Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFILE #2 EIR BIDWELL HEIGHTS LAND CO. 8 OF 10V. ENVIRONVENTAL'IMPACT AND MITIGATION' A., GEOLOGYA:44`I) SOILS IMPACT Introduction Material in this section (with the exception of the section on erosion) ;is taken from the October 13 1981 geological -site reconnaissance report b PALydon. y,, Y Plea se refer to Appendix. B for the report in its entirety as well as for a complete listing` of the references cited here, This .report indicates that "subsidence, loss of mineral resources, erosion, nd volcanism are, not likely to pose significant problerna, whereas expansive soil, fault displacement, rockfalls and seismic activity might pose significant geologic hazards, Geo?og46al Hazards Subsidence. Rock types present on the parcels arc of a type in which extraction of subsurface fluids will not result in subsidence (widespread lowering of the ground surface). This conclusion is the name as that reached in the County General Plan (Map III"1, Butte County 1971). LoeS of Mineral. Resources. Meld ex;�mination showed no evidence of rninera 1 deposits or, sand and gravel on the>.site., The Lovejoy -Basalt is being used, as a source of crushed rock in. e, smallquarry located off the property access road, about 8Q0 feet south of the Little Chico Creek crossing4 if use; of this quarry is ,discontinued anter the property, is developed, alternative sites can be developed Upstream, ;'as: the Lovejoy is ecposed in the canyon walls for about three miles north of the property; bound&rya Erosion. The erosion hazard of ,Tooines $oil i~rated as "t:igh" by the Soil CoosotVation SerVice (1967), based at Yeast in part on the. moderate to steep slopes in the area. Under natural conditions, erosion activity is low- on the upland surfaces of Doe 11111- Ridge, and moderate 0111 the slopes of the lower Tuscan. Under conditions of development: activity, er6810tt in all areas, can be expected to 'increase; :especially in steeper portions of tte site. Must erosion, w,,suld take place during corgi ,tructton; grading fore'roads, espec4ally side-hill cuts, can ec�ntribute to Goth wind sari cVater, erosion. Some erosion could also take place after project' dev.elopntent froth unrevegeta_ted cut and' Ftl1 areas arlund homes or along roads Erosion can also occur if drainage clanneis receive significantly increasedstorm runoff and their banks erode into gullies under the force of the stortttwAter,• this would be unlikely. impacts of Oro!ion include loss of topsoilz' alteration' -18� R t ary effect, of an; haking,. the Earthquake Activity. A primearthquake is ground s horizontal, and 'vertie I vibrat;on of the ground that can result in damage to buildings,> tanks, etc. Secondary effects inCAude liquefaction, lurching, slumping, and pipesy'stort�ge y ' can be a roblem in, loose, granular, saturated soil, Or f91. Liquefaction, rvrhich P rock ag, which to of a liquid-like condition in soil by vibration. Lurching and slumpin creation are most severe is loose, granular; soil? refers° to formation of mounds, depressions, and; by vibration. Blocks of rock that are on the verge of falling are sometimes large cracks .shaken loose during ail .earthquake= free t es d soil most subject to liquefaction, clay-free $eeause the looses sand �, y" and slumping are not present on the site, except perhaps_ immediately along lurching, intermittent stream coarsest these processes do not constitute a sign..tc ant hazard on thesite. 'Fockfall could" be a problem in places.mainl to the oncausative The severity of ground shaking depends _ y the distance earthquake, the strength of the earthquake and the nature of the soil and rocket and of earthquW1,5 is expressed as magnitude (Richter scale), affected site. The strength damage in inhabited areas is expressed as intensity, (�/Iodfied 1lercalli the severity of scale)- Because the site lies within the northern extension of the Foothills Fault Systpm, the System is generalxy considered capable of producing a magaitude 65" and because private and public studies is summarized,. in Div. earthquake (evidence from numerous the site to be subjected to Bines Geology Staffs 1979), it is reasonable" planning to expect a magnitude 6.5 earthquake with its epicenter (a spot on the ground immediately, Above earthquake source) located at a distance Of less than 20 tiniles: • re Studies correlating m.agnitttde, distance to epi entee and effects ata site (56ore et.a 1978) Shovf that such sn. earthquake tetR miles t�rQrrs the site, could" result in ,t . acceleration of 0�2 to. 0.4 g (20 0 40 percent of the acceleration of horizontal graiand gravity). This corresponds very, roughly to an ,intensity of VIII (Hays, The `indicates' follo;vin paraphrasing of part of the 1lodifLed i�lercalli scale impacts .,to g structures associatedwith earthquakes of intensity VI and greater. yt: Weak plaster and unreinforcad adobe cracka windoWs break: r e d•' some "cracks in good., but unreinfOrced, rnasonry VII: Weak masonry dama� , . Good, but unrein11 farced, .. masonry damaged; some damage to' reinforced ." VIII: d workanship loose panel walls thrown out. with goad �nbrtar anm structures �2 0•- B. WATER QUALITY/PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT SURFACE DRAINAGE Rutnoff Yoluma; Development which: occurs following ;project approval will cause an increase in storm runoff quantities because of reduced ground absorption due to impervious surfaces and. i somewhat increased concentration, times. These impervious stifaces will be typical of developments e.veraging one unit per three acres. Most of this runoff will be diffused, eventually draining to numerous minor - tributaries of Little Chico Creek: 'Minor portions Would be tributary to Butte Creek. Due to the small percentage of the, project which will be covered With impervious ' surfaces in ;comparison to the sites of the drainage basins, runoff volume increases are expected to be insigniflea, nt Such increases are further limited by timing differential between flood peaks in different portions of the creeks which receives runoff. For purposes of comparison, the drainage basin for Little Chico Creek is approximately 25 ;square miles in area at Stilson Bridge, and the Butte Creek Basin is 147 square miles in area at the Covered Bridge. The project is slightly less than two square miles in area. 1Vater;.QuaUty Pollutants may be dissolved or picked up and transported by stormwater runoff; then • Greek, and,.to a much lesser extent, Butte Creek by surface dise'haiged :into Little Chico drainage Plows. While, the,, constituents of such pollutant Mixtures would be similar to -t the concentrations Would be lower and the. intensity or., more densely poe zlated areas, magnitude of the stream impacts much lower than where development is more densei • The toes of ollutants which are likely to be ,found �n urban runoff include, oils, paint y p _ ` residues, pesticides from home garden, use, sediment, rubber and asbestos particles, nitrates, phosphates, ;arid, other, urban : chemicals (primarily p.etrole'um denv$l,ives)': However, the relatively low"density (three acres per dwelling unit overall) of this project means "runoff. pollutants 'will be more dilute than in'the pity, and will havemore ,open area for per into, tiro soil Arid for absorption by surface. vegetation. F'or these reasons, less of the,polluting elements' will reach the stream than is the case farther.west where Little Chico Creek passes through file .city of Chico,. Septic Leachfield Suitability. ' .Soils investigations shoW. adequatb" soil for- septic tank leaching purposes over ,most -22= readily dispersed' in the more vigorous ds winat that elevation level, in contrast to �:nted' -vehicles at elevations below trapping of emissions gerated by project-rela periodic approximately 100A feet, where air can be seasonally more stable. (Please see Appendix D for a wind rose and other more detailed Air Qua lity Impact `information,` and calculations.) The sporadic production of dust and exhaust emissions (90 X9 CO, THC) from ® ; _construction equipmentwould take place on the project site over a period -of several These emissions,tho�.ld be minor in quantity and should be dispersed fairly quickly. years. Over the long term, the project would produce some stationary source, emissions from fireplaces, home'''heating and' cooking, and dust from dirt ;road travel in the dry months. In, general, these emissions would be quickly dispersed and not be as potentially significant as those generated by the vehicles commuting daily to the Chico area and other valley ucstnations, Emissions Generated: Assuming 2700 trips per day generated by the project, and an average one-way trip length of ten miles ;(to and within Chico), mobile source emissions entering the Sacramento Valley Air Basin can be estimated as shown in Table 3. TABLE:4 pRojT MOBILE SOURCE. EMISSIONS Emissions: Percent of 1990 PollutantTorsJDa Bay �n Emissions _ si Carbon monoxide (CO) 0,3034 0 037 Total hydrocarbons (THC) 0:1(l�8 1.291 Nitrogen oxides (NOx} 0.0347 0.252 .: focal and Basin - Wider Impacts: this While` the percentages of air -basin pollutant emissions are small, project's emissions would represent one o 11 f sever. al. incremental additions made by this and o"titer Chico area residential development proposed for the same time period: To some extent' NOx =Nitrogen oxides; CO -Carbon monoxide; TH = "rot aljHydrocarbUns, .24- of significance of CO and other emissions levels will be made by the CARB`, Consistency With. NAP, PSD Regulations:, As stater', earlier, this project's 'growth should be within the magnitude and time frame of the County growth projections incorporated into the Non -Attainment Plan (NAP) for the Air Basin. No transportation control strategies have been adopted in the NAP; however, the local Air Pollution Control District (APCD} supports County- 'measure,p t System. The mitigation promoted measures such as the Butte County Transi (see section on i!vitgations below)of providing a' project transit bus which would tie in with the County's Transit line would fit in with the .APCD19 support of local transportation ci�ntrol measures. 'In, general, mitigation measures for mobile sources would be enforced/implemented by the CARB €1lotor Vehicle Emissions program (with an inspection and ivaintenan,ce program likely to be reinstated in the next few years); measures for -stationary source emissions ,, ould be overseen by the Butte County APCD`. No Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Rule exists for this Air Basin (since it is aNon-Attain ment Area for some pollutants). The projvet is approximately three Miles from the southern boundary of the Lassen Class I area; probability of pollutant transport to this area is loSvt, since most winds are from the southeast or northwest and would tend to, carry'pollut- is to the north and west or. to the south'and east of the Class i 'area. The rnain'volume of emissions, those produced by commuters, would be generated further away in, thelow. er elevations,.a.nd would tend to, remain in the Valley rather than be carried up intci the foothills. : I�itigatrons: - " ` Measures° in into Project design to: reduce trip -generation, and theref�rce emission's, include provision of a gas station and �sinall eom�rl erciacenter on site. The l 17' developer is also considering provision of a bus,or vary on a regular schedule to transport project, resident to a Highway 32 bus stop (probably at Santos i�ay ; from Which they could use the Transit System As the numbers of elementary school age ,$u{teou►3ty etti?dterr in the project increases add%tional si hool bus service would also be provided: D. VISUAL AESTHETIC$;,IlN ACT The Scenic= Highways Element. of the Butte County Ge'ner.al Plan r.ecoanizes t}at "Butte County has many areas vi picturesqIt ue natural landscapes �' oe �YIiII Ridge, vith e looi.�nt e its chaparral vegctation and rock outcrops in^luding bluffs andbuttes oY r yj g. h -2,6." t levels." Mitigation, Dick Dyer (Division of Aeronautics, CALTRANS) suggested that residents near the k 'air strip (if built) be the users of the strip ,so that the noise.rvouId;besomewhat more acceptable. For Chico Airport the 65dB CNEt, contour is about. 400 feet on Hither side of the runway's center line; this distance could -be used as a guide for the placement of homes: Since the strip may be a significant noise source., the County may, according to provisions in the Noise Element of the General Plan (Section .2) and State law, require data on airstrip activity levels and projected noise contours. iii addition, .if the, strip is open to users other, than project residents, the t�eronautics Division of CALTFtANS Would require a noise urvey (with contours) as part of information accompa;nyirig application for an aitD. Ort use permit,. Thus either. the County or State may stipulate -Mitigation measures depending on how this Iproject component fits into their regulations. Since homes should not be within a 60dB CNEL contour o►` xighCvay, 32, no unusual noise insulationshould be necessary. In general, vegetation around homes can ;verve to reduce arnbient noise levels,, if desired by residents. F. LAND USE/PLA.NNING IMPACT The provision of suitable locations for,all: necessary community land uses—including housing—in a variety of, settings to suit various,.incozrte levels -is an ekpressed goal of the Land Use Element of the Butte County General Plan. Gn page; 33; the' Plan states that Butte County should "provide a diversity of ilausing sites varying, in Size, density and location." The project i'n- question offers; that diversity byallow}ing prospective ` r homeowners the option of purchasing 'a home in the foothills; benefitting from. the amenities of a rural lifestyle: The appropriate location for .such housing is qualified by other policies within the Plana which point out constraints and limitations to b used" in guiding coriimunity gRowth,"' so .that the ultimate development pattern maximizes community benefits and71 minimizes adverse environmental; changes. These policies, interpreted and ;applied in their extreme_` sense; would block, any development' anywhere. �Vit1t policy iriterpr,etations and62 App lisa'ttons tempet`ed'by practical reality, the conflicts between policies are resol"veci`' through theplanning process 'which yields compromises or tradeoffsin its'attem'pt to bringabout the hest possible developmer), patterns achievable in the real tivorld. ;As an 3. Availability of adequate ,fire protection facilities. 4, Adequately maintained, approved road access with sufficient capacity, to serve the area. 5« Reasonable accessibility to commercial services and schools (p. 49)«, There is evidence; of water supply with a. mutual water system already in existence, fire access exists' protection facilities are being provided, including fire fighting equipment, to an RS-7 standard,road, and commercial services are being provided Within the project. Satisfaction of these criteria ,an be: insured at the subdivision tentativemap approval stege, through application of appropriate conditions of project approval. G. VEGETATION AND IVILDUFE IMPACT Impacts on vegetation and wildlif e are directly related since the vegetation provides - r food and shelter for all wildlife. The primary impact to vegetation Would be direct removal. 'The amounts and types of vegetation removed would be directly related to the � scale and distribution of development and also to the foresight and care taken in the - construction process. �g Impacts to the abundantwildlif e in and around Doe Mill Ridge could occur from botfi direct and`°indirect effects of both construction and long-term existence of the Bidwell Heights project. 1Fi the short"term the sporadic disturbance of noise and human activity due - to construction of to and homesite9 would cause 'destruction, of habitat (permanent) and disturbance to normal movements of lamer birds and mammals . ,. s ; construction �, Y p wo�d shift arraund the site as (temporar ,)« The disturbance im acts activrties moved, s and other develo ed areas are at tbis'� ed and sizes o clu st Because t;ne' er bp ti rime in the cwsnceptual stege, it is premature to estimate number of acres of wildlife habitat removedby tine project, In anyCase areas ot` removed habitat Would be scattered thro�,hout the site rather than in one or few imageIocis: The lots surrounding the vineyard (parcels 1; tnrouh 171 and those to the north (PFu� eLs A through 13) are ,mostly' on the flat' ridge uplands cvh`ich were scraped',of all vegettior. Ppprcxir:tel�r l0 years; ago, The impacts. of dev:elopmerit (direct remaVal ,anal: indirect - 'disturbances)would occur prima )IS With respect. to the potentia(after, complete revegetation), ratiXer than present �ti�ildlife habitat value of the laird, B"ecause �� �� d bu �di,vzded into rn�_ _� ,, dividual two- these uplands wo;zia not be _clustere , or three-acre lots -32- full development could ;make the area from the vineyard north unsuitable for some of the larger people-shy wildlife speeies mainly'through a proliferation of roads and scattered habitations rather than direct removal of a significant area of habitat. Upland habitat removed would be mostly new growth chaparral, 'with; some Digge • pine and open: grasslands which are of moderate wildlife value, and not a rare or sensitive vegetation community. Vegetation types removed in the southerly clustered parcels wottl be. more varied, • composed of some chtiparralt, seine grasslands, some oak woodland,' and small,amounts of ravine woodland, depending u on e1,lster placement. Oak and riparian woodlands could he removed, in small quantit'tesl these' are the most sensitive vegetation communities: from an ecological point Lof vt`evt in that they harbor the most wildlife and cannot readily revegetate once' removed. • Clustering will enable -a design that avoids prune wooded habitat areas and leaves maximum amounts of natural land ,(see mitigation Measure list). Indirect impacts to wildlife of both construction and on-going residential use 'would" include: Road kills o Poaching ® Depredation by clogs Possible reduction of spring water in drainages downstream of project wells other impacts a. disturbance (e.g. noise) associated with human activity. e These' effects would probably cause `slight, reductions in certain wildlife populations, especially thoae inhabiting or moving through the portion zoned for two- and thcee-acre lots. Thus the 'Sralue�of the lands just north ;and east of the. vineyard as acorridor for. north south t�+ildlire movement could be significantly reduced upon total buildout. In particular, the project lies near the :western eda,e but entirely within the key p". ��tton of the T ehama Deer Het�d `,Vinter Range, and. would reduce available wintering' or f habitat for this speciesby an undetermined amount, representing, a very small percentage of the total w"rntering area, available. Since the deet"s migratory routes have been blocked to some extent by development 44� . . further east (at higher elevations -- Forest .Ranch; Butte. Meadows area),. ;the Doe Al Ill. d er. Ridge area may not actually serve 'as habitat for signtfican numbers of migratory w r i t ea su orfs Appro+�mately 40 resident deer,euerirl, of these deer maybe The' ro ec .ar ,.. P.P.. P�f through habitat removal:arid ongoing,,,�� displaced' with development, of. the site,. both disturbance. Aquatic Biology; Impacts The project area includes about 1000 feet of an intermittent stream on its western r edge and, about 1500 feet on its southern edge. If these streambeds are to be included in road; home, utility line or other 'construction, a stretmbedalteration permit (a 1603` permit), will have to be, obtained from the California. Oepartment`of Fish and Game: Impact; of erosion and sedimentation or of surface or groundwater pollution to the 1 aquatic habitats: these intermittent streams or of Butte or Little Chico Creeks are not anttci pated, to occur* see � _ and Mitigations sections.ins in jater Qualit Im ac+ Cumulative Im Pa cts S9, This project alone would result in minor, localized adverse impacts upun foothill r ecology, providing the measures listed in the i igations section; are carried' out. Local Wildlife populations would 'be reduced very slightly and could adapt and adjust to disruptions in their normal movements, as long asi the surrounding lands remain undeveloped as a, source of unrestricted act 1vi;ty: However, if adjacent lands developed in similar fashion, the foothills outside of Chico would become unsuitable for larger r wildlife, thus upsetting the ecological balance; In general,; the foothills are an important habitat, being a zone of transition between the valley floor and the montane habitats. Bothplant and wildlife species need' large ekpanses ofundisturbed land in thiw transitional tone as a buffer from ektrer.re t^onditions temperature, rainfall, winds) in the lower and hipper elevations. in addition, "the foothills contain a flora aid fauna of "their' own which are important both in their own right and as links in both valley and montane ecology.; it is thus , mportant to use moderation "both in fhe spacing out and in theinternal spatial configurations of" foothill developments to retain as much' I iritereonneeted open space as possible (measures tc� this end: are listed under ytitigaton). bh a regional scale, if dense residential developmenu; are introduced ihto the foo'ihills in " substantial numbers and Are located close together, foothill ecology would be asversely affected even if, mit%gation measures as listed are implemented withineacii development; since rio area would be °far from human babitat'ion, Marieor Endangered Speies Since the rare and :endangered'' "IL species potentially or actually growing on fhe project site:. grow on steep.a rocky outcrop areas cshieh Would' not . be .disturbed byi development, and sine the one, tulnual actually. found, onsite '(Bidwell's -knotw;eed, ,Polygonum bidw elliae) oasily reseeds itself in its steep habitat, m';itigatons for rare and 6, r _g4 -' r: 9. Use existing roadways wherever possible, to avoid cutting new roads through the open areas. Make access roads narrow, and in general minimize) construction of roads. 10. Around the perimeter of develoment clusters, leave an unimproved low-density use buffer -zone (such as a foot or horse 'trail). lands to- incorporate the 11. Coordinate planning with proposed projects on adjacent above principles, especially leaving connections at continuous habitat amongthe protects• r'P a 12. Allow no free -roaming pets, i hunting, and post speed limits of 30 raph on project roads: [I. CULTURAL RF�SOURCES .IYIPACT Althot,&h this property v!`as considered highly likely to contain remains of prehistoric hunting or food gathering camps, the findings of only' one insignificant mortar after a thorough examination lead to the recommendation that archaeological clearance be granted for theproposed project area. I. TRAFFIC';IMPACT _ „_ , - The impacts of Bidwell Heights on traffic would' occur in the same way as ��,ouid those on noise, air quality and other, impacts of residential areas: they would occur gr,dually over time es the project is bunt out L probably over about 10 to 15 years -land rr they would occur ij:i the i7ontext`of oxher such developtnents. Traffic `impacts would fake . t/'plaee within the pr.'.)ojeet on local Doe tilill Rodg,e area roads, on Highway 32, and within Chico: Trip Generation n s e ro"ect would generate about At a ma.rimu�rri antz4�pater� bui.dout • , the p,- l _ a 2700 trips per dav:# m e I I * trip genertition factor of 7 trips(.da t per unit is used here; although GAI,'CliA 6' uses 10 triplday, per unit, this is. felt to'be high. Butte'ounty, in. particular the�Air Pollution Ct�ltrol District, uses 7 since ,it more closclY applies to rural ',situatigh under dnnditi'ons of hig?I gusoline prices in which people combine trips.' School buses would take children to school,. ,and Butte County 'Transit would also 'beavailtible, further reducing trip generation;. to this project (rasing a guide of 10 pe; cent ADT for peak hour) would not bring the traffic to the con estion olnt unless other unanticipated ` g p , p ted traffic ''increases occur between now and project build.-out., This applies also to the section of ll ghway 32 between Santos Way anci Chico. However, since other residential growth is, proposed for the project area, a, small potential exists that 2430 ADT from, this project added with traffic from other projects could .extend over the projected 1991; ADT of 3600 for this sect on of ;Highway 32 and taring the road closer to capacity. in Chico Not all .2430 daily trips would enter Chico via Highway 32, some would head north or south. on Highway 99. If as much as two-thirds of project trpffic were to enter Chico, as mentioned earlier,, congestion wouldnot, be likely unless several large developments were, also built at around the same time, in which case entering Chico �:Ioad�,cauld become congested at peak 'hours. b Mitigation 14 Left turn channelization, a Jane in the downhill, (westbound) lane of 32 to "'aceomadate ''project residents and prevent ;other :traffie fror having to stop, .if .required, " by CALTRANS, would aid traffic flow. 2. Any grading for. left turn or other improvements on Highway 32 should be revegetated promptly with native vegetation p-.ia';� Q*� �xw 3. The developer has considered incorporating the f'ollorwing measures into the project: design: (a) to provide auxiliary, access to the project without creami; undue traffic;, in nearby neighborhoods, several local roads (marked an Project. 1rIap, Figure 3) "would be upgraded `to all---weather traversrole (RS8, County standard) and provided with a .; gate at; project boundaries, to be for emergency use only; (b) to reduce overall trip generation, the developer would provide a convenience shopping and gas 'station; near the project`- entrance (see N" -C area on Protect flap, Fid re 3); and ` (c) to reduce trip generation, the developer would provide a small transit bus or van; to circulate through the project an tie stn wit the schedu e of ,the Butte county Transrt System, wtirch could establish a bus $top:A Santos ;day. ' N 7777 r, 1 MaXimum streetrade on g graveled and oiled roads should not exceed. 15 percent, otherwise they must: be paved. 2. Bridges must be s minimum of 20 feet wide and have the capacity to carry a 20 - ton fire truck. The only bridge on the site is at least 20 -feet wide and can carry UP to 50 tons. 3. Curve sharpness in a road must,have a minimum 400-foot,center line radius "within a_subdivision 4.. Multiple ac Multiplecess is required because mora than 20 lots at -e proposed for the , vision, at present there is only, one access route, 5. Cul de. sacs,; because the project is out of the urban area, may be of any length but may only have 20 lots developed within them. A 50 -foot -radius ;turning circle ;is needed to accommodate fire engines. When plan details fare complete, this reI}uirement must be met., 6. Road names and building numbers must be, clearly identified from; the road and names must be approved' by the County Street Name Coordinator. 9t time of construction this requirement will be met. - For fire prevention and structural safety, the fire department includes the following; requirementsfrecommendationsx which could become conditions applied to home builders at time of eonsiructions a• A 'Inch one-haltspark arrestingmesh` screen be installed on chimne ys for fireplaces And woodburning stoves, b. Roofing and sidin materials should be constructed of fire resistant istant materials c• California lain° specifies that all wildland areas with development need to clear all flammable vegetation for 30 feet around all structures. How.ever,; if erosion might create problems,, some ,natural vegetation may be left in pIa, t .grass mast be moc�ied' and Ce but all dead limbs' from tree trunks and down, material on the ,ground must be cleared.: ivhPre feasible,<fuel breaks 6rei reco.mmded eft along the edges of a proposed development; wzdth ;will vary With the type of vegetation present and steepness.of slope: Police Protection: Since there is no assigned Sheri ffas patrol lit the project area an dno future p]an for inereasing la cv enforcehient there, the d'Iv elopment' wl create anincreased demand for , -4,0- police service where it is already inadeouate. Significant unmet demand Nill occur if the surrounding areas are also developed. Mitigtttions;: for the The developer is considering providing, a security officer patrol projectto be paid for through a Homeowners` Association in the manner of a special assessment district. This measure (also suggested by the Sheriff's Department) would provide regular patrol in the project as well as good response time to calls. A possible further improvement In security ty would be to tie in ia security alarm system with the cable television line the developer 'is considering installing on site. This measure, suggested by the developer; Would enable residents to register calls for emergency aid (police;; fire, medical) rapidly with the project security patrol (or proposed volunteer fire department), and would further raise the level of police protection; in the 'project. Schools Since capacity now exists for 830-930 school-age: children (grades Ef-12) in the Chico ` Schools, and the BidwellHeights project would add approximately 1,00r children (at 0.5 children per household), this project. alone would not strain or exceed the schools' capacities. , However, 'this project's addition; if accompanied by those of other large. pro" is g p p Y rowding of one or residential " ro'ects either exi�tin or ro osed_ m$ result in overc more of the schools. 1 ,�iti tion: ,� �,Yr,•�. The school district would exercise :its several options to alleviate overcrocYding. Takes paid 'by project residents would help to pay for any necessary facilities expansion. K. UTMrTMS IMPACT The four utilities needed by the pr.aject' would be telephone service, :electricity, water supply and sewage disposal system maintenance. Natural, gas would not be supplied by: the utility, those residents desiring gas would supply their own fuel from one of the local bottleas , gcompanies. Tokohono c s' es o roblems. in ablit to serve tie co' et f o" Company foee n v e r m Pacific TelephoneC mp , y p y �' i p. J the "lints they mairi�airi aloTsg highway 32. De4ermination of telephone Rine Tocations within the project and financial arrangements between the Telephone.,Company and the developer for cover in, , installation costs would take place after` the develop' n. plans are firm and the detailed sub'divison maps have been prepared. -4'' �1 r Electricity Pacific Gas and Electric Company (P G sac E) would have the ;capac'ity to supply electricity to the project using the existing powerline on site. Their requirements include un'dergrounding of utilities with a single-family dwelling on a parcel less than r three acres in size. This would apply to the parcels to be zoned SR -2; to any other parcels with potential for' future subdivision to below three -acre parcels; and to the 40- acre parcels to be zoned P -C with multiple Units. Power may have to be undergrounded from the supply line to the clusters, as well as within the clusters. However, these arrangements would be made in discussions between the developer and P G dr s New , Buildm , R i epresentative after firm, detailed subdivision maps are complete. Although no r additilonal requirements are. apparent under County. zoning regulations, any suchlocal ordinances would have to be checked at the time of discussions with P G do E, 'County requirements supersede those of P °G 6c E. r. A concern for availability of power, especially in the summer ,months of peak demand, has resulted in a policy set by the California Public Utilities Commission CPUC that > ( ) the det eloper rather than the ratepayer should bear the cost of 'supplying power at the initial stages of development planning, The developer must have a letter from, P G cc stating that financial arrangements have been made to pay tot the power. These arrangements would be made after subdivision maps are complete. This CP1yC' on Policy developer financing of power supply reflects the cumulative nature of the impacts of development proposals on availability 'ofpower supply, l'hile the Bidwell iieigh'ts project alone would not strain the utility, it is part of fhe ptojected demand which together represent considerable allocationof resources for the Northern Sacramento Valley. Water Supoiy Water Would be supplied to all project residences through the mutual water companuzz Tail 1Vat'er Works, whose serVicQ: area boundarie5'cOi'lCide at present With the property included in this report, :and which now operates the tWO wells on site. ;More wells wouldbe developed by the water companyas needed. All wells'vou: d be'part of an entire inter -connected system throughout the property. All residenoes �vould`be served, ' by a piped water system; with no indzviduai ~yells. The. developer would provGde pipes to the lots, 'and' each 11bMdawner would pay a fee to 'hook tip t`o the main pipes. 1 =4 2- r VII. SIGNIFICANT 'ENVIRONMENTAL EPFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE A,VOIDFD IF PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED The following adverse impacts, would be reduced in severity by mitigating measures a.5 listed within each impact area (Chap t W IV), but could not be eliminated. Thus these itnpact5 would stall occur, even if at. an insip ificant level: _ Unavoidable Adverse 1. Exposure to seismic.hazard. 2. Contribution to air pollution* 3. Alteration of natural scenic vie'Ws. 4, Removal of native vegetation. �g 5. Wildlife habitat reduction, - 5. Traffic increases at Santos Way and Highway 32, 7. Increased fire,danger and exposure to fire hazard. B. Increase in service- load on fire and police agencies, 9. Energy use by :•comes, and commuting vehicles; (contribution to long-term depletion of resources). * Subject. to evaluation by the Air Resources Banrdts determination..of significenee; project"s contribution 'may be considered insignificant. -41 I; i:K. SHORT-TERM vS,..L"ONC;--TERM COItiIIMITN ENTS OF RESOURCES Ig its undeveloped state, the project site has value as wildlife habitat and watershed, and this value will be reduced to a degree by the conversion, to residential use. After tion, the site will take on Iona-term m value as a location for rural homesites offering,*" the amenities of country living on the fringes of the Chico urban area. The preservation of agricultural land on the western side of the Chico urbanized area has lung been a stated aoal of planners and community residents alike: To protect the fertile and roduetive a�ricultural'.Iands; the areas east of Chico have p ra been suggested as appropriate for development, if wildlife and watershed values can be preserved. The project is located primarily in chaparral, a vegetation community which is well- represented in Butte County. A review of the vegetation map prepared for the 1979. update' of the Land Use Element of the Butte County General Planir�dieates approximately643000 acres of chaparral are present in the Butte County foothills. Approximately half -of thin area - that portion lying north and west of the -ToVsm of Paradise = is protected by the '40-acre minimum parcel size'specified in the Open and Grazinn, Lsnd Use category. The remainder is designated almost entirely Agricultural- Residential, leaving it exposedtosmall-parcel development.. Those chaparral areas lying within the Central Butte Study Area, 'for which a zoning; study is ;underway) and those areas near' Or .iville and to the sout;:east should be revie iVed so the valuable chaparral habitat can be suitably protected. ' Tri.e Bidwell, Heights project forms �i small islancl of ,level e agricultural- _ 7 developable residential ,land within a large expanse ofprotedted chaparral which is designated Open and Grazing. `Loss of this island as wildlife habitat will still leavemany thousands of acres of `cha arral in; the northern portion: of the Count rotedted b "' a,40-, acre minimum p p yp y ' parcel aize. Watershed Varies on the project' site- although reduced by development,! wit, be presertired to a gre4�t extent by re'troi ►ing' .open areas} project mitigation'' measures and cluster de'Velopmenfi patterns, �9aairt the island nature' .of the Ag;r cultural-Residential land irse category rstareriunded by Open, and" Grazing) means Adjacent areas will remain in large re parce'1 sues`: Some short-term cammitm'n.ts of resources will occur during the construction'" i phases when fuels, labor, andfbuilding' materials will be put to Beneficial use. In th` longer term., energy, for home heating and transportation back and forth to Chico will be -48- X. GROWTH' -INDUCING IMPACTS Approval of thisro`ect could result in P J growth an several fronts. The 'tax base of the County would im-,ocase by the amount of the assessed valuation of the project, with corresponding amounts of tares becomina collectable; Subdivisions in adjoining areas to the north and south could be ,Facilitated by the precedent of thin approval, together with the improved access, the public water system, the local public; services (fire protection, security guard), and the utility extensions (power, telephone, television cable) which will be established to serve the Bidwell Heights development. Improved road access already exists, and is not contingent: upon project approval. To the extent possible,. the developers of bidWell Heights would like to limit access to adjoining properties to emergency access only to maintain a degree of privacy. To the extent they are successful, subdivisions to the east ;and west of this project have independent access and are not dependent on, this approvali Such prajec'ts are sig oh y ally isolated by steep canyon walls and are therefore somewhat isolated from the growth --:inducing effeccs .of this project. In any case, such developinents would be much less dense due to steep topography and sewage dispa'aI constraints.- rt• ..CaO_ } 2. Inefficiences of piecemeal buildout would make homes more expensive. would reclude me.thbd: of payment i 3 Absence of Homeowners Associations wou p for needed services, mainly fire protection, securityand transit, resulting in unmet and over loaded service agencies. service needs 4 Absence of PA--C zoning would provide no means of guaranteeing soutrd' future use of non-developed lands even If homes: were clustered in some areas•.: 5. Many lots would be unfeasible to develop dire to hack of suitable soils for , or to reventing access; therefore the overall number septic leachfields steep slopes p 't 1n fact be loU;er than proposed,, impeding project subjectives. of buildable un�s would B. Entire Project Clustered, PA--O Zoning This alternative, either, with units in several clusters, favr large clusters or one large cluster on the property, ;is possible only in theory, since the land east and north of the vineyard is already tentatively approved; for 3 and,--acre :lots. However, it might be instructive to evaluate the. alternative since, like alternative A, it is an extreme proposed; project into .and puts the advantages an,d disadvantages of the perspective Benefits wildlife habitat; visual aesthetics, land farm imwould be 1. pperi spaces minimized through minimizing roads and maximizing. guaranteed natural areas. 2, project objectives would be met, in farms of densities and environmental safeguards. e efficienc of droupec units'; fewer Eccnomi:es could be achieved throu g kh Y roads and utility 'lines. Costs Residents wou'be relatively close `together if clusters were Eery and I'd dense. Reduced Overall .Derisify . S or without clusfaring, would have the ubstantiiill reduced �3erisity, either with y , fohowing effects: Benefits 1. project increment of cumulative adverse impacts in such areas as air quality, visual, aesthetics, traffic, services, acid "utilities would be;less. 2, ,adverse impacts to; thr physical and biotic environ menu would be lessened • r. Service Companya Chico Gene Grant, Distract Manager California Water Pacific Gas Electric Company R. J:. Lind, New Building Representative Jeff Blanc; Residential. Conservation Supervisor { Carl Turner Pacific Telephone Company i ` ''�sinririwi7lrtR �%® , EIR PREPARATORS This FIR was prepared by Earl Nelson and Barbara Castro of Earl D Nelson and Associates=, Chico, California, with the ,expert assistance of the following contributors: Philip Lydon. - Geology Jon Anderson -Soils Kingsley Stern - Vegetation Roger Lederer - Wildlife James Manning - Cultural Resources i ` a 1 .� .` P i 1 S� Q e i. 1 r. w APPENDIX 'F ° .i��'�4r , rENVIRONM Revxs NTAi CHECKLIST FORM �'A a� - (To be: completed by' Lead Agency) I. BACKGROUND ERD Log , 1, Name of proponent' Rldwell Heights Land Company � q. 2. Address and bane number or Proponent: P.O. Box 3040 G i, co , CA 95926 891-1727 _ 3, Date o Ch'eckiist- Subm1:tteci 8cras 51 1 4. Agency Requiring Check}. st Butte Cou Ly PLanning, Department Nance of Proposal, if applicab e Bi we i He�ght;s Land company ecific r51, ® p-lan, rezone and sub4i sion,.creating rural homes tes on portions of ,1120 � cre I T.. ENVIRONMENTAL I1',,,IPACTS . 'and (ExIplanatidns of all '"gives'" "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) YES MAYBE NO 1- Earth., Will the proposal result in significant in a.: Uristable earth conditions or _ changes in geologic structures? hG b Disruption,, displacement, com- paction at. over,:over i..ng of the soil? c. Change" in topggraphy or, groundL. su`r Ace relief ;featUreg or removal of ` tops'oil? x_ _ d De°struction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? _ x �j a I0cte69e in w7,nd or, water �j erosion of soils, either on- or offs -site? x f.' Changes in deposition or erosion:. ' o beach sand's.,, or changes in 's.iltationt' dopo- siEwion�,or erosion wiich may .' �rive;r morii,fy the 'channe.l of or- s-tream o`r the bed of the 6c eano, or all -y b'ay, inlet or r. lake f X g; Loss of prime agriculturally praduc[ ive soils outside designated urban areas? X 1 YES 1AY$E , 140_ h. Exposure of people ,or propetty to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides) ground failure,, or x similar hazard s? :. Air, 1:, ll the proposal r.es. zlt a: 5ubstarntial deter! rat.Ton "of Xc ambLent or local air quality? b. The creation of obliionable x odor s j smoke or f ume,s ? c. significant alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature or any change in climate, either x • 1 tally or recr ionallY?' 3, water. j�Till the! proposal result in substantial: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water x movements? b. Changes in absorption rate', drainage patterns or _the rate and amount of surface eater , runoff? ----=_ c. aed for off-site surface drainage improvements, includ,izg vegetation removal, channel x tion or culvert 16 s t, all at.iori? Alterations to the course or x' flow of' flood waters?--- e.hange in the amountOf.surface water in any ,wa.tex body? f'. Discharge' into surface maters, orin any alteration o,f surzace water qua`11 ty;, including but not limited to temperature, X dissolved �oxy en' or turbl' ty? -- _---- g :. A1Cera.tibrt of tFie: dtrect;ion or; r..ate ;af flow of groans waters? h, Change in he auantit� or , ,' qua,l;t5► of ground, waters, either ' thr'u h direct additions or :wiGhdgr•awals� `or through inter- cept.'On of an' aquifer'; by cuts x oL excaystioz�s? Mon :�, YES MAYBE NO i tteductlon in the amount of water otherwise available for public or private water supplies? r 3 Exposure of people ;or property' to water related hazards such as Xr flood ing? Plant Life till the proposal result in l sustarent I: a Loss of vegetation or change in thediversity of" species or number, of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass; crops, mirro - fl f ora <and aquatic plants)? ,_� X _ b. Reduction of the quaiberz o f any; unique:, rare or end- angered species of plants? c: Introduction of new species or"' plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replen ish- x went of existing species? d'. Reduction in acreage of any x _ agrcu tut°a1 crop?' in, 5. Ariimal Life: ,•lily the, proposal result substantia a Change in the d,iversit.y of species, _ or numbers, of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including rep til.esI fish, and shellfish, berithio organisms; insect& or miGrofaUlS)? „ �of b. Reduction thee nutber;s df"any, unique, ."axe or endangered speciesof animals? _ C Tntrod;uctioii; of new species of " a itals into an area, or'.result in" a bars i er to the migr a t i -ren or movement of aniIals.?. X d iteduction. oi; emttoachtrie"nt upon;" o'r ion is,r deeo fish or wildlife haC+itat? fi'. iioi&e will "the proposal result in. � substa"ntial:" a. Increases 'in noise 0Vels? c x YES MAY'S E NO r bv � people to severe �~ noiseuteof:s?eop x 7. Light ar.d Glare. Will the proposal produce szgnifIcant light or grt are? x; 8. Land Use. Glii1 the proposal r' sul.t in a significant - ignificant;a a,. Alteration of the planned land use of an area, or establish a trend which gill demonstrably lead to such alteration? x b. Con:flic`twith uses on aijoining properties, or con- flict, with established recrea- tional., educational, religious or scientifi.c uses or an area? x y: natural. Resources. Wil1 theE pro osa,l P result In subs-t;antiali a. Demrknd for, or increase in the L�(I oc use of any natural resc�urate e8.? b Depi�et ion of any tion -rene'wabie natural resource'? - a 10. Risk of Unset. Doe`s thero osal P P involve a risk of an ` explosion or the release of hazardous substances (includtng, but not limited to,. oil, pesticides, chem'cals or radiation) in the event, of en adcide;nt - upset conyit ani? x Il: Population: Will: the proposa sign ffdantly alter the locatioCl, distribution, density, orgrth rate of the human population fAf an area or phscjL ally di ide an established. oonuft n,Lt o,r facilitate deve=lopment of adjoining properties? 4 li.Housinp. �W_11the proposal si�gni"Ei "cantl,yafE�c.t r existiri hou:si.nQ �r. � create a deland for .additanal Nous;in: g? l3.' TransporCat'ion/Ci,rculation. gill theVM 't proposai,77i.e It 111,; a. Generation af,substant`ial additional vehicular movertent7' x YE•/ MAYBE .--.O b. Significant effects on exisCI, ng facilities, or° demand X parking for new. par k Ing? C, Substantial impact upon existing s? X ------ t r a c s p o r t a t i o n s Ys t em — ._-- d.; Sign;if icxant alterations to present patterns of circulation movement of pe,op,le and/or X or --.- goods? e. Alterations towaterb'orne', rail x or air traffic? or f. Increase in traffic congestion hazards to Motor 'vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ------ l4. P blic Services. Will the proposal a ` have an err'ect upon, or result in ia!`need for new or altered subs tan governmental services in any of the following areas:., X a. Fire protecL-ioa'. _ b. Police protection? X_ X, c i Schools----_ ---_ d. Parks or other r'ec"reational x a facilit ie,s . — ----- Maintenance of gublc facilities, x includingrads? — f . Other governit6ntal sere ices ? X L5',, aero W�.l the pLoposal riesult in: Use of amounts of x' „',substantial fuel or energy?--- b, Suhs.tatiai increase mesad upon ex s t ungst�ur C, S'' of energy , or req1te the deVelopment or sources "of �'ener,!gY• l6, iltilities.',Wil1 th"e,pr0posal result in a need for Hera systems, or suo- stacit al a=l terat ions to the foJ•i'owin'g utilities a. Potter or natura:�.. J?-.5 YES MAYBE. 140 b. Communications, sy_8tems? ' X c. Water?. - x d. Sewer, (will trunk line be e;xtended, providing capacity to serve new development? x e.; Storm hater drainage? x 17. Human Health. Will the proposal rosuit in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potent ial health hazard (excluding mental health)? X. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X. 18. Solid Waste. Twill the proposal result in any significant impacts associated with solid waste disposal or litter control? x ll. aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstructi.on of any public desi-gnated,o'i- recognized cenfc vista o enitoinhtheubreatio ill. the proposal p �n resu e .of an aestheticaTlj ofLensjv.e site open, to Public view? ;•ii11 the proposal significantly -alter the cfiaracter of the area? _;; x 2b. Kecreation. .7ill the proposal. result in an impact, ' upon .thee quality or quantity -of existing public recrea- tion facilities? X, 21. Arch:aeola�.ical/.Hi,st6ricali 4"ill; t ho propo , esti t �n an` a te-rarion o;f •.o `' a a sinnifican archaeological or historical site, structureobject, or bui ld i,ng? X� 22. Mandatory 1±in'dzns of"5idnificance; a. b,oes'the project have the potectial; to de;arade the, ualit o q x' of 'the environment', substaatially� reduca the habitat of a fish or.w11dl L,fe species, 'causa a fish' ar C,�ldlfe F 5 Bidwell 4OiIhCs r.........., e �..t �srli.rr,.lX�.r.. .e;�"'�.:Lt1J•..J.Y4et l�< L{ �..� k, x Specific plan, Lez`one and subdivision The project is a subdivision of about 1200 acres into around - 330 homesites with appurtenant services. Yrest side of Doe ;Jill Ridge, 7 miles ;NE of Chico, between Little Chico • Creek and Doe Mill Ridge Road. Portions of sections 7 an,d 18 of T22N, ISE; and a portion rf Section 12 of T22N, R2t MMYS. zePr, : 0 r- 1`,: J)i 9 .y `,,,i 3 ,;i t:t : U/3 acres;, avg• _Approx 7 percent of prolec i.`rut,r. ;•4' j 1, T;`�.,: `4x ': t��: P t area or. lessi, . 3;,F;; xlc ;ttdr :' ." z-. t� w . Ct,,'J j : Access would be from I'ighway 32 via Santos Way extension through IsoM-Hall property; Dae Mill Ridge Road lies to the east. T � S d +.+1' y+ "� tiki%i3 : Individual septic tanks. . r. r ,_ C1Ls� a. �r� ir•x1.r°",. ::'�1k��j.�v' Individual we;Lls. `,. Fz'o":r1� �r,' t1"r�j"t .'' , �3: Existing to project site. uJ' Agricultural -Rest. ff dential designation allows fo'r 1-40 acres /DU Ba" r�l w�v.a.. .. 3w . *+ d Flat to gently rolliq.% upland .nest of Doe M%ll Ridge, with small steeper portions as land slopes to Little Chico and Butte C:Qeks'~ ? �� f:,= Under 5% on main upland port on 100"� on easfern slopes,_itJ-45`r at , nclrth,west , south margins. 1160 - 1,640 Teets the Clot upland, 1s at around 1.460 feet- , 4� i. e'' `.t'. 14N Fi ,, small areas of steep.slope:S —_ >�J • ,t,.�z, ,. r'>� r` Thomas so'i1s thin Sunder --2 .feet thirk5 to 1c or' 5 feetdeep in some vans; a Ston,redciish-brown clay loaiwi th low to rnc+derat� subsoilpermeability and medium to rapid runoff. 'Severe limitation! ratih, for suitab`i li,ty in., septic= tarok le ChL3ehds wr' Ek3F,1 z. "rL�cy xi.' 'pryx J11`ti;+1 ►loderate Earthquake intensity Zoir 'VI.IZ r g q L �j .do pie rate �v 1•ti.� Nt,f.s'„•i• �i�l�G..�7,t{J �..�+� l,cw 6 r�oderate' pond is located near the .centbt . the property: i Bidwell 'Height Applicat on IT,I. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION L (Project .information suftnar is included in re e Y p c ding Discussion sheets) r 1;a, b, c: Development of homesites in hillside areas vtould result in excava;kion.,. earth ino'vement and nvercouering,clue to site preparation, and construction or roads and buildings. E'xcavaeLion and grading may ;result its unstable cutbanks or fill areas although this concern should not be significant if grading;requdrements of the Uhifo m Building" code are .complied w th. 1e: Grading could expose soils. during xai.riv .season or dry sun!M6r'y increasiz" g risLof on-site erosion. improper channeling of'incxeased rsurEace runoff could, cause offsite stater erosion:of soils. Existing tutbatks shota little evidence of significant erosion, however. 1 Soil disturbance from grading anis vegetation xemoval within the Li, ttIe Chico Creak or. $tate Creak wwter,she�]6 may result 'in e_asion<.and siltation o: the streams. ®l lh: B�.ilding on #pipes c,6uI'd subject hones" to rac2csk[desl 'fractures Iii the area may �6,e: associated vith seismic activity, and nay be unstable daring seismic events: This hazard is common to the Califorrtia 'fout'hi l ls:, Zs.: The addition of coi►ute tra£tfc. �t abouEOO:,hortes to and from Ghco would add Ge, otive, organic gases,niCrous ox des ;and carbon 'monotide ami, siains "basins to the air air pollutant load. 1a-ing ;in ,l,aq; air uo?;umes'should prevent aocsimulation of these p6jlutants at chis rural loe.at on. 3b: Thi creFat%on of rods;iriveways and buildings trill increase 'the area imperv2ouI of s surface and tint=s increase' surface runoff Drainage patte�rns� could be .changed b grading aetivitios, Vit; d: Ellin, aral:ume,s and velocities may be: alitxeased, necessa,tating mea sure s to' stabilize `channels and reduCc Velooit,ies ,to prevent erosion. Potential do�•It- s'cr"ea4n ;Flood prob"lerns sa�ould be e+:;aniined in ;dight of potential runoff increases; although- ,. ectad to 'be sz nifz -hew are. ����iot e p � g_ '-dant (aee 3,j). Bidwell DIS( USSTON p.3 TncreasE� in traffic hazards to motor vehicles could result fYom the13 f • y 5 increased turning movements at Santos Way and HiS hwa 32 and from hea�rier traffic on narrow locaL roads such as Doc dill Road. 14a: 80me form of ensured fixe protection wil'T be necessary since this chaparral a:cea is one of. high fire danger. Vrovi.sions may have to be made for an 'additional firetruck and adequate water supplie,5• '14b: County sheriff or other polio protection are not readily available for tl3e residents; new routes or a. shift in personnel may be. :required to cover "have a low this large development, or the residents would to be content with level of police protection., 1t�;c; r�ppzo tinateLy 3d0 Families may add ,enough children 'to the school dis- tr,ict to necessitate school expansions• 14e: Ilue to additional txraffic, on local unpaved or unimproved roads, the maintain certain ones to maintain Count . may have to improve or safety y � 15a: teased amounts of Gasoline would be used in carrsnuting to Chico; . 1 g._sic, is for horse `heating, electricity and as caou].d ase Used in nifi.cant amounts cooling and appliances, 15b: Substant;ialLy' increased demand would be placed on the electrical power distribution system, e:specja'lly a;s a Load increase in summer. mons-hs. 166, b °Te :eohone systeras would have to tie extended to the property, as caauld natural gas, unless the residents Used electricity, solar power or battled gasp Electrical' power line§,bn the pra e-rty Gould:have to be extended to the lots, 16e: Surface 'runrIf'f may be sofficiently incteased by impervious surfaces that at some paint a stor'+nr:aCer drainage sygtec may have to be installett. 1176, b: Potent-01 malfunctioning of septic systems could create. a he a,l`eh hazard in which t;round and suriacawatercould. be expbs'ed torasfi'ewater `contamin- ation. 1�'; T,he residential development could detract from scenic qualities of and may alter the, aper:-space charade views £tors li ,ght.liq 3,Z, z of the area• 21:archaealagical ;purvey is required, although the litcelihood of ar.ciraeo- iogical sites on the property is 'small• 226: vildli,fa habitat would've reduced in szze and q4 alit, e c: Fr'o ect impacts which, thbugls indiVicua�.ly l sited I se.vgerity o2 2r 'scope,- acld uri to make the pro jest a: source of 'consi'derab;t t ialpact, particlarlr when t japosed development�� ,mpact�r vi w d 'triget'her ,vith aoinint pr •erosipn and stream sedit;entatign -reduct.ian af.' wii.dii e 'habitat - ignifiCant: increa in 1oc11 p pulat on aensity, avr 00 't 't emissions, g1sc�'11�-fie. use: an�3 traffic -increase in vehicular. 1 from, O,hicri cortmu'te '' i n v 1' w.