Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMADONE AVENUE/LINDO CHANNEL BIKE CROSSING-PUBLIC PROJECT� 1 ' �� n n ,� . Y� �4 . e \ � � 1 . ,c 1 � � - � � I � - o �, � _ - 1 ' � S 4 i 1 ♦ ,yy ,� �_I 111 � _ . I ;. .� 1 _ � � r - � � I �. �' •`ylj� ,,.ice Y • � • . ' � , P \ ' . ', V � I,1 � I- I � • � I F � .` il', � ,FL.� ��\ 0 0 � y • .�1` � ' � � I r • >p 1� ':) . �. � ` i �r ,. ' , r. � 1 ' �� n n ,� . Y� �4 . e \ � � 1 . ,c 1 � � - � � I � - o �, � _ - 1 ' � S 4 i 1 ♦ ,yy .,;.: 00 • n NOTICE O&ETEIM111MATTON' 'L'I; T0; 17 Secretary for Resources JUL 2 51980 141.6 Ninth Street, Room 1317 Sacramento' CA 95814 CLgaK t�ELSON� CaurltyGlerk A. JAC1NTi-10 8 .....s....__..,...�.�..,..,.;. WjYtity /X% County Clerk County of l:n rROt°i: (Tca;l A. *ency) .� 25Coiui en er, rive � { � ( x�. Tenc ) a � � � � 1 rtva r o °tt�e. , „ e �. _'L T', _, 7t1:8"F' Cota.t�f.�Cr:n•trr..r 17r�. ;=c; msµal `)t: _ SUBJECT: Filing of Notice Of: Determination in COMI)liance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public ResoUtces Code ERI7 >;a� �` 80-03- 31-0,1. Project Tit .e Madrone Aveinue/Lindo Channel Bicycle Crossing Public 4lorks State G'leaY^a z+ shouse Number ZIf submitted to StaL-e Clearing House wontact Person Te'_e l jvl D. V1,ojco3t; )krocy,.Or. yif��j ane um er PrE ect Location S of. the Manzanita Ave. & N. of the ortionoof�MadronenAVe. dxte'ho ng S. fry;. y' o.a oct Bcscri.ptIon; rt N . From . Hawthorne Ave, northeast Ghi:o 14adrone Avenue/Lindo Channel Bicycle Grossing., .. t This is to gAvise that Che btly Board of Su erv' cors .Lead Agency has made the f0llowint, determinations regarding the above-described project: 1. The pvoJect /- 7 will have a significattt effect On the 4 %N 'T will not environment 2, -7 An Environmental l:mpact Report «as prepared for this ;)ro , pursuant to the provisions off: 6808, and teas certified as ect required b�. Section 157B5(�, 14 California Administrative Cade. A Negative Decl.ar�ition was re tired dor this pr j p p o ect pursuant to the provisions of (;l QA. A coPy of tttc Negative becl.ara tion may be e attuned at the 9nVironmcntal.Review I)epartment, 7 County Cetite : rbr�.ve, Orov111e, California 95965, 3.A � � A NotitO o� NxeMption was fl.l.er} ind ,.catit,tg this project 's OxMTlpt from environmental te'v;1.dtg, Appendl x ti _, ,;page 1 b�1,44 2 �' . _.__ ..„. , . „,. d & Y.::6w . Aw +d 1K.kN; *..14' •u•'41 AY: .hi} 4J e APPENDIX G NEkrATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ONMEPI ENVIRTAL IMPACT �. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the project described below has been .reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental. Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resourees Code 21100, et sed.) and a determination has been made 'that it will not .have a significant effect upon the environment 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT'i Log # 80-03-31-01 Madrone Avenue/LindoChannel 'Bicycle Crossing. J. LOCATION OF pROJEOT. South of the portion of Madrone Avq..extending south from Manzanita Ave.. & north of the portion of Madrone Ave,, exteoding north from Hawthorne Ave., northeast Chico_. 4, NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT APPLICANT Butte County Public Works Department Atteotion Clay CAstleberry #7 County Center Dri'v'e Oroville, CA 96>566 Lynn McEnespy 5• MITIGATION MEASURES.- 6. EASURES:S. A copy of the Environmental Review Director's initial study regarding the environmental effect ;of this p:^o j ect i s attached. This study was Adopted as presented. Adopted with changes. Specific modifications and supporting reasons are attached. 7. A public hearing on this Negative Declaration was held b the decision making body. Y Hearing body ` Butte County Board of SUpervisors Date of Determination 7/22/80 Determination:: On the asis of the initial the iriformat�on. Presented at hearings,, Director's �.n.�.tial. study, proposal and oiar owntiowl edge and independent research: comments received on the Append�ik, G page I of 2 s We find the proposed project COUI:,D NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and. a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. We find that the ,project; could have a significant effect on the environment but will not in this case because of attached mitigation measures described in item 5 above which are by this reference made conditions of project approval. A conditional NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. AUG -11980 DATE: Signature Robert E. Lemke Name Chairman, Board of supervisors Title Apondix G - page 2 of 2 ' .�hvirannor��a► 1luu7�yp �;,�;�, Inter-Depart , emora ndum u� 0 � Tor Carl Nelson, Environmental Review G�oordinator � ►���;�� �c�r,yiy FROM: Department of Public 'Works SUSJECT; Bike Crossing of Lindo Channel CBW 77-1 Our Pile: 236.1 oats: May 21, 1980 Reference is made to your environmental evaluation of the above-noted proposed and particularly the mitigation measures, p project It doesn't seem necessary or appropriate to us to include in the discussion or mitiga tion measures routine construction procedures which we would include in the contract, such as erosion control of the fills, proper compaction, slopes of the pathway, signing, color of barrier posts, maintenance, etc. If you left those decisions to qualified engineers, it would probably save your office staff: some time in the preparation of the environmentax.documents. I(H)is h Para H Paragraph ()s particularly amusing in that the bike path shoal, be constructed to withstand earthquakes and subsidence. What do the existing pools c)f water located to the West Of the project have to do with this project? Your signing recommendations are a little excessive. It appears you are recommending three signs on each end of the bike path. Why don't you let us determine the pro er signing? What we don't need is a jungle of signs for bikepath. p We don't use the Uniform Building Code in our construction. We refer to Caltrans ki Standard Specifications, which cover the work more appropriately than Chapter 70 of the UBC,. It is our recommendation that reference to the above items be removed from the environ- mental discussions and ",required" mitigation measures. May Castleberry Director of Public Works William Cheff } WC.�m Assistant Director 1r-�wi i APPENDIX F ENVIRONMENTAL, CHECKLIST FORM (To be completed by Lead Agency) BACKGROUND EES Log #80-03-31-01 1. Name of Proponent Butte County Public Works Depaartment 2. Address and Phone Number` fProponents #7 County Center Drive Attention: Clay rov e` Castleberry L nn McEnespv " 3. Date of Checklist Submitted 4. Agency Requiring. Checklist: -- 5. Channel Bicame of ycle if ipplicat e Madrone Avenue Lindo y ng II. ENV2RONME14TAL 'LWA.CTS (Explanations of all "ye-o" and "maybe" answers are on attached sheets. required YES MAYBE N0 l i Earth. Will the lctoposal result in significant: a, Unstabl-ions` or in earth d�.Substructures? cliangeseingeologic ub struc tures'? PR �» b, Disruptions, displacements, eom- pactioti or overcovering of the soil? a. Change in topography or around sur- face relief features or removal of topsoil? d, Destruction, covering or m6difica- tion of any unique geologic or physical features? e; Increase in wind or water erosion Of soils, either on or off thesite? t° Changes in deposition or erosion Of beach_ sands, or changes in silta- tion, depas .tion or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, irt:,et or lake? g„ Loss of prune agricul.tut ally pro., . ductive soils Outside designated urban areas Appendix r - page 1 sof Yt8 MAYBE NO h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, -: or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result; in: a. Substantial deterioration of ambient or local air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors smoke or fumes? e, Significant alteration of air movement, moisture ortemperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3,. 'Water. Will the proposal result in substantial; a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? b.. Changes in absorption rates, drainage Patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation iremoval, channel zation or culvert nstallation? s. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? e. Change in the amount of s --face II water in any water body? f. Discharge into surface waters, or I n any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature-, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? g; Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground wators? h, Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? t Ajotidix F page 2 of 9 x Rpt.. YES MAYBE No i, Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? j. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Plant" - Life. Will the proposal result in substantial, ....:�. a. Loss of vegetation or change in the diversity of species or number Of any species oflarts p (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? b, Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C4 Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d• cultural icropin 7crea e of any agti- S , Animal Lift Will the proposal, result in ubstantial. a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds land animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna) 7 b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species Of animals? AOL c Introduction of new speo.'es of animals into an area, or result Ln a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d Deduction of, encroachment u, ft or detE:rio ation to existing fish or Wildlife habitat? Append k r - page 3 of YES MAYBE NO 6 . Noise. Will the Proposal result in substantial: a. Increases in noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Li ht and' G1ar'e. Will the proposal pro uce significant light org lare?Ask 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a significants a. Alteration of the planned hand use Of" an area, or eFtablish a trend which will demonstrably lead to such alteration? b. Conflict with uses on adjoining properties, or conflict with eStab7.ivhed recreational, educa- tional, religious or scientific uses of an area? 9 Natural Resources. Will the proposal reluit'in substantial: a. Demand for or increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewAble natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal i nrolve a risk of an explosion or the release of Hazardous substrnces (including, but not limited to, oil_, pesticides,chemicals or radiation) in the evet of an accident or upset conditions? ll, po ulation, Will the proposal signi, icantLy alter the Location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area or physically divide an established community? 1, Nousin Wili the proposal si ni icantl y affect existing, housin or create a demand for additional g' housing? Appendix .g ra e 4 o 9 YES MAYBE NO' 13. Transportation/Circulation.. Will the proposal result in a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Significant effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? c d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of and/or people goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, tail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor ,' vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? • 144 Public Services. Will the proposal; have an effect upon, or result in a substantial need for new or altered governmentcel services in any of the following areas a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? ex d, Park..- or other recreational facilities? 5 e; Maintenance of public: facilities includimt roads? f, Other governmental. services? 15. Pn . Will the proposal result; in a. Ilse of substantial: amounts of fuel or energyh Aat b. Substantial, increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or ; requite the deVelopment of neva sources of energy? 16, Utilities . Will the proposal result i n�for new systems) or subs sta t.tial alterations to the: fol.loe�ilipl utilities ; Ap'pendik, V" page _ 5'.0f g YDS MAYBE NQ ' a, Power or natural gas"? b, Comm unicat4 Ions systems? - c. Tater? d. Sewer (will trunk line be extended, Providing capacity to serve new development) e. Storm water drainage? 17. Human Health, Will the proposal result a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)9 r b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? r 18 Solid Waste, Will the Proposal proposal result 5 n any significant impacts --- associated with solid waste disposal or litter control? 19. Aesthetics,etru`il the proposal result in n Of any public designated or recognized scenic Nista open to the public, or will the Proposal result ;in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 20. Recreation: Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing public recraa- tion facilities? 21. Arccheolo ical/Historical,, Will the proposa resu t in an atoration of a significant archeological or Historical site, structure, object or building?, Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does tthe project have the 'potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially ;reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife spedies, cause a fish Or wildlife pppula.tion to drop below self Appendix, F page of 9 c YES tILY7J D No sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plantor animal com- munity,, reduce the number ox restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b, Does the project Have the potential `to*achieve short term benefits to the detriment of publicly adopted long-term environmental goals? c. Does the project have impacts which' are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (a project may impact on two or mire separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect o'.,`, the total of those impacts on the environment is Significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings' either directly or indirectly? Appendix V .: Page 7 of 0 n a},\ Sn x r /' ,,ti+a--.~_ `tet �N..." "�.." �Y '±''rye ""• "''.".1 , �� . t! +1% �. r±'y �y� 0 r i��" ,,,+t �,. , �r^A-." ti ..�� C•r, '.tom, lL '�+. �h'�, tei` 4. • , Y. S � R qty,. �., s a• >aba y,J► �'�IL .* tt ,,,�! anan ctiz I s• xti N e Z ,a f� I S t t i F 1+�Q�.•� \\\,1.'M+. f�� "i r�..r. �•,t� T� -rI ,,:k y C �•.a , i rVl .. Ee♦, i o.. t.. `Qy w �f.. k`i� �. � �d♦t y:4• r �C.4ft1 �.. . 1'- ♦~ I � f/�'�a.iaLk: "sky t 61 Yd' Y`�3;aly,•.4'.` ", ��+.e•r� •> °T 5,'�.' ✓fit» 1 .+ i.� 4.." �7 L: s I±b / /mow t; N L,. yW ,� ���.' w 'r. ��:*`+J�:� �' .',1. #'ih 4"""�1 '...r W �- Sf � � e � ♦ �.«` ';+ ^- ` '!. •i" .,f � .+'. n �„j.SR :. y ♦ , ki '"2't�7lSant>a `,'k+`� L"*a.,.. $ S +.+ r , R • r ar j 4 ±otic ,. d rNr r $CSI r y t � L ,' 4• � { ��rs e. W.� � �, '.Y r . • i a b. a' � � a�;+�',is S i4 • 4�il+aw:ly,,,� � ?21 r. ' }?i �? Q. ° a a'r � • Q A. '.0��.,r'v a �F...!ece._.a�aaa•t♦k,�" '�As.�►ra�,i,�. ael�', tff�Y^d•��r'r++l�1+r_•:,:1 �'�::...r..,' wr�E. #4Y.: i Kaa.la+`.rr-r�•br',r�c-`wr,K�ri"e�xe.a.�. .`rr:K(Ar.r;-w.., aeK1+I �+�r�cc�aas eF ;aM,ra.�x.i. ,i`t.�,a%,'� a30i���A �•�"M♦4�t/r. ..►�1t',".t'1,�;S'•i'.'�.r2�.�.ab/.G'/0`��,}"rN�h��••r1xa,, ",rr'�xN.O':,y�",s.a:��h!.�i•'JfY. -(('i{o',hy�hx 2yr�''H •a'@1� �aajjg�M.>(•II1a'. w��q"�L�f4C�dA<F'_7�2.s*J'''.•'�t 3k^,'r.;•.,�''.�.�-Xo�'`..��t� �tx,3(U��.w•:�sa�4w, " C1;1 I;+•1�-r5�^� 'ri',r.ati�''•.0 y F' .4 . ff,��IrL,f1r'yd:;^k,,:'L-a"r'�a't'es.r�Mrh �>Y?^;'�xs �y•,�k"Ifrwi�rv�Ea':r jMi,9 r�.1�.,kr 1dI.!: a.ia+�y.g�4-�Na'�.R Nr . jK �. �.a'NpC�� r,�,1.'„.y,'S1�i/.1,.''�a :}.sa.�r.,�,±.''?.��.}.S,♦y'i!�•� i"s+T-;td!/+�rMa' .•s.t�"R"rl,•swalria'r�K!:m{�!.ry'..�rl.y1:'� ..'..a"�I`f.SVT -:w,IK,C«Lrr•_r'',%r�'�i`�aLL/v,f�.-..,.��r♦�1+1X�', �%•0A�-/i."1�.-i: t ti p' ..> Ff1 t0r i.Y0 ' f��~4�a'+'��.t."�.;S.+�`t.—il.1 a l'as�tUU '.L'fi��fi,M.�: . ae4 Sr Y �t����±,!k.�-.tOK� :y iIi ��+':A'►f'�.��•:;e�t»,`3':�C. �i4eMSb�'kukH«t.rw"tt'�V°:irr1”mb1�yEi►«l.ai�'.�n t��xn"cf �..•(l�.ai�r:':T�.`'. y''�:.W- �L. _' `S'I•+Le�FtU S »•�.I�,.tt jss,aZ H„♦ f,,`��••�1!'j "Tf.'LxQ_R�,',�Y�`„`[. '~''.�.�r�JIi%(I,r'�,.'!nt,ti'^,�z•7`F{RI]�t'`+1. ,'` ♦•`/r/. ++`"b2rr�4• 'y��♦L`ta���"♦t+'r'+ p:e,'�r' r,CM� .,•r ` ♦I+ `s'"`.#V*,,�Y+..o`,'.t•. �'�+�K`:��T�v'�kyr �'/C7r 4.a`U`.� teaatF.�r O'.A r.a *•�•\C�.G ,SC drqyJ : IP k WPRbECT SITE } o3 , .: ,5 1"P /a4,� 7 rca_►�: got 47 All. SCALE 1'.24 000 IOtlb 0 1!2000 4 sboo 6006 00EEtXs E 1 KILOMETEk OONTbUk TERVAL 10 FRIT T-1 b07TE0 LINES' R1PRtSrNT 5•�OtlT CONTbURS DATUM IS MLAN A tEV$Ll'e, T1ca�s6h 'SO %�y1f`:rtip': I .: P .y ..7 .�+. . hb* t tlYrctwb ANb alae M14"Elia NORTH 7 5 ' O U a d rA h 9l e _... a. nEt00110N ill CE OF SNE€T Mt MAO 'OOMPI.IES WITH NATIONAL MWAC RACY StANWbS t34i SALE by U. , i3FbLot;i A1, I;Ui2V Y, bENVER, OLOF?Abb 802 6, bh WAtHlNG7oN, b. C, 202 ` A 1:OLbtk btsdNIBING TbOWRAPHIC 'NiAPs AND 154YMBOU61 I$ AVAILAbLt, ON RCOUEST' i ' III.` DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Project Description 1. Type of Project: Bicycle'Crossing. 2. Brief Description: (-drone Avenuejl,indo Channel Bicycle Cressinr� 3, Location: South of the portion of Ma.drone Avenue extendin g ,south from Manzanita Avenue and north of the portion of Ma drone � Avenue extending north from Ha►v horne Avenue, not Ma(fst Chico. 4. Amount ofl Impervious Surfacing: 6320 ,sq • ft. �; ; ft. 'wide by Igo -5. Access and Nearest Pub'l'ic Road(s only via Madrone Avenue. ` )'°r bicyclisin and pedestrians Physical __Environment 1. Terrain: Gently r0i ging terrain in Linda Channel ba&in with steep, ` banks near existing portions o� Madrone Aven:uc. a. Slopes! 2% to 3o%+. b. Elevation 240 A.S.L.± 2. Soil Types and Characteristics Vina fine sandy loare, Riverwash Vina loamstop { y phase); Redding, clay la;.rn to M. & S - alluvai-fan deposits little vegetation in r+iver� wash areas (gravel and Co s, in placas from .rater erosion occurring 'over the years. a Limiting Factors: Shallow and stony soyt�, inlaces difficulty in installing footings for of soils. Liffe path; : bsdencse 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a4 Earthquake zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity zone VIII, b. Erosion Potential: Slight to high (steep banks) C. Subsidence Potential: Moderate to high. d. Expansive Soil Potential: Low to moderate. 4 Hydrology a4 Surface Water: Linda Channel would cover bike path less than 2 months per year. b4 Annual Rainfall (normal,; 24-26" 5. Visual/ Scen'c Quality: Nigh; channel b' and wildflowersj assn with riparian vegetation Bi ogicai._Enyironment 5'vegetation; Riparian Woodland with cottonwoods, willows grasses, wildfiowers, etc. III-. DISCUSSION OF ENVIR(NMENTAL EVALUATION (continued) 7. Wildlife Habitat: Good habitat for small mammals , birds, fisih and reptiles typical of ri pari an woodland. Cultural Environment 8. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: Potentially sensitive area along Lindo Channel. 9. Existing Land Use: Alonq route of bike path: Steep earthen banks on either end, tre,+elled pathway with small to large rocks in many places, 10. Land Uses: Single family residential subdivisions to north and south, open field to northwest, Lindo Channel to easti and west with periodic flows of water and some pools of water y g .> remaining after water Subsides. 11 Schools in Vista Orthoped�ca5choolslt.o north; Sierra Elementary, Loma Area: a School to south. Terra View Elementary The proposed bicycle crossing is' recommended by the Chico Area Bikeway Committee. The Butte County Public Works Department plans to con.5,truct the bicycle crossing at grade level across Lindo Channel to connect with either end of Madrope Appvenue, Maintenance of the bike path and TheaMacdironeiAvenue bridgeewiliseventually replaceothe be ferethi,snty. bike p hi The following items of environmental concern have been identified, With proper Obstruction practices in accordance with the project design and a,ppropri ate mitigation ��neas ures ; the 'bike path construction and its even'tu<tl use by pedestrians and bicyclists should not create significant ehvironmental effects. (e): Fill material will be needed in the areas near the steep earthen banks on either end of the project so the ,bike ramps from Madrone Avenue coni be constructed at about a 5% to 8% grade: Proper compaction for the fill materi a provided to prevent P P "P � g �r` k Path. or . potential erosion from affectin the bike ath Erosion it a min factor at resent exc., t where the aide cuttin action of water in, the channel is rOMOViilg soil; Design features, p,artitUlarl.y along the bike ramps, ,Will be incorporated to,minimize potential Water erosion, according to Jqi 11 i am Chef`f of the Butte County ' ubl ,c. Works Department, Will 'Bishop of the California Department of Fish and Gaoie has tentatively issued a Code 1601 permit for the streambed alterston that would be involved. The permit stipulates that Jlon�-erodable and bon_,petroleum based materials be used in the high water areas. Concrete would meet Appendix P page 8a of 9 • III DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued) that stipulation. The asphalt ramps would possfP► short- ened and concrete used. if the �"Y need to be proposed portions of the ramp near the channel are in the highwater area, 3(d) The Public Works Department intends to construct the crossing so the profile grade will match tKo existing grade of the channeland eliminate any occurrence of hydraulic interference. According to input received from Mel Schwarz of the Reclamatior, Board in January 1980, Lindo Channel has a flow capacity of 6,000 cubic feet per second. 3(j), 16(c), 17(a): In April 1980, there were still pools of water 4n some parts of Lindo Channel. In the area of the proposed bike path, there was minimal water, but two large pools of watnr (up to 5 feet deep) were evident to the west of the project area. A 12" flap - gate gate maybe the source of at least part of the water in the first pool. The pools may serve as an attractive nuisance to children. Because of a potentially hazardous situation when the channel is full, some consideration should be given to placing Warning signs atboth entrances to the bike crossing warning cyclists not to enter when the area is flooded. 4(b)i. Rare or epdangered plants are riot expected in this area other than the -riparian wege`tatio:n asa unique and .valuable habitat. Numerous California poppies were evident in the channel basin outside of the water flow areas 13(c) : The Madrone Avenue Bridge is a future project planned from ' 100 to 140 feet west of the linear ,section of the bike ,path. 13(f)c Because of the channel bank, sight distance will be obscured by a blind corner for those entering or leaving the bike pa�h. Noted from observation of the Highway 99/Lindo Channel bicycle crossing is the cobbles and silt that would be left on the bike path once the Watandede deposited the, path should be swept o d he channel water recedes Silt rocks and an debris carried soon after the inundation of the bike path ceases, p p off or otherwise removed p 14(c) Students attending Pleasant Valley High and Marigold Elementary Schools are expected to be the most consistent users of thL bike path. 1.5(c): The bike path will provide a transportation system which, once installed, will not place a demand an fuel and energy res I6(09 17`(6). See item 3(,i)► 16(d); 11('a). 21: Aechaeological clearance was granted as the result of,a tUr.Vey by dim Manning, a local`archaeolcgist. Appandi x R r page '8b of 9 IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: T find the I proposedproject effect on the environment, and UabNEGATIVENOT eDECLARATi��ant 1.0 recommended, ON 0 I find that although the significant effect an thepenvironmosed �n�3ethereuwillanota be a siynificant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Is RECOME..NRED . O effect the etproposed projec REPOT t MAY Dave a significon rehe envixouir:rcent, and an ENVIRONMENTAL is required. Date May 14, 1980 Revised May 29, 1980 (Signature) For: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DEPARn,1F�NT RBVieWed by; of Earl. D: Nelsoh Environmental Review Director ppenclix - page . of .Environmental RoDopt, J Up, 51980 Du fd Couniy o May 25t 1980 Mr. Earl Nelson, Director Environmental. Review Department 18-F County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Deat Mr. Nelsor. On Thursday, May 22, 1980 1 conducted an archaeological reconnaissance of two properties located within Butte County. They are as followst reMadrone Avenue/Lindo Channel Bicycle Crossing, Butte County Department of Public Works " located in the bed of Lindo Channel between the two sections of Madrone Avenue on either side of the channel, northeast of Chico. The proposed project is for the construction of a bicycle path across this section of Lindo Channel. Lindo Channel contains water only occasionally and the vegetation of the channel bed consists of grasses, wild flowers and weeds. David Wright & Dennis Chal.lman Ap# 56-24-94 through 101/ ERD Log #80-04-15-02 approximately 40 acres of land located to the northeastofthe intersection of Headwaters Road and Highway :32, north of Forest Ranch. The property lies in the NW -41- of Section. 28j T. 94 N., R: 3 E., Paradise quadrangle, 15' series. The proposed project is to divide the property into four parcels. The terrain of the property has a gentle to moderate northwest to southeast slope with a moderately dense Foothill Woodland -type of vegeta ;ion. Prior to my reconnaissance of the above properties T consultedthe archaeological site record files maintained at California State University, Chico to determine if any known archaeo- logical sites were located on either of the properties. No sites had been previously recorded on either of the properties. My reconnaissance of the propertles was. complete in that the entire ground surface of both properties was examined for the presence of archaeological or historical materials. Ground visibility on the Wright property was impaired by a thick duff covering,* archaeological or historical. sites were observed during my that archaeological inspection of either property `and i`t is recommended clearance be granted to both of the Properties described above; Vm .your11 . Manning Archaeology Consul t 4 latp' of &Iffantin GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 95814 EDMUND G, BROWN JR. GOVERNOR tovirom' 00111 Roviuw Dapi= July 3, 1980 Jul- ( `j iIf 00'.0 OWMy Earl. D. Nelson Butte County 4118-F County Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Subject: SCHt 89060316 Madrone Avenue/Lindo Channel Ricycl.e Crossing Dear Mr. Nelson: State agencies have commented on your draft environmental document (see attached). if you would Like to discuss the concerns and recommendations in their comments, contact the staff from the agencies whose names and addresses appear on the coltments. You may formally respond to the agencies'' comments by writing to them (including the State Clearinghouse number on all such correspondence) When filing the Final EIR, you must include all comments and responses (State EIR Guidelines, Section 15146). State review of your draft environmental document Will then be complete. To aid in preparing environmental assessment's on future projects, you should send to state agencies and the Office of Planning and pesearch. your Notice of Preparation as prescribed by AB 88`4 and Section 15066 of the EIR Guidelines ou woul ify d care for assistance. or if the need arisesr the Office of Planning and Research is available to help identify responsible agencies► distribute Notices of Prepc,rr"1.tion, Ot anize coordl.na'tion meetings, mediate disputes, and hold consolidated hearings. Please Contact Anna Polvos at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions. Sincerely, hoe-pn Williamson Clearinghouse svwjag Attachment CO:Keri ]'ellow5, DWR r�a State of California � *Business and Teansl')rtation Agency M e m o r a n d u To : Kent Smith Deputy Division Chief, DOTP Date: June 50, 1930 Debartment A-95 Coordinator File-hut— Hadvone Avenue Bike Fath SC-H 800603 10 From a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 03 Subject; District '03 has reviewed the enviroiLmental inrormation for the i adron.e Avenue/lundo Channel Aa-'U--!L in Chico. Caltrans encourages the use of facilituies that Promote alternate means of transnoxtat on it is the grades of the bath be kept to a recommended: that minimum off' SAO if possible. , ULA J. TROt T TO District Director of Dran.sportation Ri D. Skidmore Chief, Environmental Branch Snvirbnt��ntat h�ovEttw Dera3. JQL DUN couhiy �i