HomeMy WebLinkAboutSKYWAY RECONSTRUCT.+
y�
1
F• m 8 �.ets
p n ia••
a
1
..
�s�,
y �.'
y
m
d
A .
_
r
d•
i
+r �
'
o
m
1.
1
•
l
t
day
J
.APPENDIX G
V-6UATIVE DECLARATION REGA?JDING ENVIRONMENTAL TMA
CT
I. NOTICE IS BEREBy GIVEN that the project described below has
been reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources CodF
211001et sea,) and a determination has been made tnat it will
not hat; e a significant effect upon the environment.
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; 77-04--27-16
Reconstruction of Skyway
- LOCATION OP PROJECT:
Skyway - Woodward Ave. to Steiffer Rd.; Paradise.
1� • NANCE .IND ADD -USS OF PROJET APPLICANT;
7
But"
County CenteriDriveWorks Department
�/( (}O'}r('�ovmi`� /ale 7, Ca.
���]��i 95965
5 a 1`lITIGA:1."IO MUSIJ.LS:ES i
See .4ttached
6. A cup"' of the Environmental Review Di rectors 4
regarding theesenvironmental effect of this prgjec I ial stuached,
This study
x Adop, ed as Presented.
Adopted with changes.
suppo.rti �Specific modifications and
ng reasons are attached.
7. A public hoaring on this Negative Declaration was held by the
decision making body.
Hearing body � Butte County Hoard of SU
Dex'vicors
Date of D0tG!1Mination
12/6-/77
Determination: ,
On the basis of the En ronmental Director's initial study,
the izi'i'orma�ta 5n presen.tod at hearings; comments received on the
Proposal and our titan swlec ge and. ihdepenaoj)t x+esearch
App ehdix G Page of P
We find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment q and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is
hereby adopted..
x 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 abovo
which are by this reference made conditions of project
approval.. A conditional NEGATIVE D.MLAR.A.TION is howeby
adopted.
DAZE: _1_2/'64!27
�Sigxtaf�ire _ ,
Bernard ]Richter
Name
Chairman of the Board. of Supervisors
Title
Apotai�t G = page 2 of
r
1:j`
MI iGATION MEA,S112ES
Butte County Public Wc;` ks Department
Reconstruction: of Skyway Woodward Ave. to Steiff er Rd.
Loa
ai
1. Fill banks shall be seeded. with grass to prevent erosion.
2. The existing trees shall be _ preserved where feasible;.
3. Dust control measures shall be employed during construction.
SUGGESTED MITIGATION MEASUPLE
1. In the event that construction activities uncover archaeological
resources not `observable during suvf'ace inspection, of the property,
a Drofessional archaeologw.s't should ,be contacted immediately.
t
� t ,
z
F `
J '
1'
APPENDIX V'
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FO j
(To be
completed by Lead Agency)
77-04•--27"16
BACKGROUND
Various Butte Co.
I. Name of Proponent Butte Counter Publi.. Works
2<• Address and Phone
Do psr�nent
Ntitnber of Pro one
7 County Center DriVe
nova. e, kaek. -
3. Date of Checklist Submitter;
4 • Agency Requirinq Chec}clist
S. Name of Proposal, if applicable
---
Reconstruction of Slc a Woodward Ave.
to ,`3te�.�f er Rd.
II. ZNVIPONMT-1.;1rAL IMPACTS
(Explanatx )ns of ala
on attached sheets.) ��yes" and "maybe" answers are
required
YES MAYBE No
Earth. Will the, proposal,result in significant:
a. Unstable earth conditio)-,..,,.3 or in
changes in
logic: substructures?
l�
b, Disruptions, displacements; com-
paction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change it topography or ground
surface relief ieatUres?
d, Destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or Physical features
e : Increase ,in Wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off
the sate?
f. Changes in deposition or erasion
of beach sands,
or Chan es in Siltation
deposition or erosion which may 'modify
the
channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the
ocean Or any bay, inlet or- 1ake
C' `
Appendix v pa9.e l
of 8
it � i,�, ..:... ...... ...
J
YES 14AAYBE
NO
g. 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
air quality?
AOL
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Significant alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. 'Water. Will thel
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.?
o. Alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
e4 bitdharge into surface waters, or
in any alterht-iOh of surface water
quality, including but hot limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
i
f. Alteration of the directi6h or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground
waters # either through direct additibht
or withdrawals, or through interception
Of an aquifer by cuts or excaVatiohs?
pp 'x Ej-
A ends page 1
YES MAYBE NO
1. Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public
water supplies?
`
i. Exposure of people _or property to
water related hazards such as flooding?
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result
in substantial:
A,. Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, Crops, microflora
and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique
rare or endangered species of plants
t. Introduction of new species of plants
.d
.into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species?
d. 'Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop'.',
5. Animal Lifei will the proposal result in
Substanti 1:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land
animals including r�'tilp fish and
.
shellfish, benthic
orgai —48, insects or
microf±auna)
b4 Reduction sof the =umbers of any unique,
rare or endangered ;;pedes of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier to
the
Migration or movement of animals?
d. POteriotation to eXisting fish ar
piildlife habitat?
6. `poise. Will the proposal result in
ubstantial
a. Increases in noise levels?'
b. E tposu,re of people to severe noise levels?
App_end:LX 'r
page 3 cif' 8
YES MAYBE No
7.
Liht and Glare. Will the proposal produce
signxf cant :light or glare?
8.
Land Use.. Will the proposal result in a
~
substantial alteration of the planned land
use of an area?
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result'
in substantial
a;. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?'
bi Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
10.
Risk of U set, Does the proposal involve
a ris c an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticides;, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
11.
Population. Will the proposal significantly
alter the location, distribution., density,
or growth rate of the human population of
'
an area?
12.
Housing. Will the proposal significantly
affect existing housing, or create a
demand for additional housing?'
13.
Transportation/Circulation. till the
proposal result in_"
a Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
be .g
existing parking
facilities, orfects demaadn for new parking?
c. Substantial impact upon exist-inq
transportation systems?
di Significant alterations to present
Patterns of circulation or mbVdment
of people and/or goods
e Alterations to'waberborne rail or
air trait '
,pu
r
Appendix
1' " page Y of 8
J
YES MAYBE NO
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
Vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14 Public Services. Will the
' proposal have
an effect upon, or result in a substantial
need for new or altered governmental services
in any of the following areas:
a.Fi a protection?
b. Pot
r
ice protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational f
ac�.l��.ties?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads^'
f. Other governmental services.?
15 En-- e W 11 the proposal result in
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or
energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing, sources of energy, or requite
the development of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the
Proposal result in a
for new systems, or substantial
Alterat ons to the followingUtilities:
7,itZes;
a. power or natural gas?
b. COmmunicatians systems?
c. Water?
d Sewer?
17. Human Heal::th-. Wa.11 the
proposal resu.l,t in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard
(excluding mental, health
Via. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
Apendx p -page 5 of 8
•M
YES
MAYBE No
18. Aesthetics. Will thero osal. result
p P tin the
�.
obstruction of any public designated or
recognized scenic vista open to the public,
or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality, or quantity of
existing public recreational facilities?
20. Archeological/llistorical. Will the proposal
result in an alterata,on of a significant
archeological or historical site, structure
object or building?
21. Mandatary Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,.
substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below
self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important
examples of 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 lon7�term
environmental
goals?
C. Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumula-
Lively considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more separate resources
where the on each resource is
.impact
relatively small, but where the effect
of 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 bein.gs,,
either directly or Lndirectly
4;r appendix V -
page 6 of 8
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This project is the reconstruction of the Skyway f -"Om Woodward .,avenue
to Steiffer Road near Paradise Pines. The road construction
improvements and widening of about '1.03 miles of the Skyway. ent '°�Lls
landscapectleng the right-of-way for the road project co ists oto Mixed
coniferous species including white fir and ponderosa
are quite steep in some areas, par�ticulsriy an the westnside oi'e; the s t des
Skyway.
The surrounding land uses includti conventional homes and mobilehomes
community retail and open forester: land.
There is a great deal of Community support for this project. A petition
with about 40Q signatures was submitted in favor of the road reconstruction
to the Board of Supervisors. The Public Works Department has concur
with the petitioners that the project is warranted. TheProposed red
realignments will provide better sight distance for vehiclatraff�v
and •the lett-turn lanes at Colter Wlaay � and -Freemont Drive will provide
safer access for local residents,
complete the work during the summer of 17$ic Works Department plans to
1(b): The 'I.03 mile proic will cover at least 2n OOd square soil with paving. The v, , tg of the S ' q are f'ee't of
on each side of the roa.cYa curves Will be realigned up tobe about w20 feet
from their present positic ,
The road alteratiot h this mountai
excavation and gradinous terrain, wi5.1 include
g � n
some areas to brim the to ,, t6n some curves. Fill may be needed in
g�
3(b): Surf ace avatar rw:.td�p to the level of the existing road:.
...
' .11 increase as more area is
drains, conduits and. the aO paw d. Sterni
p� priate drainage facilities willbe in -
change
into the road recnnstr�ction. The
change substantially; thi8 can be mitigated by�nagepaternsili may
to be installed and through proper ,road: design.
4(a) : Where wil1 be about % trees removed of �'1u'' or, more in
A substantial change in the diversity of plant species is not diameter.
The number of sizable trees, including foreseen:
With the natural Vegetation may be substantial fir, to be removed aloe
unique, rare or y to determine the rose c
11-(b) � w
botan�.cal survey .was .made
endangered plant species. There were ,no rarenora n
dangered plant species visible during a survey by the botanist.
reports that though the `blooms of such plant species Were nisnot rose
Present. nvey, the frits and leaves, should still have been
at the time of his Survey.,
ntP
AppeilaIx F -
Page 7 of
III -- . DISCUSSIOIq 01': F'T'VIROI MENTAL EVALUATION
6(a) : The road improvements may facilitate additior!;al traffic, in -
eluding logging trucks and other large vehicles, thus increasing
no i,se levels in the surrounding area. The noise levels will not
increi,ase substantially in intensity but the frequency may increase a
noticeable amount.
10: The road reconstruction will involve the use of Oil, asphalt grid
other substances with a hazard potential. This impact Will be shoat
term and can be mitigated by the careful handling of Such substances
by the workers.
1'I
The improvements to this Portion of the Skyway may encourage some
Population growth near the project area as well as. to the north. The
Justification for the project is primarily due to increased traffic
y Paradise Pines ma
generated ba
ares .l d other resiaential development in. the
dart' as providing s��fer access for all vehicles using this
SYcyway.,
13(z w Skyway road projoct may
acct, r;.otrided through the area.geAerood more traffic as better
trafllc in the future is likely to�occur gregy rdlessnoff this project
nal
s'Ytce the SkYWay is 'the main road ,serving this part of Butte County:
The traffic counts on the nearest available points show an ADT of 1OpO
on the Skyway to the south of i
1 77) and an .AUT of 5965 on ts intersection with 1:IumbuL Road (October
the Skyway to the north of "As intersection,
With Coutolenc koad (October 1977),
14(e): The project will have an effect on the road maintenance
system of the Butte County Poblc forks pepartment
15(a) As traffic is more readily accommodated on the Skyway, , the
increased use by vehicles will affect fuel. consumptioxa,. The �n.ergy
U80 is an indirect impact of the project and is not seen as significant.
20: An archaeological reconnaissance was conducited to determine the
presence of ar4y cultural resources of historical or archaeological_
significaricP. No c� tura, resources were observed during a site serve
'Richard NIC„ 'ley, District Ax'chaeologist with the Society for California
Archaeplo,j, recommends art�haeoogical cearaxace based on :his findings.
g
r• r
IV. DETERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the bass of this initial evaluation:
R
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a sionifieant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLAIXATION
a s r6o6mmended.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect: on the env? ronment there will not
be a significant effect in th t case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet
have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARA'T'ION
IS RECOMMENDED.
0 I find the proposed ,project MAY have a. significant
effect; on the environment,, and. an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required
Date November 2; 1977
Ur (signature
For: ENVIRONME14TAL REVIEW DEPARTMENT
/j
T.eviowe
Earl D. Neleon
Envirorumental Review Director
MITIGATION MEASURES (See attacht-i zheet
Appendix r page a of 8
MITIGATION nAS jS
Butte County Public Works Department
Recons ruction of SkYWay Woodward Ave. to Steiff ex Rd.
Log # 77~04-27-16
F111 banks shall be seeded with grass to prevent erosion.
2. The OXi8ting trees shall be preserved where f'eafjj`l33.s,
3. Dust control measures shat 1.. be employed during conotru.ction.
S'gGGESTED MITIGATION M AquRE
In the event that construction acts vibes uncover archaeological
resources not observable dur' surface inspection of the property -4
a professional archaeologist should be contacted. immediately.
SOCIETY FOR CALIFORNIA ,ARCHAEOLOGY
District 2 CleAringhoase
september 8:'1977
11'I ,. Earl Nelson) Director
Environmental Rev
ieW Department
#7 County Center drive
tirovf I le, California 95965
Dear Mr. Nelson.,
At your request IT have conducted an archaeological
reconnaissance of three parcels located within Butte
County that .are scheduled for development or construction
projects, The three ,
' listed and described beloyv_,
parce s
resources of d by mysa I f for the presence of cu (sural;
were inspected
historical or. arc, p
haea l ogi ca�! s gr7i f"i codec.
No cultural resources were observed dura m
q y general
surface reconnafissance in which al'i land' surfaces that
could reasonably ber expected to contain visible arch-
aealogicaI values were inspected. The 16 acre parcel
referred to as Vi neya.r.d Acres was systematf ca 1 1 y i nspecte.d
by walking roughly north -south oriented transects spaced
approximately 15-20 meters apart.
In addition to the field inspection, the archaeological
site survey record files at California State University;
Chico were consulted to determine if any archaeological
sites had been previously recorded which are: located
within the parce,i s it!
scion. No archaeologfcal sites
have been recorded. que
Description Of areas surveyed
A. Byrd Construction Co., AP 54-09-22 -approximately
1 /4 acre parcel located West of Clark road and
south of Buachmann AV:e. on the west side of
Paloma Ave.3 Paradise, 'Callf.
B. Vineyard Atres, AP 50-0i321 - approx imate i y 10,
acre grape 'vineyard located on the east side of
Clark iload lu8t south of wherd it intersects
Skyway and east of the SprjR 1 ine, Paradise; Cal If,,,
C. skyway w dj.I ,ing from Woodward l=id. to Stef,'t{er Fid.'
( Butte Cow' Asv <Public Works), parad f se, Ct l i f.
Archaeological clearance i recommended for the three
arcel s described ab+,,
p ve. HorVevershould construction or
development activiti.s uncover archaeological resourdee
not observab It throuq,h surface aspects on' of" the parc I ,
a profess ana,1 arch�'�j,logist should be contacted ftftediately.
xfir6iiMon F4 ,I Rbvrnw Not,
Ifel 106) 6041-92,
SEP 297.�7
rS P A"t l R