Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMERIDIAN-MUNJAR-PUBLIC PROJECTFate Of (UibTi t 1Y,1i�y�� GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH '` / `nviro�,nonfnf � n 1.400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 95814 Roviow Do pf. EDMUND G, BROWN JR. MAY h 2 r/ GOVERNOR 1980 BUN Coun;y May 23 1980 Clay Castleberry Butte 'Co. Public Works Dept. 7 County Center Dr=ve Oroville, CA Q5965 Subject: SCH4 80042208 Master Drainage Plan-Meridian-Munjar Area Dear Mr. Castleberry; 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 comments. You may formally respond to the agencies' commentsby writing to them (including the State C"learinghouse number can all such correspondence) . When filing the Final Elia, you must include all comments akld responses (State EIR Guidelines, Section 15146) State review of your draft environmental document will then be complete. To aid in preparing envi,romunental assessments on future projects.. you should send t'o state agencies and the Office of Planning and. Research your Notice of Preparation as prescribed by AB 864 and Section 15066 of the EIR Guidelines. Zf you would care for assi,5tance or if the need arises, the Office of Planning and Research is avaixs_ble to 'help identify responsible agw,; O.�,es , distribute Notices of Preparation, Orc anite coordination weet ngs mediate disputes, and hold consolidated hearings. Please contact Anna Polvos at (916') 445-0618 if you have any questions. Sa.ncerely Stephen C��illiamsoh State Clearinghouse 5VW`/atl Attachment cc:: igen Fellows; DWR ~ Stat4i 'of California Business rind Transportation Agee. Memorandum To Rent Smith Deputy Division Chief, DOTP date: 2l, 198Q Department A-95 Coordinator File: 03-But-99 Meridian--Mun.jar .Area Haster Drainage Plan SCH 80042208 From . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 7 Subject= District,3 has reviewed the master storm drainage plx-L for the Meridian-Plunjar area of northern; Butte County. State, Maintenance forces indicate that all Cross drains under Rouge 99 within the study ..area are either av or near capacity at the present time. The channel leading to Locat;':on CT 11 as shown on the plan, is being eroded due to high ve1.o--ity and. right angle bends. At Locations CT 15 and CT 16 where the equalizer channel is proposed., the roadway grade was raised two years ago to prevent water from flowing over the highway. g tual].y flew to structures Any increase in dischar e wa.].1 even which are at capacity ty on Route 32. property fe ,It that increased development trill have on downstream owners, as the1l as the adequacy of downstream structures, shoula, be a part of. the report. Consideration should be given to the type of financing.. to be used if additional improvements are required at Route 99 or downstream. 120 J TROMBATORE District Director of firm-ispdrtation R D. Skidmore i Chief , Env:i,ronmentai Branch stgtr, of California Memarand u To 1, James W. Burns Assistant Secretar; for Resources 2. Clay Castleberry Earl D. Nelson Butte County Public Butte County Works Department and Environmental 7 County Center Drive Review 0roville, CA 95965 18-F County Center From : THE :RECLAMATION BOARi Drive Department of Water Resources 4roville, CA 95965 The Resources Agency Date MAY 2 0 19,80 File Noa Subject : SCH 7909110;x, Master Drainage �1er Mud Creek(. 8004 aster Dra3.na fan - Meridian Munjar Area We have reviewed the two documents 11hich present plans to divert floodelows originating, north of Chico Airport into ''Uppe'r Mud Creek. These drainage plans seem to us to be part of a larger plan that .would permit the development of several thousand acres of land north of the City of Chico that currently is sparsely or undeveloped because the land is subject to flooding.The premise presented in these two plans is that the U. S. Corps of 'Engineers overdesigned the capacity of Mud Creek ,and in reality, there is excess capacity that can be used. Upper Mud Creek is part of a federally -constructed flood control Project - Chico and Mud Creeks and Sandy Gulch Project - that was built to divert Big Chico Creek flood flows around the City of Chico. The design of the levees of Upper Mud Creek provides for three feet of freeboard at design capacity. Any change or nevi Sion, in the operation of Upper Mud"Creek Will require the concur- rence of both the Corps of Engineers and The Reclamation Board. We are not aware of any contact that the County's consultant has made regarding changing the operations of the flood control project. Before the County expends more money or other efforts, we would advise Butte County to contact b Corps oth The Reclamation Board and the of Engineers and review the federal project design criteria and hydrology assumptions. After these discussiohs, the Couhty may be in a better position to proceed, Thank you for the Opportunity to review these documents. I�TNRT General Manager 445-9454 cc: Colonel Paul F. Kavanaugh District Engineer Sacramento District U. S Army Corps of Engineers 650 Capital Mall Sacramento, GA 95814 1 Pafo'cf 611forniex The Rosolif ioa .Agency emorandu To s I. Jim Burns, Projects Coordinator Date; f h� 151980 Resources Agency �nriranGit�t3lat ;duwre;'Y (tifji4. 7.Bar! D. Nelson, Director Environmental. Review Departmen �• �� 212 19801 18-F County Center Drive Orov "'Leo CA 95965 POW County From ' Department of Fish and Game Sub'ect cy/ Master Storni-Draiaaga Plan fo�Tppear-M%4,creek Area, Meriajan-Mun jar Area and Rock Creek, Butte County - Sq�422d 5CH' 79091103 The Department of Fish and Gamey reviewed the subject storm drainage plans and has the following comments Channel.ization eliminates riparian vegetation, a valuable and diminishing habitat type. It is unclear from the document exactly which arses aro Proposes! for channelization however, there are 1'iparian Wetlands in the project area, tspecially along Rock Creek., It is the basic policy of the Resources Agency that its Departments "Will not authorize or approve projects i o este that fill or otherwise .harm or destroy inland Wetlands." Th® project alsoa . pr Poses t* divert Rack Creek discharge to the Mud Creek flood control facilities which presently receive Big Chico Creek water, The effect of additional flood waters iii Mud Creek and the7 Kusal. Slough area could only contribute to backwater flooding. In the recent past the Department. reviewed a flood control probosal to eliminate riparian vegetation along lower &ig Chico Greek meat has high wildlife values. The Department is o pto the al.imination of riparian vegetation on. Big Chico Creak as welleel a as cveartaxing the existing flood bypass ft i,ties that service'Big Chico Creek. In addition, the hg flood of water from Rock Crack could poten+:ial.ly effect the water sup ply maintaining riparian vegetation along lower RockGreekecessary for The Department r. ecommend$ that the flood water management project tole the !!flood meadow'► concept lasted as one of the alternatives in t��o document. This alternative would not overtax; existing flood control facilities and would Provide '� he adO.ed benefit of perms eqt o and wevl ands for wildlife, pen spas© Thank you far the rpportunitp to comme"t. if the bePartmont card be i�i,a; "urther assistance, Pleas( contact Robert W* Lassen, Regional Asn ager) 09 Oh 2 Z`7G1. Rambus toad, Rancho Cordova,; �CA 95670r tele hone: 9lb � � � � 35$-7026 Director �c�tt ti. � iSY.YM1 •.... State of California The Resources Agency Memorandum To 1. James W. burns Assistant Secretary :dor Resources a4t� MAY 2 p 1980 2: Clay Castleberry Earl D. Nelson Filo No., Butte County Public Butte County Works Department and Environmental subject, SCIi 79091103,, Master 7 County Center Drive Review Drainage .a�_ ._U ex• baud Oraville, CA 95965 18-F County Center Cree -. � SCH 8001 ?2 caster From THE RECLAMATION 130ARD Drive Draina .G~PAH - Meridian Department of Water Resources Orovil.le, CA 95965 Munj4r Area lie have reviewed the two documents which nt iloodflows originating north of Chico Airporteintalans to�idivud ex�ei�. These drainage plans seem to us to be part of a larger plan that Would permit the development of sevdral thbusand acres of land berth of the City of Chico that currently is sparsely or undevel.o ed because the l.zand �.s subject to flooding, 'these two plans is that the u, � The Premise presented in S. Corp: of Engineers: overdesigned the capacity ref hSud Creek and in real .ty, there :is excess capacity that can. be used. Upper Mud Creek Is part o a federally" con structed flood control pro,�ect Chico zzt�d MU4 Cre ?lis abd Sandy Gulch Pro • ect . built t to divert Big Chico Greek flood ilotvs around the City was Chico. The tlesi. ;n of the Levees o Upper Mud Creep provides for three feet of freeboard a;, de.� p r Upper Mu capacity. Any�chz3� ge or revi- sioh nd The In the thetCor sfofMud Creeit will, re wire the cot,^ux- We are not aware bt' any co�ntacththat eers ��e Counteclama�sul.tAoard. made regard:Ll chabg nS the operati.ort of the flood control project. CorpsBefore the e, Coon r..rt s more money or other dttorts, we Would r L., County to contact both The :Reclamation Beard and the: Corps of nginecra and and hydreview the federal prosect design criteria: rology assumptiohs. After these discussion may be in a better 'position to proceed. 83 the County Thank you for the opportunity to review these documents: General manager 445-9454 cc: Colonel Paul P. Kavanaugh Distrlot Engi door Sacramento DistrjLrt, 4S. Army Corps of Engineers 4 C Capitol Mall. Sacramento,, CA 958h y� t� MINASIAN, MINASIAN, MINASIAN, SPRUANCE &. BABER ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. JACKSON MINASIAN 1681 131RD STREET AT OAK STREET DAVID HANKINS'MINASIAN P. O, DOX 1679 TrL,EFNUNt! 533-.2883 PAUL RYAN MINASIAN WILLIAM H. SPRUANCE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 AREA COO) 916 WILLIAM H.DAE9ER,Ill IN REPLYING i1EFE12 TO JEFFREY A.MEITH April 28, _1980 FILE NO..... County of Butte i Board of Supervisorsi� 1 2.5 County Center Drive oroville, California 95965 , ,�ny�onmc?rfol �"ovieW i?ep}, Re: Meridian - Munjar Area Master Drainage Plan ProjeCt frimV J 1950 Ladies and Gentlemen: buffo Count . We have received notice,of the i,*1ainage plan studies in regard to both of the absve areas. AS you are no doubt aware, the baster Drainage Plan areas as contained within these studies are limited. to ^t-in-ain geographic areas but do not include the areas w:hil th will aceive the drainage water' from the projects proposed. Tie {ul.c calf your attention particularly to the fact that e.ch of the 'Plans Calls for the use of Pine Creek and Rock Creek as tributary to Pine Creek to convey the waters from these drainage areas. As you are aware, Pane Creek is a channel which is owned by private parties including the Peterson Ranch; and whish has never had any contribution from either the State of 'California or the County of Butte it regard 'to flood protection works. xn general, the private landowners along Pine Creek have spent substantial amounts of money attempting to keep this channel clear, in Some cases placing levees and embankments to prevent erosive flows and still there 3*.S a substantial flooding problemarisingfrom Pine Creek. The .idea of Master Drainage Plans is, of course, a good onei It is even a better idea to get the developers who are so anxious to make money Upon the ConVitrsion of open land tel urbah purposes to pay the costs Of drainage facilities. However, we suggest to you that it is even a better plan to provide the following: 7} { ('! l+ Make sure that therei's'a legal,right to drain the artificial flows from urban clevslo'lmer.t into Pine Creek4,G� before the adoption of a Masi✓er Dtainaga Plan and the go�' G (�� a County of Butte Board of Supervisors April 28► 1980 Page -2- ahead for urban development in accordance with that Plan. We believe that there is no such right at the present time in light of the unimproved nature of Pine Creek and the failure of the County to obtain necessary easements or to make necessary agreements with the adjoining landowners. 2. We think the adjoining landowners along Pine Creek will be happy to cooperate with the County in this regard if specific provisions are included in the Master Dra.Lnage Plan for bearing a portion of the.maintenance of Pine Creek and certain recognitions on the part of the County in respect to the need for maintenance and- improvement work on Pine Creek. The cost of these works could, of course► be included in the Master Drainage Plan for each of these 'areas. In short, we believe that the Negative Declaration is inappropriate in this regard unless and until'; 1. A further study and inclusion of the Pirie Creek disposal capacity into the study is included. 2. The adoption of these plans should not occur until the necessary legal provisions as to the Ise of Pine Creek are provided, 3. The Master Drainage Plan for each of these areas must recognize payment of a portion of the costs of use Of pane Creek and Rook Creek for the draining of areas made subject to -urban development 4. Consideration should be given to the liability of the County in adopting a Master Drainage Flan for these areas at the requests of developers without providing as a condition for the formation of the drainage plan area an ability to convey artificial drainage flows away from the Master Plan area. In regard to Mud Creek riaster Drainage Plan the Environmental Impact Report is inadequate beca-use of a failure to discuss the effects ilpon Pine Creek of the Plan Very truly ,yours r MINA81AN ► MINACIAN ► MINI1MN r Sk'RUANCB & BAnBn PAUL R. MINASIAN (fin Behalf of VMA B �, and V2 TRICTA PB` A80N r PMEASQN P.RMAP