander`' oning 'se .�,f.�e I7 1-3, Finding 3e "Residential development is occurring in the mountainous areas of the County where hate -4 fire hazards are high or extreme and `Where fire prote6ti6n facilx- fi es are i)oostl.y inador��'uate and difficult to piovide.'I 1� poi, iCy. "Litait development Adze hattiral fire hazards are high, or ektreme until. adequato fire protection is provided." Impl,eme;tlatioft: "done high and ex reriie natural fire hazards areas which are irv-, adoglately protected for low regidential uses only. ri,bvxde no newpublic: faoil.ti.ties that encourage growth in these' arras except those es ent al to public safety." g. Vindinq 6 "bevelopment in reservoir wAterelidat leads to fires which the eaten community `wa.ter supplies-. " Pol `cv., IlLimi" development in reservoir watersheds. Implementation: Zoning plans for cr,iticai watershda areas. 11 F LANij, USE AND (PEN SPACE '.SAPS 1° The L,IInd Use Map followa,ng page 5 4 3 of the land 'us me r e e e e epicts tire, eastekn portion, as "ta;mber-mountainous terrain." The open land mapfallowing page S.; deaignates this' same area as '' "Permanent open sjpace.'" There is no designation on the maps for ticesidenta al, conv ercial, or other use of this area, otrier. than permanent "Open s'�ace. ,. NG multiple v;�e is projected and'' the area mist be permaner'tftly preoerVed in open space with, veky _„large mini mutm<,parc is size, 2 ,, , The wet cert /ro' ' , t sgort-.ion f the rezone are:' 'als :designated ( ., y on these `a`�� ps a, gj:Ia:,zing opeh space. The 'vs es d6lsignated by the plan for this areaj,do root include comtrercial use', but require lazge minimum parcel ,a3,.7e rand strictly rural, if any,'=residential use. �r 3. The” ;Ponser'vatioh Blement Map ,following page 8, ll -in- dicates, in- dieates that thy,i entire area is "well suited forgraying or try. ,Not arable because of steep` slo es ss'ce tib"' lity to.orer Ir 1 Prosio2r1",.i � 4. See also the Geological Ma fol 1 g p lowing page 2.1, izzdx dating the entire m6Unt.ai»ous area is, "basement compl4x. includes metamorphic and intrtlsive`-'igneous rocks, cretaceous and alder. Generally non-4a.ter-b,aring. CONCLUSIONS PRWI TI=IE GENIEPAL PLAN , Z. 240 romm��ci�`l zoning is permitted and the minimal existinc3.. commercial use Icatihbt be ekpanded, but can dist only as a non-obhforming use: ' .a 2. Lot sizes in Ijthe eastern portion are generally quite Targe and the pla-arequix}es that they remain so,. Tha. area incudes a�ad `i's "surrounds d bye cellkit timber land ' and W li life habitat, commorcial fore: t lands and ;i 5 . Gt�rnriient land; for which�tthe general plan, requires p'erManent proteet,* on with large miniMUM parcelsites. A 9p acne minimw sive is suggested by the plai , lri staff' fox timber-mountain areas ar,a this mar- be appropriate for eastern portion of this rezone: y ?. The western portion' of t1iis area contains ,ont . yanci with Less steep al.apes"arid less.timk�ea:, but is also remte Erb '"trban � development, is watershed area got L'Ote Orov.ille and :tLhd, Vew tries Rive', has %;primarily chaparral tregetq, Tian with extremely i 3 ,fire danger has inbUfficierit ,'Water; has Ih6'11fficient 8611 f'or ' eroo- � l ation ili'thout oth,tamil ation of water sixpply anA watershoand "'has I.nsuffioient ad'6ess: i t�l�asigna�.a,on and either tent ` � �i°he open t�pa,cts dons ideratiUiis require large tihimurh pa ciA ;fixes, no urbanixation,�, and no urban amenities: �' I ,' �, LY Ik S" ° 5 COMMENTS ON ENV'IkONMENTAL, 'MPACT REPORT' A 5E&ION 15140. GENERAL-ADDITIONAL B.r�SIC IMPACTS TO BE CONSIDERED p -`�1 ,-Th.4uffidien 4, >� To the basic im aL"�s should be added: m 'r' � t , water for further' develo �''ent and ot�ntn a1 ?.oaa or c2im�nishmert developix p of water supply to present�� residents as d propi�rty owners if ad- ditional developme.,nt occurs. 4fi � Add n. Potential, health px`oi lems, including Valley Fever, from potential disruption of numdtoUs archaeological sites and G11 contamination of shallow water supplj by., additional septic tanks. r' Add o. Increased danger of Wilh- fire and' related,,destruction of�ladditional erosion. orne ;3 causing es timber, wildlife habitat, and watershed, Furthe� Add 'unclip unavailable for ,increased services r p. g ,� 4ich causes C health problem's, criminal activity, fire and fire d'am,» Ye otentia,l., � redu�stsic ha�.11esal�subt�wv�di,ntiancT iot'delassl�tsprocessi.ncJ development q , g ' g p r fraudulent 'land sales,, shom:tage of school personnel, dangerous conditions for busihq ° school children, illegal waste and garbage dumping, and the like. Add q3 Loss of timber production and associated county revenues from'di^vision of land into smaller parcels, diminished water supply, erosion, wild fire; cohfli.:ct with adjacent residential uses; and increased trafkic hazards and obstruction by road con-1 strUction. , These are all basic impacts which we ,consider substantial: and sorious and all should receiVA_ further study ,arid ransideratlon before action on this proposed rezone. B. SECTION 1.51411,. GENETtAL-EFFECT OF REZONING FROM ".Aw2, ugh even the proposal is more restri.ctivo than A-2„ g r-hip noes zon�.n , this s should not be construed as an improvement and not mean the rezoning has no adverse impact. In effect,, th,i.s`Oill tf be, the first time tha l.and has been zoned« .J zoning is more" restvio'lAvve than what is now in effect,no zone at all. Since the landi.s being zoned for the first time, after yearn of delay and cc,ntr��ersy,. the bast' possible xoninq should be applied. A-2 not comply with the general, plan maps or text and this `n@� z:Onemust "comply. j JM "Most of the ,. landowners' do not en :residi' a r -^_ r the area 'and we az"e ° info'xmed that a large portion have never '-seen the land.' Persons r who may buy existing- parcels car new parcels allowable under this G,pro� P g i'aination which permits massive now p arceli'zation wire, a zoninsadej. magnot.know of the character of this land Therefore c l la,b �t1 ,this as a rural residdhtial area, contrary to its true remote and naoveloped nature,-Andn encourage and: facilitate parr s " c`eiizinq, sa es, and subi'tantial development. Thi'i will tLffect x1A only the reaonirg area but all its surroundings, some of which are -.even more remote and mugged. This is rot, only destructive of r�lands values as described in the general plyk-'n and the Elk, but would d`iceive, potent ,al; buyers of present :and future paraels. C. S;TION 15141(b) A STATEMENT OF THE OEJECTIVES 80UGHT r�T.,TH2 � ..,PROPOSED PROJECT .� Welowed inh�ag pr with these objectives and hope they will be fol e fanning decision. Zoning compatible with the. carrying capaci­4y"of the land must, according to the EZR and the general plant: limited to very large parcel sizes. We also agree ,with Objective 5, seeking consistency with, ;> -the, needs and desires of (area residents and landowners. Non, of thr�,pxesen 7( -'WI eats claim a desire to dUt.their land into new par�cols. X, there is any such desire, it is from non-county, resi- debt`�speculators who have not publicly expressed this desire.;, ti ,Present �,esidents.have expressed their desire to live in a remote, „�uo ndveloped area s�I whish has not yep;: had growth pres,sv` ,s The 1 J,, ��esfreeefrGmsl�.mitations inrtheause�arcal sizes is out-of ,a with to of the land, but ;not out of an ; ` the ess a number of creat e parcels. If this is the case, given E.x reseed des�.re to create e' new - � . arealg undeveloped parcels in this and other mountai.nbt g, of the County, and ft`rther given the recent q,ecline in:rural and. urban lot salnns, there is no need for small, lot zoning here.With substant al in►pacl:;s And contrary general. plan diredt,Lves,��'10 need Can be shown for the proposed commercial and small lot --,on.,ng A: J�. S C'1TOt� 15 (c) A GEN IRAI, DESCRIPTION OV TRE PRWECT�tp TEr_1HNtCAL, _CON . . T` ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTEISTICS CONOMZ�..,AN Ong a e 6 4 t p , as Acknowledged � ` � at a large portion of the area has marginal to minimal soil depth,ljwhichk presumab�.y means less than feet and less than is required for septic tanapproval, It this indeed what is meant by the stateme�t7 It is further stated that much of the remairrI:ing area has Drily j 2 to 4 feet of soil.. It is our eAnfoxmati:on that very little of the 4exona,ng area, if any, has, that) much soil;. Ukore any of ti "area is zahed to permit additional par ou ls, su,ff"d'&'t 5611 information should be obtained so as ,to deter- which if Shy, of thu included lands should he zoned to permit n n li r` c. u 1< \ new parc6is�. If resident;ial or"commercial. zoning is: ��� approved 'in the absence of suffic ent soil�'depth, the Departmeint ofpEnvironmenta -1; Health,Pl�blic Works Department I Planning Department, Planning * Commission and Board of Supervisors 'will unnecessarily be forced for the indef nite-future to review up to- '20000 or 3,000 additional parcel ar;a;subdivision lot' requests.' This Would, -be a waste Of enemy "and public funds, would overwork"` sta f f, and would dimin,t sh �r their ability to serve reasonable =f �' y parcel applicants E K, "parts of „the County, (f Economic Considerations: Although the adverse impacts of"', ;•this' pr6posal are pdtent_!aT Ty6vastating-if even a portion of the new lots were developed, the kIR ack'aowledges the short and long f term demand for new parcels is uncer'train or limited. if that is the case; what: dneed is there four zoning permitta.ng' neW parcels? /) ,t, t er' Stx�l'�11.cM� r lrt�-'' �`t� �rnrtu�w^� eo��e�t t_tya .,�y x' and water is, bar ly adequate far the present ?uu,-.��i1jents, who `J.ive on legis thai�,� 100 of the eXa.stilkg� parcels. iY.,ter��supply �i.s of .unknown quant ity ±br, additional future -,use : , ' Thi\"e meaho that water supp5y" f6r the more than 51.3 Bxist Lng undeveloped ,parcels may be., inadequate, not to speak of the 2400 to 2 300 ne' parcels'4hich this rezone Mould permit. Development of even the existir,'" parcels may dyprive present residents of their-'water')supp`,y and' there is no",feasibly: alternative supply. - This may be the mayor lin►iting factor to be considered �� .'1'he EIA indicates that \ ,`� y 1 cracks in the base rock which ,L �.� n � ' rt , r�gely into f e�a.s We is are la �...s �,,�.st inches belowthe surface. Where are no aquifers. LO.Ca.`&iller;Tom Xruse, indicates ' that the average draw of area, weir;:_A-s 3 gallons per ,minute. This barely,.,,,e g y , g . y ` meets the legal � minimum m�:an�.r► that man wel:l`s have below „ standard techar a ability. As a result, it is knor,4n to reaiaents of the area =that wells frequently decrease thex,r output when other 'wells are drill.ei nearby and when the summer and winter are dry. It is questionabio ,therefore; ihether water supply is truly adequate to serve present r'e�i'Ldents. 'What guarantees can the County give to present residents that they Will not Lose their water sups ply. if new parcels are permitted? what action.w'�irij the County take to proVTde water to present and new residents �f/thair water supply',, becomes inadequate Sewage D` ` s ift�licated that decomposed granite /sa'il p rovdesasuff� ent�meda,um for sewage disposal, if sol.l "soi1j"?s boos' this mean they granite said throughout the aeea, which depthghat is the definition that is being used fo does chinks ofnot,-decomposed granite and (,reins of quartz? Cres this Mean sand with somo, loam? There is vo;ry little loam in ,this, area: It is well, known''to Brea residents that many Goptic * tanks have boon approved here by thsr Environmental \�iiraalth Department where there is little or no soil,,, bvit where perdol&E". i, is excellent. What assurance do we have that toil, depth and quhlity'r�rd,potential for water pollution will be thoroughly tested before' new parcels are,pe titted? xf 2 feet of soil i1a required•; as stated,,,for septic yi t