Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA/RZ 99-03_PLANNING 3 SEPARATOR SHEET aaN: o31�-sro- �I�S � PROJECT NUMBER: BUTTE COUNTY , LERK OF THE BOARD USE ONLY BOARD OF SUPERVISUIRr S J MEETING DATE: AGENDA TRANSMITTAL AGENDA ITEM: AGENDA TITLE: Russel (GPA) , Mooretown (GPA/RZ), Schuster (GPA/RZ/TSM) t. DEPARTMENT: DDS, PlanningDATE• 4/1 0101 MEETING DATE REDUESTED•h4/24/01, .ti CONTACT: Dan Breedon ___ r- _.- v PHONE:__7601 REGULAR •X ---CONSENT --ro DEPARTMENT SUMMARY AND REQUESTED BOARD ACTION:­' r_; SUMMARY: On the last agenda for .these items. ;Bring forward Action Requested: See attached-.. AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL REQUIRES THE ORIGINAL AND NINE (9) COPIES ATTACH EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM AND OTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION AS NECESSARY Budgetary Impact: Yes . Nom_ CAO OFFICE USE ONLY If yes,complete Budgetary Impact Worksheet on back Budget Transfer Requested: Yes No__y Administrative Office Review If yes,complete Budget Transfer Request Worksheet on back. Administrative Office Staff Contact (Deadline is one business day prior to normal agenda deadline) Will Proposal Require an Agreement: Yes X No 4/5's Vote Required: Yes: No: Auditor-Controller's Number(if required): County Counsel's Approval: Yes No X Date Received by Clerk of Board: Will Proposal Require Additional Personnel: Yes No X Number of Permanent: Temp Extra Help Previous Board Action Date: Additional Information Attached:Yes X No Describe: Rev.I t98 _ 1 ... .. SPEL.,-.L INSTRUCTIONS TO CLEF...:; ,,.'rte' •.x:_ '';s � , ., Number of originals requ'ired�to lie returned to Department:17.3 __ a ' .. * ...., /1; h _.• J: .. ;.yak,: ,,.+ • . '� ,,' .. "-. r,�'y+_�.,,. 1 ; 1i=. 4.?�;<•=1s*' .a..r- ,�_T:.,;• - "Please Note'*Department is responsible for returning contract to contractor.,-Clerk of.the' Board returns completed Auditoei'copy ONLY.'"' ,,I-_< : i�. Requested Board Action: ..,. - Yf,.. Ordinance Required Resolution Required_/Minute Order Required - For Information Only ?`f - ° ' �'1 "MPACBUDGETARY}ITWORKSHEtVc _ {` ' Current Year Estimated Cost/Funding Source I Source of Additional Funds Requested Estimated Cost $ Contingencies $ (Fund Name: ) (Fund Number: ) Amount Budgeted $ Unanticipated Revenue $ (Budget Unit Number: ) (Source: ) (Fund Name: ) (Rev.Code: ) (Fund Number. ) Other Transfer(s) $ 1. Complete worksheet below 2. Deadline Is one business day prior to normal agenda deadline Additional Requested $ Total Source of Funds $ Annualized cost$ if also planned for next year. Budget Transfer Authorized By Administrative Office Board Action Required for B-Transfer? Yes No Authorized Signature Date BUDGET TRANSFER REQUEST WORKSHEET Transfer Request: AMOUNT LINE ITEM LINE ITEM t Transfer S (No Cents)From To Transfer S (No Cents)From To Transfer S (No Cents)From To Transfer$ (No Cents)From To TABLE OF CONTENTS Board Agenda Form Board Agenda Memo PAGE Attachment A: Actions for Consideration 1 Attachment B: Joint Resolution for Russell, Mooretown Rancheria, and Schuster Projects 42 Attachment C: Rezone Ordinance for Mooretown Rancheria, and Schuster Projects 155 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION To: Honorable Chair and Board of Supervisors From: Daniel C. Breedon, Senior Planner Subject: Joint Actions & Resolution Amending the General Plan Russell General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-01) Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone (GPA/RZ 99-03) Schuster General Plan Amendment.and Rezone (GPA/RZ 01-05),and Tentative Subdivision Map (APL 01-06, TSM 00-03) Date: April 24, 2001 Attachments: A. Actions for Consideration B. Joint Resolution for Russell, Mooretown Rancheria and Schuster Projects C. Rezone Ordinance for Mooretown Rancheria and Schuster Projects On February 27, 2001, the Board of Supervisors passed a motion of intent to approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezone for the Mooretown Rancheria, on March 13, 2001, the Board passed a motion of intent to approve a General Plan amendment for Robert Russell, and on March 27,2001, the Board passed a motion of intent to approve a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Tentative Subdivision Map for Stephen Schuster. A joint action and resolution has been provided for these projects. Section 65358 (b) of the Government Code limits the County from making more than four amendments to the General Plan each calender year. Two General Plan Amendments are conserved by. combining the resolution amending the General Plan for each of these projects. These amendments may be used later in the calender year, if necessary. Staff recommends approval of the Russell General Plan Amendment, Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment/Rezone and the Schuster.General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Tentative Subdivision Map, with findings. K:\PLANNING\PROJECTS\GPA\IVIOORETOW.GPA\JOINT.FRM 0 Joint Actions ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Russell General Plan Amendment: I. Adopt a Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts,with the following findings:, A. Find that an Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, that said study did not.identify any significant environmental effects, and a Negative Declaration is proposed. B. Find that the Board of Supervisors has considered the proposed Negative . Declaration, together with comments received during the public review process. C. Find,on the basis of the whole record before the Board of Supervisors,including the Initial Study and any comments received,that there is no substantial evidence that the General Plan Amendment for Robert Russell will have a significant effect on the environment. D. Find that the proposed Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the County, which is the Lead Agency. II. Adopt a "de minimus" exemption regarding impact to fish and wildlife. The design of the proposed project improvements will not cause environmental damage to fish and wildlife or their habitat,and the collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) and 14 CCR 753.5. is not required. The project site is not known to contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project will not: have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat; have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected'wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act;interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; or, conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. III. Find the General Plan Amendment in the public interest in accordance with California Government Code Section 65358 based upon the following factors: A. The project will not result in the loss of significant amounts of grazing land. B. Grazing uses will still be possible on the two potential 29+ acre parcels. IV. Adopt a Joint Resolution amending the General Plan from Grazing and Open Land to Agricultural-Residential, on property identified as a 25-acre portion of APN 073-110-036, Planning Division file GPA 01-01, with the following findings: A. Policy 2.2.a. of.the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element states that extensive areas for primary use as livestock grazing land be maintained. The change from GOL to AR is not expected to have a significant impact on livestock grazing on the site. Livestock grazing will still be possible. B. Policy 2.2.b. of the Butte County Land Use Element states that livestock grazing be allowed.on all suitable sites not needed for development or crop production. The soils on the site have severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation,but are fairly well-suited for grazing. C. Policy 2.2.e. of the Land Use Element states that Grazing and Open Land category areas on the Land Use Map be retained where location and natural conditions make lands well suited for grazing land. The majority of the site is heavily vegetated with numerous pines, cedars, firs, oaks, and extensive brush. Overall, the site is limited for livestock grazing due to the heavy vegetation. D. The characteristics of the project site-beyond service areas of community water and sewer systems, less than 30% slopes, adjacent or near to existing roads and public utilities, and not within floodplains or known active faults - meet the criteria for inclusion into the requested General Plan designation of Agricultural Residential. Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone: I. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts with the following findings: A. Find that an Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, that said study identified significant environmental effects and includes mitigation measures that would mitigate such effects below significant levels, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. B. Find that the Board of Supervisors has considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received during the review process. C. Find, on the basis of the whole record before the Board of Supervisors, including the Initial Study and any comments received,.that there is no substantial evidence that the Mooretown Rancheria Rezone and General Plan Amendment,Planning Division File No. GPA/RZ 99-03, as mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment. D. Find that the proposed mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent . judgment and analysis of the County, which is the Lead Agency. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 2 ■ E. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts, with Mitigation Measures 1 thru 5, as detailed in the Agenda Report dated February 27, 2001. II. Adopt a "de minimus" exemption regarding impact to fish and wildlife: The design of the proposed project improvements will not cause environmental damage to fish and wildlife or their habitat,and the collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) and 14 CCR 753.5. is not required. The project site is not known to'contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S.Fish and Wildlife Service. The project will not: have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat; have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act;interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; or, conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. III. Find that the proposed General Plan Amendment is in the public interest in accordance with California Government Code Section 65358 as supported by the following: A. The lack of adequate parking in the area of the Mooretown Rancheria and Feather Falls Casino causes congestion and illegal parking along private roads and in unimproved fields. This creates a hazardous situation that can be alleviated by the construction of an adequate formal parking.area. B. The proposed amendment to the General Plan will allow for the construction of a parking lot, which is needed to meet public parking demand for the Feather Falls Casino complex. IV. Adopt a Joint Resolution amending the General Plan from Low Density Residential to Commercial and, adopt an Ordinance rezoning from AR (Agricultural Residential) to C-1 (Light commercial)property identified as a 5.45-acre portion of APN: 036=310-162,subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached to the Zoning Ordinance as Exhibit"A",with the following findings: A. The proposed C-1 (Light Commercial) zone is consistent with the proposed Commercial General Plan designation. B. Although the proposal will result in the loss of 5.45 acres of land now designated for Low Density Residential uses by the General Plan, there is no impact to housing availability in the area, as supported by the following: 1. It is unlikely that additional dwellings may be developed at this site without full sewer service being provided to the area. This area is currently not ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 3 ■ provided with sewer service, and the Environmental Health.Department indicates that on-site disposal of sewage is very difficult due to the poor soil . conditions of the area. 2. The Mooretown Rancheria is in the process of providing additional housing for tribe members within the Rancheria itself. Through this planning process, adequate housing will be provided for the Rancheria community,and the loss of residential land represented by this proposal will not significantly affect housing availability in the area. C. Visual impacts will be mitigated through the inclusion of Mitigation Measures#1, which requires that all lighting fixtures be directed downward and not exceed the height of mature trees, and that lighting be contained within the parking lot boundaries, and Mitigation Measure#2;which requires landscaping to be-installed in accordance with an approved Landscaping Plan. D. Air Quality will be protected through the inclusion of Mitigation Measure#3,which requires that construction areas be watered or treated with a soil palliative to prevent fugitive dust conditions. E. Runoff generated by the proposed parking lot will be mitigated through the inclusion of Mitigation Measure #5 , which requires a drainage plan that shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on-site and/or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility, and that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. F. Erosion shall be mitigated by the inclusion of Mitigation Measure#4, which requires that all cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height created during parking lot construction shall be stabilized with a native grass seed mix or hydroseed application. G. The Mooretown Rancheria has been required to submit fair-share contributions for off-site road improvements in order to maintain adequate traffic flow and circulation for the Feather Falls Casino complex. Any traffic impact from the proposed parking lot associated with this General Plan Amendment and Rezone has been mitigated by the work completed and scheduled by the Department of Public Works. These improvements include the widening of Lower Wyandotte Road to include a continuous left-hand turn lane and signalization of the intersections of Lower Wyandotte,Ophir,and Upper Palermo Roads and the intersection of Ophir Road and Lincoln Boulevard. With the exception of the signalization of Ophir Road and Lincoln Boulevard, the work has been completed to the .satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The Ophir Road/Lincoln Boulevard signalization is scheduled for the Summer of 2001, according to the Department of Public Works. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ Apri124,2001 ■ PAGE 4 ■ Stephen J. Schuster General Plan Amendment,Rezone,and Tentative Subdivision Map: I. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, with the following findings: A. Find that this project has been reviewed for consistency with the adopted North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP) goals and polices and utilizes the adopted Certified. Environmental Impact Report (CEIR) prepared for the NCSP as 'the -basic environmental document. The NCSP is a mixed-use large scale development plan, which serves as a broad-reaching site planning tool for larger developments in the unincorporated North Chico area. These documents were adopted by the Board of Supervisors in March of 1995. Pursuant to Government Code Section 21083.3,if an EIR has been certified for the adoption of a Specific Plan, the application of CEQA shall be limited to effects upon the environment which are peculiar to the parcel or to the project and which were not addressed as significant effects in the prior CEIR. Based upon an Initial Study and Mitigation Measures prepared for this project, and a review of the North Chico Specific Plan CEIR, the project's impact is fully mitigated by the North Chico Specific Plan policies and by the identified mitigation measures for this project. B. Find that an Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act,and that said initial study identified significant potential environmental effects, that revisions in the project made by, or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study were released for public review would avoid the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. C. Find that the Board of Supervisors has considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received during the public review process. D. Find, on the basis of the whole record before the Board of Supervisors,including the Initial Study and comments received pertaining to it,the Agenda Report dated March 27, 2001, and all other oral and documentary evidence received,.that there is no substantial evidence that the Tentative Subdivision Map and General Plan Amendment and Rezone for Stephen J. Schuster, Planning Division File Nos. GPA/RZ 00-05 & TSM 00-03, as mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment. E. Find that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the County, which is the Lead Agency. F. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts, with Mitigation Measures 1 - 7, as detailed in the Agenda Report dated March 27, 2001, . and authorize the Chair to sign. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0 ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 5 ■ II. Adopt a"de minimus"exemption regarding impact to fish and wildlife or their habitat. The design of the proposed project improvements will not cause environmental damage to fish and wildlife or their habitat. The collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3)and 14 CCR 753.5.is not required.The project site is not known to contain'any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S.Fish'and Wildlife Service. The project will not: have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat; have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act;interfere substantially with the movement of any native -- resident or migratory fish or wildlife species;conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources;.or, conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. III. Approve, by 4/5ths vote, findings supporting an override of the Airport Land Use Commission's finding of inconsistency of TSM 00-03 and GPA/RZ 00-05 with the 1978 Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan (CMAEP), as amended October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999,as outlined below. The Board of Supervisors hereby makes the findings required by Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676, as supported by those specific . findings set forth below, which findings are incorporated herein and support the conclusion that approval of the Schuster General Plan Amendment,Rezone,and Tentative Subdivision Map (Schuster project), as designed and conditioned, will not create any new noise and safety problems near the Chico Municipal Airport(CMA). Furthermore,the approval of the Schuster project, as conditioned, includes land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise, overflight and safety hazards and provide airspace protection. These conclusions are supported by the detailed information contained in the administrative record. Therefore, the approval of the Schuster project is consistent with the purposes of Article 3.5 of Chapter 4 of Part I of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code, as stated in Public Utilities Code Section 21670. III. 1 ALUC FINDINGS A. Inconsistency findings: 1. The proposed project is inconsistent with the 1978 CMAEP, as amended on October 21, 1998, and December 29, 1999, as follows: a. A portion of the proposed project is located in Overflight Protection Zone A. This area is subject to frequent low altitude overflight activity. No new residential uses are permitted within this zone. The proposed project shows one parcel and the majority of two other parcels, planned for single-family residential use, in this zone. b. A portion of the proposed project is located in Overflight Protection Zone B. This area is subject to less intensive overflight activity. No ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 6 ■ new single-family development is allowed,but multi=family uses may be permitted in this zone. The proposed project shows three parcels and the majority of four other parcels, planned for single-family residential use, in this zone. C. The balance of the proposed development is in Safety Zone 6(Traffic Pattern Zone). This area permits residential development at a density not.to exceed 1 dwelling unit per 2.5 acres. Inconsistent with that,the proposed project shows residential lots ranging from 1.0 to 1.3 acres- in size within this zone. 2. Approval of the project as proposed would necessitate the adoption of Overriding Findings by a 2/3'vote of the governing body. Overriding Findings by the governing body can only be made based on substantiated facts and must be supported by new substantial factual evidence introduced into the public record that the proposed action is consistent with the State Aeronautics Act as stated in Section 21670. Overriding Findings cannot be adopted as matters of opinion, hearsay, or upon the unsubstantiated fears and desires of the governing body. B. Project Requirements for Consistences If the applicant wishes to revise the development proposal to conform with the requirements of the 1978 CMAEP, as amended on October 21, 1998,and December 29, 1999, the following conditions shall apply: 1. The lot design shall be amended to show no single family residential building sites within either Overflight Protection Zone A or B.' No residential lot for a single family dwelling shall be less than 2.5 acres in gross size. 2. A condition shall be required on the Final Map stating that prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the CMA in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts. C. Additional Findings: 1. Airspace Protection The Commission finds that due to the topography of the project, there are no transitional surface problems. The subject property is located slightly below the airport surface with approximately 188 feet between the ground level and ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ Apri124,2001 ■ PAGE 7 ■ the horizontal surface. Approach surfaces would not be affected due to topography or future development. a. A condition should be included on the Final Map stating that any project-related lighting shall be directed within the project site and shielded to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent properties and aircraft flight activities. b. A condition should be included as part of the proposed rezone or future parcel map stating that uses which have the potential to create visual,electronic,or physical flight hazards including the generation of dust,smoke,glare,electronic interference;or the attraction of birds to the project area shall be avoided. 2. Safety Accident scatter information adopted as part of the October 21, 1998, CMAEP Amendment,Exhibit D(Hodges and Shutt-1993 and UC Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies - 1993) indicates that the highest concentration of both departure- and arrival-related aircraft accidents takes place within the Runway Protection Zone and Approach Surface off the ends of the runway and on either side of the runway. Due to the project site's location away from these runway areas, no special conditions are necessary for safety purposes provided that the recommended residential density is adhered to. III.2 OVERRIDE FINDINGS On September 20,2000,the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission(ALUC)reviewed the Schuster project application for consistency with the 1978 CMAEP as amended on October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999. While the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook(CalTrans Handbook)identifies four functional categories for determining airport land use compatibility: Safety, Overflight, Noise and Airspace Protection, ALUC only reviewed the Schuster project application on September 20, 2000 for consistency with the amended CMAEP regarding policies to address Safety,Overflight and Airspace Protection. However, because the CalTrans Handbook discusses Noise compatibility in addition to Safety, Overflight and Airspace Protection, the following override findings address all four issues in order to factually demonstrate that approval of the Schuster project by the Board of Supervisors meets all Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676 requirements: A. Safety and Overflight. 1. On December 29, 1999 and October 21, 1998, ALUC amended the 1978 CMAEP after deciding that the standards within the CMAEP should be ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS 0 April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 8 ■ modified to carry out the intent of the State Aeronautics Act. The 1999 CMAEP amendment modified Overflight Protection Zone(OPZ)"A","A-1", and`B"previously established under the 1998 CMAEP Amendment. Under the 1999 amendment,limited portions of the Schuster property are located in OPZ's "A" and "B" (approximately 1.75 developable acres (3% of the site) are within OPZ"A"and approximately 5 developable acres (11%)of the site are within OPZ`B"). Zones "A" and "B" in the 1999 CMAEP Amendment, purport to completely prohibit new single family dwelling uses. The balance of the site proposed for development(approximately 26.5 developable acres (60% of the site))is located outside of OPZ's "A" and`B". Under the_1999 CMAEP Amendment,this remaining 26.5 acres may only be developed at a minimum parcel size of 2.5 acres per dwelling unit. The entire 43.83-acre site is located within the CalTrans Safety Zone 6 "Traffic Pattern Zone" (TPZ)which specifies appropriate residential dwelling unit densities adjacent to airports. 2. The Schuster project was reviewed. by ALUC on September 20, 2000 for consistency with the 1978 CMAEP as amended in 1998 and 1999. Following that review, ALUC made findings that the Schuster project was not compatible with the CMAEP and ALUC determined that in order to approve the project, the Butte County Board of Supervisors (Board), would have to make overriding findings pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676. 3. Approximately 14% of the southern portion of the Schuster property lies within OPZ"A"and`B"as identified in the 1999 CMAEP Amendment. In the CalTrans Handbook in Chapter 3 "Types of Compatibility Concerns" at pages 3-1 through 3-12, in its discussions of "Overflight", the CalTrans Handbook states on pages 3-8 to 3-10, that"[t]his category of compatibility concern is not one for which many ALUCs have adopted criteria or policies ...The compatibility objective associated with overflight impacts is not easily expressed in land use planning terms. It can perhaps be stated as being to help people with above-average sensitivity to aircraft overflights—people who are highly annoyed by overflights." Annoyance is also discussed under the heading of "Noise" in Section `B"of these override findings. "The ideal land use compatibility strategy with respect to overflight annoyance is to avoid development of residential areas in the affected locations. To the extent that this approach is not practical, the alternative is (sic) make people better aware of the airport's proximity before they move to the area. This can be accomplished through buyer awareness measures such as: —Dedication of avigatioh or overflight easements; ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0 ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 1i PAGE 9 ■ 0 —Recorded deed notices; and/or —Real estate disclosure statements." (CalTrans Handbook,pages 3-8 to 3-9.) 4. To assure CMA safety and overflight compatibility, the Board requires that the Schuster project incorporate the following language as conditions of approval: —Prior to recordation of final map, enhanced disclosure measures shall be developed and implemented to alert prospective home buyers and rental tenants as to the proximity of the CMA. Disclosure measures shall be in place before any lots are sold and include: the existence of avigation easements, the existing and projected future overflight and noise levels,and such related issues as are appropriate to fully inform such prospective home buyer or rental tenant. Enhanced disclosure may be modeled on Butte County Code,Chapter 35 Protection of Agricultural Land. —Prior to recordation of final map, conduct a noise analysis and establish construction standards that will result in interior noise levels of 45 decibels or less in all homes within the subdivision. —Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "As a condition for the issuance of any Building Permit on these parcels the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts." By incorporating these CalTrans-supported criteria into project conditions of approval, the Board of Supervisors has determined that overflight and safety concerns are adequately addressed making this an "acceptable form of development"as described in the CalTrans Handbook on pages 3-8 and 3-9. For this reason, a complete prohibition on residential development within OPZ "A" and "B" on the Schuster property is unnecessary to satisfy the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 21670. Thus,the Board of Supervisors concludes that a complete prohibition of new single-family residential dwellings is not only not practical, but clearly not necessary if the CalTrans-recommended measures are followed. In this case, the Schuster conditions of approval minimize potential incompatibility with ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 10 ■ the airport by already incorporating the recommended buyer awareness measures. Because of the inclusion of these several buyer awareness measures in the conditions of approval,the Schuster application incorporates the other adequate "compatibility strategies" recommended by CalTrans which make the project compatible with the CMA without'the need to avoid residential development in this location. .5. For the remaining approximately 86% of the Schuster property which is located outside of OPZ "A" and `B" within the Traffic Pattern Zone as identified in the 1999"CMAEP Amendment" Drawing CIC-14 and in the CalTrans Handbook in Figure 9G at page 9-16,the discussion of"Acceptable Forms of Development" states that: Traffic Pattern Zone -- Within other portions of the airport area routinely overflown by aircraft, the potential for aircraft accidents is relatively low and the need for land use restrictions is thus minimal. . . . Only very large assemblies of people -- in the 150 or more people-per-acre range -- need to be avoided. . . . Typical residential subdivision densities of 410 6 dwelling units-per-acre are acceptable from a safety perspective. . .Even higher densities may be reasonable, especially if development is clustered to provide open space. The Schuster project conditions of approval limit residential densities to 30 lots on 43.83 acres for an average density of nearly'1.5 acres per residential dwelling unit, well below levels acceptable under the CalTrans criteria whereby: "[t]ypical residential subdivision densities of 4 to 6 dwelling units-per-acre are acceptable . . ." within the Traffic Pattern Zone. Based upon these CalTrans acceptability criteria,the Board of Supervisors has determined that one residential dwelling unit per an average 1.5 acres on the Schuster property outside of OPZ Zones "A" and `B" within the Traffic Pattern Zone is an acceptable form of development satisfying the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 21670,as recommended in the CalTrans Handbook on pages 9-21 through 9-23. For this reason, a limitation of one residential dwelling unit per 2.5 acres as required by ALUC in the 1999 CMAEP Amendment within the Traffic PatternZone is unnecessary. 6. The Schuster subdivision map incorporates a condition of approval which requires that: —"Prior to Final Map recording, the Developer shall deed to the Chico Area Recreation&Parks District Lot"B"as shown on the tentative map for the purposes of establishing a neighborhood park." ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 11 ■ Lot `B" is a neighborhood park site re-located from the north end of the project site to a location along the southern boundary of the site bordering Keefer Slough where the park will be combined with roadways and a drainage detention basin which action will serve the multiple purposes of creek.corridor wildlife habitat and recreational trail expansion, flood plain protection, improved on-site sewage disposal, and providing an emergency landing area for aircraft before they flyover the subdivision, which ALUC staff acknowledges: The proposed changes to the General Plan and Zoning are more compatible with airport operations than the existing plan layout. By moving the park area adjacent to Keefer Slough,more non-residential acreage is placed in the more restrictive Overflight Protection Zones A and B.The project changes do have one positive feature,potential useable open space for emergency landings. The combined park, roadway,and drainage detention basin provide an area approximately 250 feet wide and 1,400 feet long. (ALUC staff report, September 20, 2000, at page 2.) The retention of open space and some use of clustering residential dwellings in the Schuster project are recommended by CalTrans as acceptable strategies to improve the compatibility of residential development within all CalTrans safety zones, including the Traffic Pattern Zone. The CalTrans Handbook, on page 9-24, in its discussion of "Clustering Versus Spreading of Development," acknowledges that: . . . [T]radeoffs between safety and economic concerns usually dictate some amount of development near airports. . . . The premise behind the concept of clustering is that, in most off-airport mishaps, the aircraft are under some degree of control when forced to land. Clustering thus allows a greater amount of open space towards which the pilot can aim. In addition to reducing the risks for people on the ground, open space also provides benefits for aircraft occupants. Regarding the Traffic Pattern Zone specifically,the CalTrans Handbook states on page 9-27, ... . . 10% to 15% useable open space or an open area approximately every 1/4 to 1/2 mile should be provided." Because the project design and conditions of approval specify the retention of a 6.71- acre P-Q zone and 0.73-acre OS zone along the project's southern boundary along Keefer Slough, which amount to a total of 7.44 acres of open space (17% of the project area), the Board of Supervisors hereby determines that the goals ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 12 ■ and objectives of Public Utilities Code 21670 to minimize the public's exposure to excessive safety, overflight (and noise) hazards are already accomplished by the Schuster project design and conditions of approval. 7. In Exhibit D (Drawing CIC-17) and Exhibit E (Drawing CIC-18) in the October 21, 1998 CMAEP amendment, which have been incorporated into the 1999 CMAEP amendment, and which were adapted from the CalTrans Handbook and the University of California Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies (1993), ALUC alleges that these exhibits identify-- areas with "particular safety-related concerns." When the text and Exhibit 8F, "Accident Sites for Runways of 6,000 Feet or More," in the CalTrans Handbook are referenced to explain the meaning of ALUC 1998 CMAEP Amendment Exhibits D and E in Drawings CIC-17 and CIC-18,respectively, the CalTrans Handbook states on pages 8-32 and 9-26 that, "Accidents in which aircraft are under control are bunched relatively close to the runway ends -- mostly within about 3,000 feet--both for arrivals and departures. . . These observations lead to the following suggested criteria: . . . Traffic Pattern Zone--Within other portions of the airport area routinely overflown by aircraft, the potential for aircraft accidents is relatively low and the need for land use restrictions is thus minimal. . . Typical residential subdivision densities of 4 to 6 dwelling units per acre are acceptable from a safety perspective. . . 10%to 15% usable open space or an open area approximately every 1/4 to 1/2 mile should be provided. . . ." As described previously in these findings,particular safety-related concerns are minimized by the design and conditions of approval for the Schuster project so that the Schuster property no longer needs to be identified as an area with particular safety-related concerns. For example, residential land uses at densities greater than one(1) unit per acre, will not be allowed within 3,700 feet from the centerline of the existing main runway, as the Schuster project is located approximately 1 1/4 miles from the CMA, thus limiting the potential for complaints of incompatibility with airport uses. Furthermore, the Board of Supervisors finds that, because the 7.44 acres of open space provided by.the P-Q and OS zoning exceed that amount recommended by CalTrans for residential developments within the Traffic Pattern Zone, where the Schuster project is located, safety and overflight, as well as noise, and air space protection concerns, are reduced well below CalTrans' recommended thresholds to ensure airport compatibility. 8. Based upon the location of the Schuster project within the Traffic Pattern Zone, CalTrans data further demonstrates that the safety hazard risk for all accident sites -- arrivals and departures -- is minimal. Specifically, the CalTrans Handbook indicates on page 9-17 that for.airports with runways of 6,000 feet or more, the chance of all aircraft accidents within the Traffic Pattern Zone is 0.02% per acre in Table 9A, "Safety Compatibility Issues." ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 PAGE 13 ■ Because the likelihood of an aircraft accident is so low, about 2/100 of 1% anywhere within a full one-acre area,the Board of Supervisors finds that the likelihood of am aircraft accident involving any particular residential dwelling represents.an exceptionally low safety risk, well within the acceptable limits recommended by the CalTrans Handbook. 9. Regarding whether the Schuster project creates a safety or overflight concern posing any threat to continued firefighting air tanker operations at the CMA, Mr.: John Hawkins, Division Chief Butte Ranger Unit, Butte County Fire- Department and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, stated in his testimony before the Board of Supervisors on March 27,2001, that the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Butte County Fire Department find no potential negative impact resulting from the Board's approval of the proposed Schuster subdivision. Based upon Mr.Hawkins' testimony and all of the reasons described in these findings, the Board of Supervisors hereby concludes that establishment and application of the OPZ"A"and"B"zones by ALUC on October 21, 1998 as updated by ALUC on December 29, .1999,along with ALUC's corresponding policies and measures are unnecessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare, as well.as to protect the continued viability of aircraft operations to and from the CMA. Furthermore, the Board concludes that because the Schuster project design and conditions of approval already include the several significant land use measures described herein which minimize the public's exposure to excessive safety, overflight(and noise)hazards, approval of the project by the Board is in compliance with Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676. B. Noise. 1. The 1995 CMA FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program and Environs Plan (FAR Part 150) states on pages I-5 and I-8 that the General Plans of Chico and.Butte County set forth maximum exterior noise levels for residential and other noise-sensitive uses to be a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL/Ldn) of 65 decibels (dB). The intent of these' standards is to establish guidelines and methods for determining the acceptability of specific land uses with respect to various noise levels since these levels usually allow normal outdoor and indoor activities, such as communication and sleep,to occur without interruption. CNEL 65 dB is the criterion noise level above which residential and other noise-sensitive land uses.(e.g., schools, churches, hospitals and libraries) should not be allowed unless noise attenuating construction is utilized. Table III-1, "Recommended Land Use Compatibility Designations-CMA" from FAR Part 150, states that residential land uses are compatible in areas exposed to a CNEL of up to 70 ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 10 PAGE 14 0 dB, but recommends that.measures to achieve outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction levels (NLR) of at least 25 dB and 30 dB should be incorporated into building codes and be considered in individual approvals. According to the FAR Part 150 study,the maximum amount of noise to which any portion of the Schuster project site is exposed,even projected for the year 2010, is a CNEL of less than 55 dB. All 43.83 acres of the Schuster project site lie outside of the 55 dB noise contour as demonstrated in Exhibit I-3, "Noise Exposure Map: 2010 Forecast Conditions," and Exhibit III-1, "Airport Noise Compatibility Plan" to the FAR Part 150 study. 2. As explained previously, in Exhibit B (Drawing CIC-15) to the October 21, 1998 CMAEP amendment, ALUC sought to amend the 1978 CMAEP by combining the "CNEL Noise Contours" (Drawing CIC-3) in the 1978 CMAEP with the CalTrans Safety Zones described above. The noise contours from CIC-3, which were prepared in 1978, have been shown by much more recent analysis to be an overly optimistic view of future air traffic increases at the CMA. In an "Aviation Activity Forecast" prepared by P& D Aviation (P & D) as part of the Aircraft Noise Exposure Map Report in 1992, it was revealed that the Federal Aviation Administration's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) growth forecast was in excess of 5% per year for Chico airport expansion. This underlying assumption for the noise contours in CIC-3 of the 1978 CMAEP is now "believed to be an overly-optimistic view of future air traffic potential." (P&D,p.III-10.) The result being that, "[t]he 1978 Environs Plan [CMAEP] forecasts have proven to be highly optimistic." (Ibid.) Based upon more current and more precise data,P&D also considered an "Enhanced Growth Forecast" for the CMA to seek to determine a more accurate upper range for aircraft activity that more realistically might result from increased aircraft activity at the CMA. The Enhanced Growth Forecast assumed the commencement of a Flight Training Center at the CMA by the year 1995. Flight training operations were assumed to increase at an average annual rate of 3%per year through the year 2010 forecast period. (P&D,Exhibit III-1 on p. 9 and pp. III-12 to III-14.) At the end of first quarter of 2001, a flight training facility still has not yet been established. "The Enhanced Growth Forecast provides for the introduction of approximately 5,000 annual operations of turboprop aircraft operations (e.g., Beech King Air) by the year 2000. . . . The Enhanced Growth Forecast also includes allowances for yet additional flight operations of multi-engine aircraft for several classes of general aviation users. . . . Allows for greater use by heavy turboprop. . . . For example, expanded aerial firebomber operations or additional corporate aviation. . . . The potential for greater levels of corporate turbojet activity is also provided for in the "Enhanced Growth Forecast." (Ibid.) The Enhanced Growth scenario resulted in a total of approximately 173,000 total annual aircraft operations in the year ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 15 ■ 2010 for the CMA. (P&D,Exhibit III-2 on page III-16.) The 1978 CMAEP assumed a total of 250,000 annual aircraft operations in the year 2010. (Ibid.) (This is 77,000 fewer operations or 31% less than the assumptions which . created the noise contours in Drawing CIC-3 of the CMAEP that were relied upon in Drawing CIC-15 by ALUC on October 21, 1998.) P & D also analyzed in the same study an '.'Indigenous Demand Forecast" projecting growth based upon actual annual aircraft operations at the CMA. The Indigenous Demand Forecast projected a total of approximately 130,000 annual aircraft operations in the year 2010. (Ibid.) (This is 120,000 fewer operations or 52% less than the assumptions which created the noise contours in Drawing CIC-3 which were relied upon in Drawing CIC-15 by ALUC on October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999.) 3. Based upon this expert analysis,P&D concludes that, "[i]t is very important to note that available annual airport capacity greatly exceeds the 20-year . forecast for aircraft operations under both the indigenous and enhanced growth scenarios." (P&D,p. III-15.) This means that under either current total aircraft operations, or a more realistic forecast of future growth, total aircraft operations at the CMA fall far short of the much higher total aircraft operations assumption reflected in the noise contours in Drawing CIC-3 of the 1978 CMAEP which comprise the noise contours now relied upon by ALUC in Exhibit B (Drawing CIC-14) to the October 21,1998 and December 29, 1999 CMAEP Amendments. ALUC chose not to incorporate portions of the 1995 FAR Part 150.study in its 1998 and 1999 Safety and Overflight analysis and not to incorporate the updated Noise analysis from the same 1995 study found on Exhibit I-3, "Noise Exposure Map: 2010 Forecast Conditions" and Exhibit III-1, "Airport Noise Compatibility Plan." A portion of Exhibit III-1 was incorporated into ALUC Exhibit A (Drawing CIC-14) and ALUC Exhibit B (Drawing CIC-15) in the October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999 ALUC CMAEP Amendments which establish the Overflight Protection Zone. However,the noise contours in Exhibit III-1, which are based.on better data and are 17 years more current, were.not incorporated. The failure to incorporate these noise contours is quite significant and appears extremely arbitrary,especially since ALUC has repeatedly stated in writing, in the administrative record to the 1998 amendment process, that the entire 1978 CMAEP, including noise contours, is"terribly outdated." The Board of Supervisors chooses to rely on the much more recent and reliable data found in the 1995 FAR Part 150 program, as well as the 1992 Aviation Activity Forecast for the CMA by P & D, to more accurately determine airport noise compatibility. Both of these more recent studies ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 16.■ conclude that,even after taking into account future growth scenarios for the CMA, the Schuster project is compatible with CMA operations. 4. In the March 27,2001 Board hearing,Norman Rosene,ALUC Chairman,and Brian Baldridge of the North Valley Pilots Association testified that the Schuster project site is likely to be exposed to single-event noise levels and other episodes which exceed ."normally acceptable" noise .levels for residential development. Potential single-event noise level generators were identified by Mr. Rosene and Mr. Baldridge as CDF air tanker operations during campaign fires,commercial passenger aircraft,Aero Union and other businesses under contract with CDF and the U. S. Department of Forestry which periodically run up aircraft engines at night for the purposes of aircraft engine maintenance and operational testing. No known or estimated decibel levels were specified by Mr. Rosene or Mr. Baldridge and no identifiable noise studies were cited by them to support their contentions. To the contrary, the Board of Supervisors chooses to rely upon the 1993 CalTrans Handbook at Page 6-27 in its discussion of ambient and single-event noise entitled, "Sleep Disturbance," which states that: A British study (UK Department of Transport-- 1992)found that an average person has only a 1 in 75 chance of being awakened by an aircraft noise in the outdoor range of 90 dB to 100 dB SEL. Allowing for the noise level reduction of the structure,this indicates that indoor single-event sound levels of 70 dB to 80 dB will cause less than a 2% chance of sleep disturbance. Based upon this recent British study and other supporting analysis in Chapter 6 of the CalTrans Handbook, the Board of Supervisors finds that the likelihood of ambient and single-event.noise, even at extreme 90 dB to 100 dB SEL outdoor ranges to which people might be exposed during summer months with open windows at nighttime, present no more than minimal public exposure to noise. While other studies mentioned in the CalTrans Handbook indicate that higher percentages of the population may be awakened by indoor single-event sound levels of 70 dB,CalTrans states that the 1992 British Study is equally reliable and"the discrepancies among these studies can probably be accounted for by the differences in the way people sleep in'their own homes verses in a laboratory setting (people are more likely to be awakened by noise in a laboratory setting than in a familiar, home environment) (pg. 6-27)." Furthermore, the main sources of single-event noise, Aero Union, CDF, and other industries, are located on the east side of the CMA some two miles or more from the project which is located on the west side of the CMA. This significant distance is expected to further attenuate noise at the project site. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0 ACTIONS 0 April 24, 2001 �. PAGE 17 0 Finally, the entire project site lies outside of the 55 dB noise contour, which all studies cited by CalTrans and elsewhere acknowledge is acceptable noise exposure for residential development, such that noise exposure due to airport . activities is not a concern at the project site. 5. In the past,ALUC has relied upon Exhibit 4-4, "Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments".found on page 4-33 of the 1978 CMAEP for the premise that noise levels for residential land uses are "normally acceptable" up to CNEL 60 dB. However, Exhibit 4-4 also states that exposure of residential land uses to CNEL up to 70 dB is also acceptable if new construction or development is conditioned to require noise reduction and noise insulation features in housing design. Exhibit 4-4 also states that, "[c]onventional construction,but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice" by itself to keep noise levels in the acceptable range -- even without noise reduction and noise insulation features included in design and construction. Because the Schuster project's conditions of approval already require that "Prior to recordation of final map, conduct a noise analysis and establish construction standards that will result in interior noise levels of 45 decibels or less in all homes", the Board of Supervisors concludes that community noise environments for residential dwellings on the Schuster project, including both ambient and single-event noise levels, will remain within acceptable levels under not only the 1978 CMAEP, as amended October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999,but also according to the specifications in the FAR Part 150 program and the CalTrans Handbook. C. Airspace Protection. 1. The September 20, 2000, ALUC "Project Consistency Findings" found the applicant's.proposal to be inconsistent with the 1998 and 1999 amendments to the 1978.CMAEP based upon measures and policies designed to address Overflight Protection and Safety.With regards to Airspace Protection, ALUC states that: "With approximately 188 feet between the ground and horizontal surface, and a 35-foot maximum building height imposed by the zoning, no conflicts are expected [although] . . . execution of an avigation easement is recommended to protect future airport operations." 2. In determining a project's compatibility with Airspace Protection, the CalTrans Handbook states on pages 3-7 and 3-8 that the particular hazards of concern are "airspace obstructions" and land use characteristics which pose "other potential hazardsto flight by attracting birds or creating visual or electronic interference with air navigation." "Compatibility Strategies" recommended by CalTrans for protection of airport airspace are (1) to avoid ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 18 ■ airspace obstructions by limiting the height of buildings and antennas and other types of structures and trees so as not to pose a potential hazard to flight and (2) land uses which may create the types of hazards described above should be avoided near an airport or modified so as not to include the offending characteristic (i.e., attractions to birds, creation of visual or electronic interference with air navigation). The Schuster project proposes single-family residential dwellings and related land uses which,by their nature,and by existing design standards,are limited . to heights below 35 feet by Condition 3 and are otherwise designed so as not to pose a potential airspace obstruction. Furthermore, project conditions of approval require that the applicant: —Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "As a condition for the issuance of any Building Permit on these parcels the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the Chico Muncipal Airport in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts." —Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Any project-related lighting shall be directed within the project site and shielded to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent properties and aircraft flight activities." —Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Uses which have the potential to create, visual, electronic, or physical flight hazards including the generation of dust,smoke,glare, electronic interference,'or the attraction of birds to the project area shall be avoided." 3. In addition, no evidence has been presented by ALUC or otherwise on the record to demonstrate that land uses associated with the project,including the establishment of open space habitat areas and drainage detention basins, create potential hazards to flight by attracting birds or creating visual or electronic interference with air navigation. These types of hazards are not normally associated with single-family residential development. Because no conflict is expected by ALUC,and because the project conditions of approval herein mitigate these concerns, the Board of Supervisors hereby ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 19 ■ finds that the Schuster project is compatible with CMA operations because it does not cause a significant risk to Airspace Protection. D. Consistency with other approved North Chico Specific Plan projects On December 1, 1998,the Board of Supervisors approved another,much larger,300- acre subdivision proposal known as the"Stephens' project." (Butte County Specific .Plan#97-01;DA#99-01.) The Stephens' project is located immediately adjacent to the CMA. The Schuster project is located approximately 1 1/4 miles away and three subdivisions removed from the CMA, considerably further than the Stephens' project. In addition, the Schuster project is surrounded on three sides by residential subdivisions in various states of construction which have been approved by Butte County in the recent past. As such, the Schuster project is largely just an "infill" project in an otherwise developed area. Because the Board's findings supporting approval of the Stephens' project are relevant to Board approval of the Schuster project and because the two sites are located near to each other,the Board hereby also adopts and incorporates by reference the findings and all of the reasoning discussed in the findings adopted by the Board on December 1, 1998 for the Stephens' project as part of the findings supporting the Board's approval of the Schuster project. E. Consistency with North Chico Specifie Plan Although the Planning Commission,having no authority to make overriding findings, recommended denial of this project based solely upon the 1999 CMAEP Amendment inconsistency, the Planning Commission additionally found the re-configuration of the neighborhood park,as proposed under the General Plan Amendment and Rezone, consistent with the policy criteria of the North Chico Specific Plan. The NCSP was adopted on an override of ALUC'S decision, which found the NCSP inconsistent with the 1978 CMAEP. At the time of its adoption, the proposed SR-1 zone located within the NCSP was deemed to be consistent with the CMAEP. ALUC's determination of inconsistency was related to the urban designations in the "town center" area of the NCSP, south of Mud Creek. ALUC's 1998 and 1999 amendments to the 1978 CMAEP found the SR-1 zoning to also be inconsistent with the CMAEP. The impact of the 1998 and 1999 CMAEP amendments on the NCSP have not been reassessed by the Board of Supervisors since that time. F. Conclusion to airport consistency findings above. Based upon all of the substantial factual evidence submitted into the record during the course of the several public hearings upon the Schuster application before ALUC, the Butte County Planning Commission, and the Butte County Board of Supervisors from 1999 through 2001 as described in these findings and the exhibits and attachments and other data referenced herein, including the applicant's letter and exhibits to the Board of Supervisors dated March 27, 2001, all of which are ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 20 ■ incorporated herein into the administrative record by reference,-the Board of Supervisors hereby concludes in fulfillment of the requirements of Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676 that approval of the Schuster project provides for the orderly development of the CMA and the area surrounding the airport so as to promote the overall goals and objectives of the California Airport Noise Standards adopted pursuant to Section 21669 of the Public Utilities Code,and,'as designed and conditioned, the Schuster project prevents the creation of new noise and safety problems. Furthermore, as designed and conditioned, approval of the Schuster project protects the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of the CMA by and through the adoption of the numerous land use measures described herein and in the exhibits attached hereto which minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around the CMA, and which also adequately provide for overflight and airspace protection. G. Documents included in the Administrative Record Data supporting the Board of Supervisors findings have been accumulated from studies and reports prepared by recognized professionals and agencies with expertise in airport land use planning and.airport land use compatibility. These documents, which are available to the public, include but are not limited to: 1978 Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan - R. Dixon Speak Associates Aviation Activity Forecasts for the Chico Municipal Airport, May 1, 1992 - McClintock, Becker& Associates Aircraft Noise Exposure Map Report Including Aviation Activity Forecasts for the Chico Municipal Airport- December 7, 1992 - McClintock, Becker& Associates 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook- CalTrans Division of Aeronautics 1995 FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program and Environs Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport - P&D Aviation Notice of adopted amendments to the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan, October 22, 1998 - Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Notice of adopted amendments to the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan, December 29, 1999 - Butte County Airport Land Use Commission ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 21 ■ Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Findings for Steve Schuster—General Plan Amendment/Rezone and Revised Tentative Subdivision Map, APN 047-350-013, 014, and 015, September 20, 2000 -Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Schuster project application, exhibits, correspondence and public testimony in the administrative record, March 27, 2001 - Butte County Board of Supervisors IV. Find that the proposed General Plan Amendment is in the public interest in accordance with California Government Code Section 65358 as supported by the following: A. Letters received from the Chico Area Recreation&Park District dated July 18,2000, September 15,2000 and January 4,2001,support the reconfiguration and relocation of the park as proposed by the General Plan Amendment. The reconfiguration and relocation of the park result in a 0.73 acre lost of open space. Yet, despite this decrease, the reconfiguration and relocation are in the public interest because of the benefits to the Chico Area Recreation.& Park District as discussed below and because of the benefits to the CMA. For the CMA, there is increased compatibility due to the reconfiguration and relocation. The reconfiguration and relocation create a total of 7.44 acres on the southeast side of the project site instead of on the northwest side of the project site,which provides greater safety benefits to both the CMA which is located to the southeast of the project site and the residences of the subdivision than the original design in which open space was located on the northwest side of the project site furthest away from the CMA. Thus, airport compatibility is improved: (1) more residential development is moved out of the Overflight Protection Zone; and(2) a larger block of open space approximately 250 feet wide by 1,400 feet long is created which provides substantially more usable space for emergency aircraft landings. Finally, the public interest is also served by creek corridor wildlife habitat and recreational trail expansion,floodplain protection, and improved on-site sewage disposal. B. The public land proposed under this General Plan amendment shall be dedicated to the Chico Area Recreation & Park District for public purposes. C. The current location of the 5-acre neighborhood park occupies the only ground suitable for a community sewage disposal system. Because sewer service is not available at this location, development of the property at the 1-acre parcel size provided for under the SR-1 zone and the North Chico Specific Plan may not be possible without moving the 5 acre park. D. The proposed relocation of the park is supported by the Chico Area Recreation District, which provides recreational opportunities to the general public in this area. The new location for the park will enhance riparian conservation, trail development and aligns with other lands owned by CARD adjacent to the east. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 22 ■ V. Adopt an Ordinance rezoning .from P-Q (Public, Quasi-Public) to SR-1 .(Suburban Residential, 1-acre parcels); OS (Open Space) to P-Q; and, SR-1 to P-Q, and adopt a . Resolution amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan from "Public" to "Agricultural Residential", and from "Open Space" . to "Public" and "Agricultural Residential'to"Public",property identified as a 5-acre portion of APN: 047-350-130, and a 6.71 acre portion of APN: 047-350-015, subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached to the Zoning Ordinance as Exhibit`B", with the following findings: A. The proposal is consistent with the following Policies from the North Chico Specific Plan: 1. General Policy 2 (NCSP Page, 3-5) Create integrated open space,parks,recreational amenities which will result in improved quality of life for residents of both the Plan area and the greater Chico area. The proposal integrates the neighborhood park with the Keefer Slough corridor, and provides for the location of a trail on park land, which will align with other land owned by the Chico Area Recreation District located to the north. 2. Circulation Policy 3 (NCSP Page_4-7_) In order to encourage use of the proposed paths/trail system, design street patterns which utilize single loaded streets and other street and lot design techniques along proposed paths/trails. The proposal allows for the neighborhood park and trail to be accessible to the public along the entire length of the proposed collector road, with parcel development restricted to the opposite side of the collector road. 3. Circulation Polic�6'(NCSP Page 4-7) All path and trails designed within properties which are proposed for subdivision shall be required to be designed and improved by the developer of the subdivision in accordance with the requirements of this Plan and good planning and engineering practice. Maintenance of these areas will be the responsibility of CSA 87. The proposed new location for the neighborhood park will allow for the development of the trail required by the NCSP. Development of the trail will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this proposal. 4. Environmental Protection Policy 1 (NCSP Page 5-6) ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24, 2001 ■ PAGE 23 ■ Minimize impacts to archaeological, biological, riparian and other natural resources through avoidance. Mitigation Measure#1 requires recordation of an easement requiring a 100 foot no development setback prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this proposal. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and.Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. A pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located outside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. 5. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-1 (NCSP Page 7-55) Development of Keefer Slough shall be set back 100 feet from the top of the bank to preserve existing riparian vegetation and habitat, to encourage the expansion of riparian habitat, and to provide a corridor for wildlife. Proposed trails shall be aligned along the outer edge of the 100 foot buffer zone. The precise location of the top of the bank shall be approved in the field by the Director of Development Services or designee in conjunction with the Public Works Director. Mitigation Measure #1 requires the maintenance of the 100 foot no development setback in accordance with the NCSP. The proposed new park location provides adequate area clear of the 100 foot setback for development of the trail system. 6. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-3 (NCSP Page 7-6) Conduct pre-construction surveys for properties in the vicinity of Keefer Slough between Garner Lane and Hicks Lane to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black shouldered kite are occurring. Delay construction activities within 300 feet of any nest until the young have been fledged. Mitigation Measure #S requires pre-construction surveys for the black shouldered kite prior to any development activities. This mitigation will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this project. 7. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-4 (NCSP Page 7-6) An Archaeological.survey and written report shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist addressing proposed development within areas of high sensitivity as shown in NCSP figure 7-1. The proposed Subdivision Map is shown to be outside the area designated as having high archaeological sensitivity. The new location of the proposed ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 24 ■ park site, is an area that has been identified as having a high archaeological sensitivity (NCSP Figure 7-1). Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or- activity that will impact archaeological resources. However, a pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development - of any area located outside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. VI. Adopt a Joint Resolution amending the General Plan by amending the North Chico Specific . Plan Figures 5-1.Parks&Open Space,6-3.Drainage Concept.&Figure 3-1 Land Use Map, in accordance with the actions contained in action V. above, on property identified as a 5- acre portion of APN: 047-350-130,and a 6.71 acre portion of APN: 047-350-015,with the following findings: A. Figure 3.1. North Chico Specific Plan Land Use Map This figure shows the Specific Plan Designations applicable in the North Chico Specific Plan Area. This figure is amended by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The amended Figure shows the proposed new location for the park, designated as P-Q (Public, Quasi-Public), along Keefer Slough, and an SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1-acre parcels)specific plan designation at the previous location of the 5-acre park. B. Figure 4.1. Circulation System This figure shows the location of the proposed collector road (Guntren Road) as required by the NCSP. The applicant shows this road on the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. The road location conforms with Figure 4.1. This road shall also provide access to the proposed new location for the neighborhood park. C. Figure 4.2. Paths & Trails This figure shows the alignment of the trail through this property and the proposed new location for the park. The development of the trail will be a condition of the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. D. Figure 5-1. Parks & Open Space This figure shows the location of Parks & Open Space in the North Chico Specific Plan Area. This figure is amended by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The amended Figure shows the proposed new location for the park, along Keefer Slough. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 25 ■ I E. Figure 6-3. Drainage Concept This figure shows the current location of.the 5-acre park as a detention area, which is necessary to mitigate water runoff from a 10 year,24 hour post development storm.. This figure is amended by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The new detention area, located in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to Keefer Slough, can serve the same purpose, provided the proposed subdivision is developed with drainage structures to properly divert and retain storm water runoff. This will be a condition of the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. F. Figure 7-1, Archaeological Resources This figure shows the location of areas that have a potential to contain sensitive archaeological resources. Any development of sensitive areas shall be in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. VII: Uphold the appeal, and approve Tentative Subdivision Map 00-03, for Stephen J. Schuster, subject to the conditions found in Exhibit"A", and subject to the following findings: A. The Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the following policies and figures from the North Chico Specific Plan: General Policy 2 (NCSP Page 3-5) Create integrated open space, parks, recreational amenities which will result in improved quality of life for residents of both the Plan area and the greater Chico area. The proposal integrates the neighborhood park with the Keefer Slough corridor, and provides for the location of a trail on park land, which will align with other land owned by the Chico Area Recreation District located to the north. Residential Policy 3 (NCSP Page3-5) Provide buffers between residential uses and industrial uses and/or arterial thoroughfare streets by using landscaped corridors, berms, greenbelts, and/or setbacks. The project site is located along Garner Lane which is identified as a major arterial. Lots adjacent to the arterial will require an-effective separation from this street through the use of a 6 ft. landscaped buffer that will reduce the noise and dust impacts associated with the roadway. This separation is added as a condition of project approval. Circulation PolicX 3 (NCSP Page 4-7) ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 26 ■ In order to encourage use of the proposed paths/trail system, design street patterns which utilize single loaded streets and other street and lot design techniques along proposed paths/trails. The proposal allows the neighborhood park and trail to be accessible to the public along the entire length of the proposed collector road, with parcel development restricted to the opposite side of the collector road. Circulation Policy 5 (NCSP Page 4-7) In order to encourage public transit usage, the arterial street design shall provide for bus turnouts and for the location of bus shelters. The NCSP requires that bus turnouts and bus shelters be provided for on the new arterial road. The applicant may be required to install a bus turn-out along Garner Lane within the project. The property has adequate.room to provide such a turn-out. The location will be determined and approved by the Department of Public Works. Circulation Policy 6 (NCSP Page 4-7) All path and trails designed within properties which are proposed for subdivision shall be required to be designed and improved by the developer of the subdivision in accordance with the requirements of this Plan and good planning and engineering practice. Maintenance of these areas will be the responsibility of CSA 87. The proposed new location for the neighborhood park will allow for the development of the trail required by the NCSP. Development of the trail will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map. Circulation Policy 10 (NCSP Page 4-8) Noise attenuation along existing and proposed arterial shall be required to protect residential development proposed to be located adjacent to the proposed arterial. Noise attenuation measures shall be required to reduce interior noise levels to 45 decibels for proposed residential development adjacent to existing or planned arterial and/or when adjacent to Highway 99. Future dwelling units located on lots adjacent to the new arterial and Garner Land will be subject to high levels of noise from vehicles on these roadways. The NCSP requires that all dwelling units adjacent to Garner Lane and arterial roads have an interior noise level no greater than 45 decibels CNEL. The NCSP also requires that all new dwelling units in the Plan area incorporate noise attenuation measures in the design of those dwelling units in order to reduce noise.impacts from overflying aircraft. A condition of this project will require that all dwelling units have an, interior noise level no greater than 45 decibels by incorporating noise attenuation measures in the design of those dwelling units. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 27 ■ Environmental Protection Policy I (NCSP Page 5-6) Minimize impacts to archaeological,biological,riparian and other natural resources through avoidance. Mitigation Measure#1 requires recordation of an easement requiring a 100 foot no development setback prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this proposal. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. A pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located inside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. Water Policy 2 (NCSP Page 6-14) In the area north of Mud Creek, a community water system may be required. The community water system shall be established in accordance with the requirements of State law. . Waste Water Disposal Policies 2 & 3 (NCSP Pa e�6-14) 2. In the area north of Mud Creek,community septic systems may be required. Operation and maintenance of these systems shall meet the requirements of state law and standard engineering practices. 3. In the area north of Mud Creek,developments shall meet the requirements of the Department of Environmental Health relative to the installation of septic systems. The applicant has met the requirements of the Butte County Environmental Health Division for development of a community sewage disposal system. Individual septic tanks are not practical due to soil limitations. The Environmental Health Division recommends conditions for the use of a community sewage disposal system, which will be conditions of the Subdivision Map. The Environmental Health Division is not requiring a community water system. Individual on-site domestic wells will provide a water supply that is acceptable to the Environmental Health Division. The wells must meet the requirements of the Environmental Health Division. A water system shall be developed for the purposes of fire protection. However, this system will not be used for a domestic water supply. Drainage Policies 1 - 5 (NCSP Pages 6-14 thru 6-15) I. Utilize,to the maximum extent possible,natural or natural-appearing streams or drainage courses for storm drainage. 2. Design stormwater facilities, including detention basins, to ensure public safety, to be visually unobtrusive, and to provide where feasible, recreational uses. 3. Development within designated floodplains shall conform to County and FEMA regulations. Development shall not be permitted in the floodway. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 28 ■ Limited recreational activities, which are not in conflict with flood control, the 100 year floodplain, or habitat uses may be permitted. 4. Utilize pollution control traps or sediment basins, designed pursuant to County standards and/or direction, for storm drainage systems. 5'. All drainage areas shall be maintained through amendment to the CSA, or other means acceptable to LAFCo,Butte County,'and the maintaining group or agency. The developer will be responsible for the design, installation and maintenance of all drainage requirements in accordance with the standards above and all other applicable County development standards. These requirements are conditions of the Subdivision Map. Also included is a condition that there be no increase in peak flow run-off. School Policy 4 (NCSP Page 6-15) Impacts to school facilities within the Chico Unified School District(CUSD) shall be fully mitigated through the payment of mitigation fees in the amounts justified by the CUSD prepared nexus studies, including adjustments, and adopted by the District, or through the implementation of other equivalent measures acceptable to the CUSD, including those measures specified in the CUSD Board of Education Resolution No. 486-92. The County, as condition of approval of the Specific Plan(NCSP), has required that new residential development fully mitigate its impacts to school facilities. Additionally, a condition on the Subdivision Map requires the payment of school fees as required by the NCSP. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-1 (NCSP Pa eg 7-5) Development of Keefer Slough shall be set back 100 feet from the top of the bank to preserve existing riparian vegetation and habitat, to encourage the expansion of riparian habitat, and to provide a corridor for wildlife. Proposed trails shall be aligned along the outer edge of the 100 foot buffer zone. The precise location of the top of the bank shall be approved in the field by the Director of Development Services or designee in conjunction with the Public Works Director. Mitigation Measure #1 requires the maintenance of the 100 foot no development setback in accordance with the NCSP. The proposed new park location provides adequate area clear of the 100 foot setback for development of the trail system. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-3 (,NCSP Page 7-6) Conduct pre-construction surveys for properties in the vicinity of Keefer Slough between Garner Lane and Hicks Lane to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black shouldered kite are occurring. Delay construction activities within 300 feet of any nest until the young have been fledged. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0 ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 29 ■ Mitigation Measure#5 requires pre-construction surveys for the black shouldered kite prior to any development activities. This mitigation will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-4 (NCSP Page 7-6) An Archaeological survey and written report shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist addressing proposed development within areas of high sensitivity as shown in NCSP figure 7-1. - ---- The proposed Subdivision Map is shown to be outside the area designated as having high archaeological sensitivity. The new location of the proposed park site, is an area that has been identified as having a high archaeological sensitivity (NCSP Figure 7-1). Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. However, a pedestrian level archaeological .reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located inside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. Figures Figure 4.1. Circulation System. This figure shows the location of the proposed collector road (Guntren Road) as required by the NCSP. The applicant shows this road on the Tentative Subdivision Map. This road shall also provide access to the proposed new location for the neighborhood park. Figure 4.2. Paths & Trails This figure shows the alignment of the trail through this property and the proposed new location for the park. The development of the trail is recommended as a condition of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Figure 5-1. Parks & Open Space This figure must be amended to approve the General Plan Amendment/Rezone, since this figure shows the current location for the neighborhood park. The new Figure would show the proposed new location for the park, along Keefer Slough. Figure 6-3. Drainage Conceit This figure must also be amended if this project is approved. This figure shows the current location of the 5-acre park as a detention area, which is necessary to mitigate water runoff from a 10 year, 24 hour post development storm. The new detention area, located in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to Keefer Slough, can serve the same purpose,provided the proposed subdivision is developed ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 30 ■ with drainage structures to properly divert and retain storm water runoff. This will be a condition of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Figure 7-1. Archaeological Resources This figure shows the location of areas that have a potential to contain sensitive archaeological resources. Any development of sensitive areas shall be in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. B. With the additions of Department of Development Services, Planning Division Condition#1, the proposed Subdivision Map conforms to the zoning and General Plan designation proposed under.GPA/RZ 00-05. C. With the additions of Department of Development Services, Planning Division Condition #2 - 11, the proposed Subdivision Map conforms to the North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP). D. With the addition of Department of Public Work's Conditions#27 thru 40 ,regarding access and Environmental Health Department Conditions#41 regarding review of on- site sewage disposal capability,the project is physically suitable for the use and density of the proposed development. ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ Apri124,2001 ■ PAGE 31 ■ EXHIBIT A Tentative Subdivision Map for Stephen J.Schuster,TSM 00-03 (Pheasant Landing, Unit III) I. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Planning Division 1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, General Plan Amendment and Rezone 00-05 shall be approved by the Butte County Board of Supervisors. 2. Place a note on a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "All lot development/preparation shall be subject to the specific grading and erosion control guidelines indicated in the North Chico Specific Plan. All development plans shall be approved by the Planning Division and the Department of Public Works for compliance with the North Chico Specific Plan prior to any earth moving on-site." NCSP 3. Place, a note on a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "The maximum building height on these parcels shall not exceed 35.feet." NCSP 4. Place a note on a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "The maximum building coverage on these lots shall not exceed 15% of the lot area." NCSP 5. Place a note on a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "If, during any phase of site development or project construction, archeological resources or human remains are discovered, work shall be immediately halted within 150 feet of the find. The Butte County Development Services Department shall be notified,and work shall not be resumed until the find has been evaluated by a qualified professional archeologist and a report has been prepared and reviewed by the Planning Division." NCSP 6. Prior to recordation of final map enhanced disclosure measures shall be developed and implemented to alert prospective home buyers and rental tenants as to the proximity of the CMA. Disclosure measures shall be in place before any lots are sold and include: the existence of avigation easements, the existing and projected future overflight and noise levels,and such related issues as are appropriate to fully inform such prospective home buyer or rental tenant. Enhanced disclosure may be modeled on Butte County Code, Chapter 35, Protection of Agricultural Land. NCSP ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 32 ■ 7. Prior to recordation of final map, conduct a noise analysis and establish construction standards that will result in interior noise levels of 45 decibels or less in all homes. NCSP 8. Street trees and shading requirements apply to all new development. Street trees must be planted within six months of the completion of streets. The trees shall be maintained by the developer,until they are self-sustaining. Local tree species can be selected by the developer and property owners. Submit a landscaping plan to the Planning Division for approval prior to recordation of final map. NCSP 9. Enter into an agreement running with the land for the mitigation of cumulative road, traffic, fire,recreation,school and drainage impacts within the North Chico Specific Plan(CSA 87). The applicant/owner shall sign the CSA 87 Traffic and Drainage Mitigation Agreement and/or pay the required fee prior to the issuance of building permits. If the agreement is used it shall be recorded by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Place'a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "These parcels are subject to the collection of fees to mitigate impacts to roads,traffic, fire,recreation, school and drainage facilities as stated in the North Chico Specific Plan. These fees shall be collected at the time of application for building permits on these parcels." NCSP 10. Show on the final map a minimum 6 foot landscaped berm/buffer along the Garner Lane frontage of Lots 1 thru 7 and Lot"A". The design of the berm/buffer shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval and be constructed prior to the recordation of the final map. The design shall include trees, ground cover, fencing, and irrigation which shall be maintained by the Property Owner's Association. NCSP 11. The trail required by North Chico Specific Plan Circulation Policy#6 and shown on Figure 4-2 of the NCSP shall be developed along the south margin of the property near Keefer Slough. This trail shall provide access to those on foot,horseback or bicycle. The proposed trail shall be developed along the outer edge of the 100 foot no development zone, in accordance with NCSP Resource Protection Policy 7.4-1. The trail shall have a minimum width of 10 feet and may,,have an earth or gravel surface, but must be well enough drained to be passable during wet Weather. The Planning Division shall be notified upon completion of this mitigation so that an inspection can be scheduled,prior to Subdivision Map recording. NCSP 12. Prior to Final Map recording, the Developer shall deed to the Chico Area Recreation&Parks District Lot "B" as shown on the tentative map for the purposes of establishing a neighborhood park. This conveyance shall be in accordance with Section 66428(a)(2)of the State Subdivision Map Act, which allows parcels of land to be conveyed to a public entity without a Parcel Map. 13. The Final Map shall show easements or other mapped provisions for the placement of centralized mail delivery units. Developers will provide a concrete base for placement of the ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 33 ■ centralized unit. Specifications and location of such base shall be determined pursuant to the applicable requirements of Postal Service and the County of Butte Department of Development Services,with due consideration for street light location,traffic safety,,security, and consumer convenience. 14. A bus turn-out shall be provided.along Garner Lane.near Guntren Road to provide for a future bus shelter when public-transit is provided along Garner Lane. The turn-out shall be developed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works prior to Final Map recording. : 15. At the time of conveyance of any deed dedicating or transferring the property zoned P-Q (Public Quasi-Public) to a public entity, a 100 foot no-development setback easement shall be executed, which shall prohibit any development activities within a 100 foot linear area measured from the top of the bank.of Keefer Slough. This. no-development setback is necessary to allow for the establishment of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough, in accordance with policies of the North Chico Specific Plan. The no-development setback shall not prohibit conservation efforts intended to benefit the establishment of riparian habitat or grasses along Keefer Slough provided it is approved by the California Department of Fish & Game. (Mitigation Measure#1) 16. Complete the following to the satisfaction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District, prior to Final Map recordation: A. Measures shall be taken to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Measures may include site and road watering and/or,use of other acceptable soil palliatives. Questions regarding fugitive dust control may be directed to the Butte County Air Quality Management District at phone number(53 0) 891-2882. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, submit an improvement plan with respect to fugitive dust and air pollution to the Butte County Air Quality Management District for review and determination of adequacy. Said plan shall include measures to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development, including the construction of dwelling units. Measures determined to be acceptable by the Air Quality Management District shall be implemented during all development activities on the site. A copy of the approved plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and Department of Development Services, Building Division, prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map. B. Place a note on the owner's statement, the deed, or any other instrument to be recorded that states: "Measures shall betaken to control fugitive dust emissions from all driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Approved dust control measures are found in the fugitive dust control plan for the site approved by the Butte County'Air Quality Management District, a copy of which can ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 34 ■ 1 . be obtained from the Butte County Department of Development Services, Building Division." (Mitigation Measure#2) 17. The four small valley oak trees (Quercus lobata) which will be removed from.this property as a result of subdivision construction shall be replaced with eight valley oak seedlings with at least a 15 foot interval between each seedling,in a common area on the property that will not be disturbed. The oak trees shall be properly maintained by the developer until they are self-sustaining. The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for their continued care and maintenance through the Subdivision's CC&Rs. The Planning Division shall be notified - upon completion of this mitigation so that the Planning Division can review the CC&Rs for compliance and an inspection can be scheduled, prior.to Subdivision Map recording. (Mitigation Measure#3) 18. In accordance with North Chico.Specific Plan Policy 7.4-3, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified professional along Keefer Slough and vicinity to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black-shouldered kite are occurring. Any portion of the subject property that lies within 300 feet of an active nest shall be surrounded by an orange fence during construction activities. Any construction activities planned for areas that are within 300 feet of any active nest shall be delayed until after the young have been fledged. The survey shall take place prior to Subdivision Map recording. The survey and all findings shall be provided to the Planning Division. The Planning Division shall ensure that compliance with any limitations on construction activities in the vicinity of any identified kite nests. (Mitigation Measure#4) 19. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Prior to site development all foundations shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer or licensed architect." (Mitigation Measure#5) 20. In order to address the significant impact of this project on the CMAEP, comply with the following: A. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "As a condition for the issuance of any Building Permit on these parcels the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts. B. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Any project-related lighting shall be directed within the project site and shielded to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent properties and aircraft flight activities." ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 35 ■ C. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Uses which have the potential to create visual,electronic, or physical flight hazards including the generation of dust, smoke,glare,electronic interference,or the attraction of birds to the project area shall be avoided." 21. To ensure that construction noise does not become a nuisance to neighbors, construction activities associated with subdivision development such as clearing,road building,grading, and infrastructure development shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. (Mitigation Measure#6) 22. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities shall be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, Article II of the Butte County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the building permit." (Mitigation Measure#7) Fire Department 23. A pressurized community water system for fire protection is required. A County Service Area (CSA) or a Homeowner's Association shall be formed for operation and maintenance of the fire protection system The specific locations and fire flow requirements shall be in accordance with the Fire Department specifications and to the satisfaction of the County Fire Warden. Average required hydrant spacing, 800 feet,hydrant size 6 inches,and residual fire flow, 500 GPM. Submit plans to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to construction of facilities. 24. Construction, installation or development of structures or facilities on the parcels shall comply with the latest Fire Safe Regulations of Butte County;Public Resources Code 4290, and all other applicable State and County codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of application for improvement permits. 25. Building identification and/or addresses shall be installed in conformance with PRC 4290 and shall be posted at the beginning of building construction and maintained continuously thereafter. Fire hydrant identification, reflector or post reflectors shall be installed acceptable to the County Fire Warden. 26. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet which states: "Construction, installation or development of structures or facilities on the parcels,including as a minimum,driveway standards,building setbacks,and addressing,shall comply with the latest Fire Safe Regulations of Butte County, Public Resources Code 4290, and all other applicable State and County codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of application for improvement permits." ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 36 ■ Public Works _ 27. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the final map. Street names shall be approved by the. County Address Coordinator-prior to the recordation of the final map. Submit a minimum of 5 alternate names for each new street to the County Address Coordinator for approval. 28. The developer shall provide all necessary traffic safety signs including stop signs. A note shall be placed on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Parcel Map stating: "No public entity shall be responsible for the maintenance of the stop sign. In accordance with Civil Code Section 845, maintenance of the road, including the stop sign shall be shared by those properties with a legal interest in the private right-of-way or easement." 29: Pay the recording fees then in effect for recording the final maps and related documents. 30. Deed to Butte County,in fee simple, 30 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Garner Lane. The right-of-way shall be sufficient for the installation of standard No. S-5 at all street intersections.. 31. Construct one-half street plus 12 foot section on Garner Lane to NCSP Arterial Type A-IV geometric standard. Minimal structural section to be 3 inches AC and 12 inches AB,SC 250 prime, fog seal and 95 percent relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R" value determination-and other data may be required to support the section design. 32. Construct full street section on interior streets to NCSP local type III road standard with 2 inches AC, and 8 inches AB, SC 250 prime, fog seal and 95 percent relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R" value determination and other data may be required to support the.section design. 33. Dedicate a one foot "no access strip" or relinquish abetters rights to Butte County along the Garner Lane frontage of parcels 1 thru 6 & 34 except at approved access points. 34. Prior to recordation of final map, obtain an encroachment permit and construct a standard road approach,in accordance with County Improvement Standards. Adequate sight distance at the intersection of access road and Garner Lane shall be provided. 35 Show.on the additional map sheet or on a document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map a 50 foot building setback from the centerline of interior street and a 55 foot building setback from the centerline of Garner Lane. 36. Prior to recordation of the Final Map a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 37 ■ specify how drainage waters shall be retained/detained on-site and/or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. 37. For any portion of the property that is within a designated floodplain, establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the additional map sheet or on a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the final map,the elevations (by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark and a temporary benchmark on-site. 38. Show all easements of record on the final map. 39. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay in full any and all delinquent,current and estimated taxes and assessments as specified in Article 8, of Chapter 4 of Division 2 of Title 7, of the California Government Code commencing with Section 66492. 40. A County Service Area(CSA)or Homeowner's Association shall be formed for drainage and street lighting. Street lighting shall be provided in accordance with Butte County requirements, accepted design criteria, and recommendations of Pacific Gas & Electric Company. If the developer chooses to install drainage improvements and streetlights and pay energy and maintenance costs through a CSA, he/she must complete the formation of the CSA prior to recordation of the Final Map. The CSA formation process will require the Developer to fund the service until the beginning of the first fiscal year in which service charges can be collected for the CSA, and agree to an annual maximum service charge to ensure continued operation of the facilities. Environmental Health Division 41. Comply with the following requirements of the Environmental Health Division: A. WASTEWATER HAZARD ZONES 1. Provide a 150-foot community sewage facility setback area around any existing wells within 150 feet of the property boundaries and around the designated well sites for lots 6,7 and 8. 2. Identify on the additional map sheet an area for wells and a 50' septic tank and sewage tight-line set back from designated well sites on lots 1 through 30. .3.' Identify on the additional map sheet an area for a well on Lot 1 and an area for the fire protection well that is 100 feet from the edge of the storm water ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 38 ■ retention pond (Lot C). Then show a 100 foot wastewater free setback around both well.sites. B. WATER SUPPLY WELLS 1. Place a note on the map stating "All.water wells drilled in areas of known flood hazards must meet construction standards as set forth in Butte County Code 23B-9c." C. NEW COMMUNITY SEWER 1. Prior to improvement plan approval and/or before initiating any site improvements, provide Waste Discharge Requirements issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 2. Prior to initiating any grading or site improvements, submit improvement plans for review and approval for the construction of a community sewage collection,treatment and disposal facilities. At a minunum,these plans must meet the following standards and criteria: a. Comply with all State and local law regarding the design, placement and construction of a wastewater collection and disposal system; b. The design must be included as an integral part of the grading and site improvement plans, subject to approval by both Butte County Environmental Health and Public Works Departments; C. Provide a detail on the plan demonstrating encroachment of private sewer lines in public road rights-of-way and their placement in public easements; d. The plan must be complete and detailed, submitted by a licensed civil engineer,showing a continuous flow-through system. This plan shall specify construction details with appropriate construction notes, materials to be used and show elevations of various gravity-fed components in relation to site plan (commonly called a hydraulic profile cross section). This plan must be finished and detailed sufficiently with construction specifics that would allow a contractor to install the facilities in accordance with the above referenced criteria. 3. Prior to recording the Final Map, construct a community sewage collection, treatment and disposal facilities in compliance with California State Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB), the Butte County Code, California ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 39 ■ Health and Safety Code, California Water Code and other applicable codes and regulations governing the design, construction and operation of the facilities.' 4. Prior to recordation of map, provide an."encroachment agreement" to be recorded concurrently with the map, satisfactory .to the Department of Environmental Health and Department of Public Works for the operation and maintenance of community sewage disposal facilities in the public road rights-of-way. 5. Prior to recording the Final Map provide a Homeowner's Association or other legal entity acceptable to the Regional Water Quality Control Board adequate to insure the operation, maintenance or repair of the sewage collection, treatment and disposal facilities. . An entity other than a Homeowner's Association(such as a community services district) approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board shall in addition to meeting Regional Board requirements meet the following: a. Insure financing of operation, repair and maintenance; b. Provide qualified individuals and operational procedures for facility operations, repair and maintenance; C. Provide adequate resources to comply with all monitoring and other Regional Water Quality Control Board Waste Discharge Requirements; d. Provide adequate resources for facility inspections and reports; e. Provide adequate resources and/or mechanism to insure adequate funding of a major sewage treatment and a disposal facility replacement or reconstruction if necessary; f. Provide a liability risk assessment for review by the County of Butte; g. Indemnify the County of Butte and Community Services District or other government entity for all claims and liability that may occur relative to the sewage disposal facilities. 6. If a Homeowner's Association is formed as a responsible entity for the maintenance and repair of the sewage collection, treatment and.sewage disposal system, obtain approval of the by-laws and CC&Rs by California State Regional Water Quality Control Board and Butte County ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 40 ■ Environmental Health. Approval shall be obtained prior to recordation of the Final Map. 7. Place a note on the additional map sheet that states"Development of Lots 1 through 30 will require connection to the community sewer system." 8. Place a note on the additional map sheet that states "Lot A is to be held in common for the benefit of the homeowner's association for the purpose of providing a community sewage-disposal system." 9. Place a note on the additional map sheet that states "Lot 7 shall be designated common area for repair or replacement of the community sewage disposal facilities." Lot 7 shall not be released from common area designation for lease, sale or finance until a written release has been provided by Butte Co. Environmental Health Department and the RWQCB to the Homeowner's Association and Developer. These provisions shall be incorporated into the homeowner association by-laws and CC&Rs. 10. Record concurrently with the map a"Sewage Facility Expansion Agreement", acceptable to both Butte County and the RWQCB, detailing the conditions for use and/or release of Lot 7 for sewage disposal. 11. Provide for ownership or control of the sewage disposal area, sewer mains, filter, dosing tank, re-circulating tank and other facilities by the wastewater system maintenance entity. D. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PLANS . 1. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map stating "Solid waste disposal shall be the responsibility of each property owner. Trash and debris shall be picked up weekly by either a trash collection company approved by the County of Butte or the property owner shall assume the responsibility for taking trash and debris to a County approved land fill." Regional Water Quality Control Board 42. The landowner/developer shall comply with the following.requirements of the Regional Water.Quality Control Board: A. Storm Water - A construction Activity Storm Water Permit is required for storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing,grading and excavation results in a land disturbance of five acres or more. Storm water discharges from a construction activity that results in a land disturbance of less than ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 41 ■ 5 acres, but which is part of a larger common plan of development, also requires a permit. The Construction Activity Storm Water Permit must be obtained prior to construction. Failure to obtain a permit, when required, may result in enforcement action. B. Construction Dewatering-If improvements such as sewer,or other utility installation require dewatering of any excavation, a general NDPES dewatering permit must be obtained. This office may be contacted to obtain the forms for this permit if necessary. Chico Area Parks & Recreation District 43. The landowner shall enter into an agreement with the Chico Area Parks & Recreation District to allow for the formation of a lighting and landscaping assessment district for the neighborhood park identified as Lot`B"on the tentative map. The agreement shall indicate that the Pheasant Landing Unit III Subdivision will be included and participate in any future assessment district. Indemnification Agreement 44. Applicant agrees to enter into an indemnification agreement to indemnify the County of Butte from liability or loss related to the approval of this project. VIII. NOTATION Minor changes may be approved administratively by the Directors of Development Services, Environmental Health, or Public Works upon receipt of a substantiated written request by the applicant, or their respective designee. Prior to such approval, verification shall be made by each Department or Division that the modification is consistent with the application,fees paid and environmental determination as conditionally approved. Changes deemed to be major or significant in nature shall require a formal application for amendment. K:\PLANNING\PROJECTS\GPA\MOORETOW.GPA\ACTIONS.WPD ■ BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISM3 ■ ACTIONS ■ April 24,2001 ■ PAGE 41a ■ Resolution No. JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM GRAZING AND OPEN LAND TO AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL; LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL; AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH CHICO SPECIFIC PLAN FROM PUBLIC TO AGRICULTURAL-RESIDENTIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL-RESIDENTIAL AND OPEN SPACE TO PUBLIC. WHEREAS, a private individual, Robert Russell, has petitioned the Butte County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, for a change from Grazing and Open Land to Agricultural-Residential, for that property identified on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Mooretown Rancheria Concow Maidu, a federally recognized sovereign Indian tribe, has petitioned the Butte County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, for a change from Low Density Residential to Commercial, for that property identified on Exhibit B-1 attached hereto; and WHEREAS, a private individual, Stephen J. Schuster, has petitioned the Butte County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element and North Chico Specific Plan, for a change from Public to Agricultural Residential and from Agricultural Residential and Open Space to Public, for that property identified on Exhibit C-1 attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendments have been studied and reviewed by the Butte County Planning Commission and a public hearing held pursuant to law, at which time all interested persons were heard; and WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has reviewed and considered the contents of the Initial Studies (Exhibits A-2, B-2, and C-2) prepared on the amendments pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has held hearings on the General Plan Amendments at which all interested parties were heard; and WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors finds the proposed amendments comply with all elements of the Butte County General Plan and comprises an overall internally consistent whole, specifically: Robert Russell General Plan Amendment -A. Policy 2.2.a.of the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element states that extensive.areas _. for primary use as livestock grazing land be maintained. The change from GOL to AR is not expected to have a significant impact on livestock grazing on the site. Livestock grazing will still be possible. B. Policy 2.2.b.of the Butte County Land Use Element states that livestock grazing be allowed on all suitable sites not needed for development or crop production. The soils on the site have severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation,but are fairly well-suited for grazing. C. Policy 2.2.e. of the Land Use Element states that Grazing and Open Land category areas on the Land Use Map be retained where location and natural conditions make lands well suited for grazing land. The majority of the site is heavily vegetated with numerous pines,cedars, firs, oaks, and extensive brush. Overall, the site is limited for livestock grazing due to the heavy vegetation. D. The characteristics of the project site -beyond service areas of community water and sewer systems, less than 30% slopes, adjacent or near to existing roads and public utilities, and not within floodplains or known active faults - meet the criteria for inclusion into the requested General Plan designation of Agricultural Residential. Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment A. The proposed C-1 (Light Commercial) zone is consistent with the proposed Commercial General Plan designation. B. Although the proposal will result in the loss of 5.45 acres of land now designated for Low Density Residential uses by the General Plan,there is no impact to housing availability in the area, as supported by the following: 1. It is unlikely that additional dwellings may be developed at this site without full sewer service being provided to the area. This area is currently not provided with sewer service, and..the Environmental Health Department indicates that on-site disposal of sewage is very difficult due to the poor soil conditions of the area. 2. The Mooretown Rancheria is in the process of providing additional housing for tribe members within the Rancheria itself. Through this planning process, adequate housing will be provided for the Rancheria community,and the loss of residential.' land represented by this proposal will not significantly effect housing availability in the area. C. Visual impacts will be mitigated through the inclusion of Mitigation Measure #1, which requires that all lighting fixtures be directed downward and not exceed the height of mature trees, and that lighting be contained within the parking lot boundaries, and Mitigation Measure #2, which requires landscaping to be installed in accordance with anapproved Landscaping Plan. D. Air Quality will be protected through the inclusion of Mitigation Measure#3,which requires that construction areas be watered or treated with a soil palliative to prevent fugitive dust conditions. E. Runoff generated by the proposed parking lot will be mitigated through the inclusion of Mitigation Measure #5 , which requires a drainage plan that shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on-site and/or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility,and that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. F. Erosion shall be mitigated by the inclusion of Mitigation Measure#4,which requires that all cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height created during parking lot construction shall be stabilized with a native grass seed mix or hydroseed application. G. The Mooretown Rancheria has been required to submit fair-share contributions for off-site road improvements in order to maintain adequate traffic flow and circulation for the Feather Falls Casino complex. Any traffic impact from the proposed parking lot associated with this General Plan Amendment and Rezone has been mitigated by the work completed and scheduled by the Department of Public Works. These improvements include the widening of Lower Wyandotte Road to include a continuous left-hand turn lane and signalization of the intersections of Lower Wyandotte,Ophir, and Upper Palermo Roads and the intersection of Ophir Road and Lincoln Boulevard. With the exception of the signalization of Ophir Road and Lincoln Boulevard, the work has been completed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The Ophir Road/Lincoln Boulevard signalization is scheduled for the Summer of 2001, according to the Department of Public Works. Schuster Amendment to the North Chico Specific Plan A. The proposal is consistent with the following Policies and Exhibits from the North Chico Specific Plan: 1. General Policy.2 (,NCSP Page 3-5) Create integrated open space,parks,recreational amenities which will result in improved quality of life for residents of both the Plan area and the greater Chico area. The proposal integrates the neighborhood park with. the Keefer Slough corridor, and provides for the location of a trail on.park land, which will align with other land owned by the Chico Area Recreation District located to the north. 2. Circulation PolicyNCSP Page 4-7) In order to encourage use of the proposed paths/trail system, design street patterns which utilize single loaded streets and other street and lot design techniques along proposed paths/trails. The proposal allows for the neighborhood park and trail to be accessible to the public along the entire length of the proposed collector road, with parcel development restricted to the opposite side of the collector road. 3. Circulation Policy 6 (NCSP Page 4-7) All path and trails designed within properties which are proposed for subdivision shall be required to be designed and improved by the developer of the subdivision in accordance with the requirements of this Plan and good planning and engineering practice. Maintenance of these areas will be the responsibility of CSA 87. The proposed new location for the neighborhood park will allow for the development of the trail.required by the NCSP. Development of the trail will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this proposal. 4. Environmental Protection Policy 1 (NCSP Page 5-6) Minimize impacts to archaeological, biological, riparian and other natural resources through avoidance. Mitigation Measure#1 requires recordation of an easement requiring a 100 foot no development setback prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this proposal. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. A pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located outside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. 5. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-1 (NCSP Page 7-51 Development of Keefer Slough shall be set back 100 feet from the top of the bank to preserve existing riparian vegetation and habitat, to'encourage the. .. expansion of riparian habitat, and to provide a corridor for wildlife. Proposed trails shall be aligned.along the outer edge of the 100 foot buffer zone., The precise location of the top of the bank shall be approved in the field by the Director of Development Services or designee in conjunction with the Public Works Director. Mitigation Measure #1 requires the maintenance of the 100 foot no development setback in accordance with the NCSP. The proposed new park location provides adequate area clear of the 100 foot setback for development of the trail system. 6. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-3 (NCSP Page 7-6) Conduct pre-construction surveys for properties in the vicinity of Keefer Slough between Garner Lane and Hicks Lane to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black shouldered kite are occurring. Delay construction activities within 300 feet of any nest until the young have been fledged. Mitigation Measure #S requires pre-construction surveys for the black shouldered kite prior to any development activities. This mitigation will be required prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map submitted concurrently with this project. 7. Resource Protection Policy 7.4-4 (NCSP Page 7-6) An Archaeological survey and written report shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist addressing proposed development within areas of high sensitivity as shown in NCSP figure 7-1. The proposed Subdivision Map is shown to be outside the area designated as having high archaeological sensitivity. The new location of the proposed park site, is an area that has been identified as having a high archaeological sensitivity (NCSP Figure 7-1). Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. However, a pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located outside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. 8. Figure 3.1 North Chico Specific Plan Land use Map This figure shows the Specific Plan Designations applicable in the North Chico Specific Plan Area. This figure is amended.by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The amended Figure shows the proposed.new location for the park, designated as P-Q(Public, Quasi-Public), along Keefer Slough, and an SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1-acre parcels)specific plan designation at the previous location of the 5-acre park. . 9. Figure 4.1. Circulation System This figure shows the location of the proposed collector road(Guntren Road) as required by the NCSP. The applicant shows this road on the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. The road location conforms with Figure 4.1. This road shall also provide access to the proposed new location for the neighborhood park. 10. Figure 4.2. Paths &Trails This figure shows the alignment of the trail through this property and the proposed new location for the park. The development of the trail will be a condition of the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. 11. Figure 5-1. Parks & Open Space This figure shows the location of Parks & Open Space in the North Chico Specific Plan Area. This figure is amended by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The amended Figure shows the proposed new location for the park, along Keefer Slough. 12. Figure 6-3, Drainage Concept This figure shows the current location of the 5-acre park as a detention area, which is necessary to mitigate water runoff from a 10 year, 24 hour post development storm. .This figure is amended by this General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The new detention area, located in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to Keefer Slough, can serve the same purpose, provided the proposed subdivision is developed with drainage structures to properly divert and retain storm water runoff. This will be a condition of the concurrently submitted Tentative Subdivision Map. 13. Figure 7-1. Archaeological.Resources This figure shows the location of areas that have a potential to contain sensitive archaeological resources. Any development of sensitive areas shall.be in accordance with NCSP Policy. 7.4-4. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. ' The General Plan Amendment to Agricultural-Residential as shown on the attached Exhibit A-1 is hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The General Plan Amendment to Commercial as shown on the attached Exhibit B=1 is hereby incorporated by reference. 3. The General Plan Amendments to Agricultural-Residential and Public as shown on the attached Exhibit C-1 are hereby incorporated by reference. 4. The General Plan Amendments are hereby adopted and by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte as amendments to the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, said Amendments to be the land use policy for the County of Butte in the affected area for all findings pursuant to law; and WHEREAS, with regards to the Schuster project, at a public hearing held September 20, 2000, the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed the Schuster project application for consistency with the 1978 Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan (CMAEP) as amended on October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999 and found the project inconsistent with the CMAEP; and WHEREAS, with regards to the Schuster project, the Board of Supervisors, on May 8, 2001, made and adopted findings to override the ALUC inconsistency findings in accordance with Sections 21676 and 21670 of the Public Utilities Code; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, with regards to the Schuster project, that the Butte County Board of Supervisors hereby approves: 1. Revised text, figures, and tables to reflect the effects of the Schuster General Plan Amendment on the whole North Chico Specific Plan, including but not limited to; a. Amend Figure 3.1, North Chico Specific Plan Map, to reflect the new land use designations. b. Amend Figure 5.1; Parks & Open Space Map,.to reflect the new land use designations.. C. Amend Figure 6.3, Drainage Concept Map, to reflect the new land use designations; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant.to Government.Code Section 65359 that the General Plan be endorsed to show that the above amendments have been approved by this Board. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if any of the three General Plan Amendments made by this Resolution, namely the Robert Russell, Mooretown Rancheria, or Stephen Schuster Amendments, is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions of this Resolution relating to that Amendment shall be deemed severable, and the invalidity thereof shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of Supervisors on this . day of , 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: NOT VOTING: CURT JOSIASSEN, CHAIRMAN Butte County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: John S. Blacklock, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board By: K:\PLANNING\PROJECTS\GPA\BDRESO _ u one F' a�• GOL --- ------ ----- -- --- �- -- - " GOL Forbestmn Pro ect Location " .. I GOL I I. - -------------- ------ GOL 4P161 AO ac m 45.43 ac 8ti9fi aE, D ivisor;; Hill L n $�.79 ac ac AR� AR 0, 167.07 /� MR R 79.05 ac - --- AR II GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FR M O GRAZING&OPEN LANDS TO AGRICULTURAIrRESID MAP AMENDING Exhibit. A4 ORO LE VIL AREA LAND USE PLAN File; GPfvxz 01-01 Resolution Date Butte County Board of Supervisors N EXHIBIT A-2 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 COUNTY OF BUTTE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND: 1. Name of Proponent: Robert Russell 2. Address: P.O. Box 222, Bangor, CA 95914 Phone: (530) 370-0124 3. Name of Proposal: N/A 4. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment 5. Proiect Description: This is an application for a General Plan Amendment to change the Butte County General Plan land use designation on the project site from Grazing and Open Land to Agricultural-Residential. The area proposed for change encompasses approximately 43 acres. The project has two General Plan designations: approximately 43 acres of Grazing and Open Land and approximately 16-acres of Agricultural-Residential. The Butte County General Plan Land Use Map.shows that the boundary of the Grazing and Open Land/Agricultural-Residential designations on the project site is an Oroville Wyandotte Irrigation District (OWID) water ditch that traverses the site. The Planning Division's Geographical Information System (GIS) General Plan theme coverage for the project site shows that the Grazing and Open Land/Agricultural-Residential boundary only generally follows the OWID water ditch. The difference in what is shown on the General Plan Land Use Map and what is shown on the GIS is not significant because the difference is small. It appears that the OWID water ditch was used as the boundary because it is a well-defined and easily identified physical feature. The lands below the ditch are somewhat less vegetated than the lands located above the ditch. The lands below the ditch are also generally not as steep as the lands above the ditch. The proposed Agricultural-Residential General Plan land use designation, along with the existing A-5 zoning of the site, could result in the property being divided into eleven 5-acre parcels. However, the project site is located within deer herd critical winter habitat, which requires a 40-acre minimum parcel size. The applicant proposes to create, with approval of a subsequent parcel map, two 29+ acre parcels. The California Department of Fish and Game has tentatively approved of the two 29+ parcels provided that deed restrictions be placed on the property to prevent impacts to deer(see the attached Department of Fish and Game letter, dated September 22, 2000). The deed restrictions will include a prohibition on further land divisions and the location of a new homesite. The deed restrictions ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 151 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 recommended by the Department of Fish and Game will be conditions of project approval for a subsequent.parcel map on the project site. Note: The project specific environmental issues that may result from a land division . allowed under this proposal would be completely addressed when an application is made for a parcel map. This Initial Study addresses the environmental impacts directly related to a change in the General Plan designation. 6. Location of property: On the south side of Black Bart Road,approximately 1.4 miles south of Forbestown Road, at 876 Black Bart Road, Robinson Mills Area. 7. Setting: The project site is developed with a home,three accessory structures, septic system, and a well. An Oroville Wyandotte Irrigation District water ditch, with an adjacent dirt service road, traverses the site. Access to the site is via a long dirt/gravel driveway off of . Black Bart Road. Vegetation on the site consists of numerous pines, cedars, firs, oaks, and extensive brush. An open area consisting of grasses is located below the existing homesite. The site has undergone timber harvesting. Elevations on the site range from a low of 2,340 feet above sea level in the southwest portion of the site to a high of 2,740 feet above sea level in the northeast portion of the site. The site has a slope of approximately 22%, but there are some slopes on the site that are nearly 50%. The site generally drains into Negro Creek, which then flows into Natchez Creek. The project site is located within deer herd critical winter habitat. Surrounding parcels are zoned A-5 or TPZ-160 (Timber Preserve Zone, 160-acre minimum parcel size) and have a General Plan land use designation of Agricultural-Residential or Grazing and Open Land. Surrounding and nearby parcels range in size from 16-acres to 167- acres. The predominant land uses in the project area are dwellings at rural densities, timber harvesting, and scattered animal keeping. 8. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 073-110-036 9. Date Checklist Submitted: January 3, 2001 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e&—, permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Butte County Building Division, Butte County Public Works Department, Butte County Fire Department/CDF, Butte County Environmental Health Division, California Department of Fish and Game. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 2 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 II. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: © I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ there will NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been ❑ adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable.standards, and (b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. • ISI l I b Prepared by: Stephen Betts, Senior Planner Date evlewed by: Randy Wilson, Principal Planner Date III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. I ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 3 53 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants based on a project-specific, screening analysis.) 2) I All answers must take account of the whole action involved including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a.particular physical impact may occur,then the checklist answers must indicate :whether the-impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) 'Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 4 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant. No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures: For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or.threshold;-if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 5 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? �t d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect.day or nighttime views in the. area? K Response: This project will not affect a scenic vista nor have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The site is not located along a State or County designated scenic highway. The one additional dwelling that could be built as a result of this project, if the land is subdivided, will most likely have night lighting for safety and security reasons. However, this lighting will not cause a significant impact because only one additional dwelling can be placed on the site. Street lights are not required as a part of this project or of a subsequent land division on the . property. Mitigation Measure: None required. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining. whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to-non= agricultural use? 1t ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 6 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less . Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Conflict with existing zoning for. agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? K c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? _ K Response: The project site is zoned A-5 (Agricultural, 5-acre minimum parcel size),which allows most agricultural uses as a right. The project has two General Plan designations: Grazing and Open Land (approximately 43 acres)and Agricultural-Residential (approximately 16-acres). The boundary of the Grazing and Open Land/Agricultural-Residential designations generally follows the Oroville Wyandotte Irrigation District water ditch that traverses the site. This project will change the General Plan:Grazing and Open land use designation to Agricultural- Residential, and allows the .possibility. for two 29+ acre parcels to be created (note: a condition of the subsequent parcel map,will prohibit further land divisions of the two 29-acre parcels). There are four soil series types on the project site, which include Englebright, Rackerby, Rackerby Variant, and Wisheylu (U.S. Department of Agricultural, Tables for the Soil- Vegetation 1Liap, Rackerby). These soils generally consist of loams and clay loams.and range in thickness from 20 to 50 inches in depth. The soils have a very low to medium suitability for extensive range use (note: estimates for potential suitability apply to open areas, either natural'or cleared). The soils have a Soil Conservation Service Classification of VI (Butte County GIS). .Class VI soils are considered to have severe limitations, but are generally adequate for grazing purposes(Butte County General Plan, Land Use Element,Table LU-4). The property is not currently used for any agricultural use and does not have a history of commercial agricultural use.. There is no .California Land Conservation Agreement ("Williamson Act") affecting this property, but the adjacent parcel to the west is covered by an agreement. A small number of cattle are grazed on that parcel, which contains large areas that have been cleared of trees and brush. The only agricultural use in the area is limited- livestock imitedlivestock grazing. Although not considered an agricultural use; timber harvesting is also a major land use in the project area. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 7 . Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation. Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The project site is not conducive to livestock grazing due to numerous trees and extensive brush on the site. There are only a few small open areas on the site, located in the southwest portion of the property, where grasses can grow to provide forage for livestock. . The, proposed Agricultural-Residential land use-designation allows agricultural uses asa Primary Use and agricultural uses will still be possible on the site. The change from Grazing and Open Land to Agricultural-Residential is not expected to have any significant impacts on agricultural uses. The Agricultural Element of the Butte County General Plan does not apply to land that is designated as Grazing and Open Land. The Land.Use Element of the General Plan has several policies with regards to grazing lands, specifically Policy 2.2.e., which states that Grazing-Open Land category areas be retained where location and natural conditions make lands well suited for grazing land. As discussed above, the property does not appear to suitable for grazing purposes due. to the extensive amounts .of vegetation on the site. Changing the General Plan designation to Agricultural-Residential will not have a significant impact on the grazing potential on the site because that potential is already very limited. Grazing and other agricultural uses will still be possible on the two 29-acre parcels that may be possible as a result of this project. Mitigation Measure: None required. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 1t c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division .■ 8 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant . No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact under an.applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? �t d)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 1t e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 1t Response: a. - d. Both the California Air Resources Board and the Environmental Protection Agency have established air pollution standards in an effort to protect human health and welfare. Geographic areas are designated attainment if these standards are met and nonattainment.if they are not met. .In addition, each agency has several levels of classifications based on severity of the problem. .Butte County, and all northern Sacramento Valley Air Districts, have been designated as"moderate."nonattainment areas for the state standards for ozone (03) and fine particulate matter (PM10). Currently, Butte County is in attainment for all the federal (less stringent) air quality standards. Future proposals to develop the land to the extent permitted by this project will require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts from any proposed roads and development associated with the subdivision. Appropriate air quality control measures will be incorporated at that time. No significant air quality impacts are expected because only one new parcel may be created. e. This proposed change in residential density will not create significant objectionable odors, smoke or fumes beyond what is customary and expected from residential uses at rural densities. Mitigation Measure: None required. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 9 59 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 0.1-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 9t c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally-protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? _ 1t d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 1t ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 10 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. �t f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? K Response: Vegetation on the site consists of many pines, cedars, firs, scattered oaks, and extensive brush. The site has undergone timber harvesting. The project is not in an area that is known to support threatened, rare, or endangered plant;or animal species (Butte County Master Environmental Assessment;Figure BI0-2). The.site does not contain any significant natural watercourses. The entire project site is within deer herd critical winter habitat for the Mooretown deer herd (Butte County Deer Herd GIS coverage). The California Department of Fish and Game recommends a minimum parcel size of 40 acres for parcels located within deer herd critical winter habitat in order to help prevent impacts to the deer. This project may lead to the creation of two 29+acre parcels, which are less than the minimum parcel size recommended by the Department of Fish and Game. The Department of Fish and Game reviewed this project and has no objections provided that the applicant place deed restrictions on the property that requires mitigations designed to reduce impacts to the wintering deer herd (see the attached Department of Fish and Game letter). These mitigations will include a restriction on further land divisions of the two 29-acre parcels and a restriction where structures can be placed. The Department of Fish and Game will review and approve of the deed restriction at the time of application for a land division on the property to create the two 29+ acre parcels. Additional mitigations will be placed on a land division on the project site that require fences in non-residential areas meet specific criteria in order to prevent-a barrier to deer movements on the property and that deer impact fees be collected. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services 6 Planning Division ■ 61 11 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 c Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Because the General Plan Amendment in and of itself.will.not cause any environmental . impacts,no mitigations are recommended for project approval. It is not recommended that Fish and Game Filing fees be required, and a de minimus impact finding shall be made with respect to the project's impact on fish and wildlife. This finding may not be applicable to a future land division on the site if significant impacts to fish and wildlife resources are indicated. Mitigation Measure: None required. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? )t _ b) Cause a substantial adverse,change.in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? x c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? )t d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? )t Response: a. - d. According to Butte County constraints mapping, the project site is located in an area considered to have a low to medium archeological sensitivity. This mapping is general in nature and basis the probability of archeological significance on the physical characteristics and history of different areas of the County. According to the Northwest Information Center, several historic and prehistoric sites have been recorded in the project area. An archaeological survey conducted on the site for a timber harvest plan identified the OWID water ditch that traverses the property as a historical resource. The OWID ditch, known historically as the Oroville-Wyandotte ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 12 6 2 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-0I Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Canal, was initially constructed in 1853 and provided water for mining operations. The OWID ditch is still in use, 'and supplies irrigation water. This General Plan Amendment iri and of itself will not cause impacts to any cultural resources that may be located on the site,but will allow for a tentative parcel map to create two 29+acre parcels, one of which could be developed with a dwelling unit. An archaeological survey,which will identify historic or prehistoric resources, may. be required at the time of application for a parcel map on the site. Mitigation Measure: None required. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss;.injury; or. . death involving: 9t 1) Rupture of a known earth- quake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area orbased on other sub- stantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 1t 2) Strong seismic ground Shaking? X 3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X 4) Landslides? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 13 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact . Incorporated Impact Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1t c) Be located on.a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become_ unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? )t d) Be located on expansive soil, as . defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating sub- stantial risks to life or property? �t e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks:or alternative waste water disposal system , where sewers are not available for the disposal or waste water? )t Response: a.1. The Seismic Safety Element indicates that all of Butte County is in Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. The closest mapped Fault-Rupture Zone is the Cleveland Hills Fault line which is located approximately 3.75 miles to the west. No impacts are anticipated as a result of fault rupture and no seismic related requirements are necessary. a.2. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific site depends on the characteristics of the earthquake,the distance from the earthquake, and on the local geologic soils and conditions. At present, there is insufficient data to predict accurately the expected ground motions at various locations in Butte County. a.3. The Butte County Seismic Safety Element's Liquefaction Potential Map indicates that the site has a moderate potential for liquefaction. No impact is anticipated. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 14 64 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a.4. The Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that there is a low to moderate potential for landslides in this area. No impact is anticipated. The Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map also indicates that the property is not located in an area subject to-subsidence: No impact is anticipated. b. The Erosion Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that the soils on the site have a high erosion potential. Due to the low density of development associated with a subsequent parcel map allowed by this General Plan Amendment, no significant impacts are anticipated.- If soil erosion appears to be a problem, those impacts will be addressed at the time of parcel map application. C. No impact is anticipated from instability, landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. d. The Conservation Element's'Expansive Soils Map indicates that-the project site has a low expansive soil potential. No impact is anticipated. e. The Butte County Environmental Health Department indicates that the project is located in an area where soils are adequate for on-site sewage disposal. Mitigation Measure: None required. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 15 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With .Than . Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact.. Impact accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 1t c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed schools? X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 1t e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for.people residing or working in the project area? 1t f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 1t g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X ■ Buite County Department of Development Services N. Planning Division ■ 16 66 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No . Impact Incorporated Impact Impact h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including . where*wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X Response: a. - g. The project will not interfere with any airport or emergency response plan nor is located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.. h. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow one additional homesite. This new homesite represents an incremental increase in the need for fire protection services. The Butte County Fire Department/California Department of.Forestry indicates that thisrindividual General Plan Amendment has no impact on.the.Fire.Department,.but..the cumulative affect of the General Plan Amendment and higher density results in an incremental increase in demand for fire protection services. A future land division permitted by the General Plan . Amendment will require additional environmental review which may result in mitigation measures/conditions requiring fire sprinkler systems, water availability requirements and the application of fire safety standards found in Public Resources Code 4290 (Fire Safe Regulations). Mitigation Measure: None required. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 1t j b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 17 67 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01. Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which'would not support existing - land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? �t c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would. result in substantial.erosion.or siltation on- or off-site? X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including. through the alteration of.the,c.ourse.of a, stream or river, or substantially.increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? K e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? )t f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1t g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 18 68 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? �t i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding 'as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? K j) Inundation.by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Response: a. - f. Future proposals to develop the land to permitted by the General Plan Amendment will require additional:project-specific environmental review to assess the potential impacts to water;quality., drainage:and groundwater withdrawal. Itis not anticipated that development of one additional parcel proposed will have an impact on water flows off-site. The 29-acre parcels that may be proposed are large enough to accommodate retention of tun-off generated by development of one single family dwelling. b. Water supply for the one additional parcel permitted by the General Plan Amendment will.be provided by an on-site well. No impact is anticipated. g. - i. The property is shown to be outside the area of the 500-year flood according to Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel#06007C-1050C, dated June S, 1999. No impact shall be incurred with respect to flooding. j. The property is not located in an area prone to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact shall be incurred with respect to these natural hazards. Mitigation Measure: None required. ■�, Butte County Department of Development Services Planninb Division ■ 19 69 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact . 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project? a) Physically divide an established community? 1t b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted . for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 1t c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural.community-.. conservation plan? �t Response: a. The project will not physically divide an established community. No impact shall be incurred. b. , This project does not conflict with any of the Grazing and Open Land polices of the Land Use Element of the Butte County General Plan. These policies were adopted by Butte County in order to prevent the loss of agricultural land within the County. Loss of agricultural land to development is considered an environmental impact and is discussed under Initial Study Checklist Item 2, Agricultural Resources. Surrounding parcels are zoned A-5 or TPZ-160 (Timber Preserve Zone, 160-acre minimum parcel size) and have a General Plan land use designation of Agricultural- Residential or Grazing and Open Land. Surrounding and nearby parcels range in size from 16-acres to 167-acres. The predominant land uses in the project area are dwellings at rural densities, timber harvesting, and scattered animal keeping. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 20 70 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Of the 101 parcels that are located within one mile of the project site,33% of the parcels are less than five acres in size, 30% are five to ten acres, 16% are ten to twenty acres, 8% are twenty to forty acres, 7% are forty to eighty acres, and 7% are greater than 100-acres in size. The sizes of the parcels that maybe created 8 a result. of this project are consistent with other parcels found in the area..Three of the six parcels surrounding the site could be subdivided,but only to a 40-acre parcel.size due to the deer herd habitat,unless approved by the Department of Fish and Game for a smaller parcel size. C. The proposal will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Mitigation Measure: None required. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES.. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?. X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? )t Response: a. - b. The property is not known to contain any important mineral resources of value to the region. A future land division on the site, which may create two 29+ acre parcels, will not significantly interfere with any future mineral excavations on the site. No impact shall be incurred. Nlititlation Measure: None required. ■ Bittte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 21 71 i Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 0 1-0 1 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? K b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels: X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without . the project? �t d) A substantial temporary-or.periodi.c increase in ambient noise-levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? k e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public' use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 22 72 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: a. - d. The project site is located in,an area of rural residential uses away from customary sources of significant noise. This General Plan Amendment project will not cause an increase in noise or expose people to severe noise levels. A subsequent land division as a result of this General Plan Amendment will result in an increase in noise created on the project site and on the adjacent parcels. Construction noise will be the first new source added to the site that could influence nearby residents. Sources could include heavy equipment, power saws and hammering and can be significant,especially during noise sensitive hours. Construction activities.would temporarily generate high noise levels on and adjacent to the project site intermittently during project development activities.. This construction noise, especially grading equipment, will not have a significant impact on nearby residents because the noise will be intermittent and short-term in nature. Mitigation.Measure::NoneRequired. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population.growth in an area, either directly(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? )t b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing . elsewhere? x c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? k ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 23 73 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA OI-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than. Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: a. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow one additional homesite on a 29-acre parcel. The subsequent land division has the potential to add an estimated three people to Butte County(one dwelling unit x 2.6 persons/dwelling unit). This is not considered a significant amount and is consistent with the estimated growth rate for the County of about 2%per year. b. - c. The project will not displace individuals or housing. If the land is subdivided additional housing could be developed. No impact shall be incurred. Mitigation Measure: None required. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the proje ct'result,in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered, governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which.could cause, significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services? �t b) Fire protection? k c) Police Protection? k d) Schools? x e) Parks? 1t 0 Other public services? k ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 24 74 . Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than . Significant Less Potentially With. Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: a. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow for one additional homesite. Although this presents an incremental contribution to the impact on area services,it is not considered significant enough to warrant specific mitigation. b. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow one additional homesite..The new homesite represents an incremental increase in the need for fire protection services. The Butte County Fire Department/California Department of Forestry indicates that this individual General Plan Amendment has no impact on the Fire Department, but the cumulative affect of the General Plan Amendment and higher density results in an incremental increase in demand for fire protection services. A future land division permitted by the General Plan Amendment will require .additional environmental review which may result in mitigation measures/conditions requiring fire sprinkler systems, water availability requirements.and the application of fire safety standards found in Public Resources Code 4290 (Fire-Safe Regulations). C. The cumulative impacts of increased development in rural areas impacts the ability of the Sheriffs Department to adequately provide police services to outlying areas. Sheriffs facilities will be collected at the time of building permit issuance to offset the cost of proving sheriff services to the new dwelling unit on the project site. d. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow one additional homesite, which represents an incremental increase in the demand for school services in the area. New development is subject to payment of school fees that are collected prior to issuance of building permits. This will be a condition of a future land division on the site. e. - f. The proposed General Plan Amendment may result in a land division that would allow one additional dwelling unit in addition to the one existing dwelling. This may represent an incremental increase in the demand for maintenance of roads and other public facilities in the area as well as area parks. This is not considered significant due to the small number of potential additional residents. Mitigation Measure: None required. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 25 75 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 0 1-0 1 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 14. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? K b) Does the project include.recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Response: a. - b. The project will allow for the eventual improvement of one new building site in addition to the one-existing building site. The impact on area recreation facilities will be assessed upon:review of a subsequent subdivision proposal. However, due to the . limited extent of development, no impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measure: None required. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 26 76 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Exceed, either individually or cumula- tively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated - roads or highways? X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X . d) Substantially increase hazards due to .a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X Response: a. - g. The property is served by Black Bart Road, a minor county road. Black Bart Road is a loop road that connects to Forbestown Road at two different locations. The proposed General Plan Amendment may contribute additional traffic-related impacts. However, it is not anticipated that the one additional building site allowed by subdivision of this site will generate any significant traffic impact. A specific environmental review shall be conducted regarding the improvements necessary to private and public area roads upon review of any future land division. However, no impact is anticipated. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 27 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-0I Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Mitigation Measure: None required. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? )t b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? �t c) Require or result in the construction..of new storm water drainage facilities.or expansion of existing-facilities,the: construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? �t d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 1t ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 28 r Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Ampact g) Comply with federal,state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? �t Response: a. - g. The General Plan Amendment proposal will provide for the potential of one additional homesite. No impact in these areas shall be incurred as a result of General Plan Amendment approval. A project specific environmental review will be necessary when a land division is submitted for review.' Additional mitigations may be necessary at that time to address any significant impacts to these areas. Mitigation Measure: None required. 17. MANDATORY 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? �t b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively consider- able" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 29 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future.projects)? X C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 1t Response: a. and d. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not degrade the environment, or have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. . b. The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. V. MITIGATION MEASURES.AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: None DATA SHEET A. Project Description 1. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment. 2. Proposed Density of Development: 59+acres. 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: One additional single family dwelling and accessory structures. 4. Access and Nearest Public Road: Private driveway to Black Bart Road. 5. Method of Sewage Disposal: On-site septic systems. 6. Source of Water Supply: On-site wells. 7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property. . 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: The General Plan Amendment proposes two 29-acre parcels, which will allow for one additional dwelling. B. Environmental Settin:; 1. Terrain a General Topographic Character: Mountainous. b. Slopes: Site average of 22%. Some slopes of 50%. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 30 80 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 C. Elevation: 2;340 feet above sea level in the southwest portion of the site to a high of 2,740 feet above sea level on the northeast portion. d. Limiting Factors: Steep slopes. 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: Englebright, Rackerby, Rackerby Variant,.,and . Wisheylu soil series. These soils generally consist of loams and clay l6ams and range in thickness from 20 to 50 inches in depth. b. Limiting Factors: Very high soil erosion potential. 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. b. Erosion Potential: Very high. C. Landslide Potential: Low to moderate. d. Fire Hazard: Very high. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Low. 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: OWID water ditch, headwaters of Negro Creek. b. Ground Water: Unknown, potentially limited. C. Drainage Characteristics: Generally to the southwest. d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 50-55 inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: None. 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Good. 6. Acoustic Quality: Good. 7. Air Quality: .Good.-. . S. Vegetation: Pines;.cedars,.firs; oaks, brush, grasses in open areas. 9. Wildlife Habitat: Deer, turkeys, quail, rabbits, mountain lions, coyotes. 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: Low to medium sensitivity area. OWID is a historical resource. 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Grazing and Open Land and Agricultural- Residential. 12. Existing Zoning: A-5 (Agricultural, 5-acre minimum parcel size). 13. Existing Land Use on-site: Single family dwelling, accessory structures, septic system, well, OWID water ditch. 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Rural residential, timber harvesting, limited grazing.. b. Zoning: North: A-5, TPZ-160. C. General Plan Designation:Agricultural Residential,Orchard and Field Crops. d. Parcel Sizes: 10 to 167 acres. 15. Character of Site and Area: Mountain timber area with rural residential uses. 16. Nearest Urban Area: City of Oroville, 12 miles to the west. 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: None. 18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: None. 19. Fire Protection Service: ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 31 Project:Russell General Plan Amendment,File GPA 01-01 a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station: Station number 54 approximately 2.9 miles away in Robinson Mills. b. Water Availability: Fire tankers, OWID water ditch. 20. Schools: Oroville Unified School District, Oroville Elementary.School District. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL 1. Butte County Planning Department. Earthquake and Fault Activity Map 11-1, Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 2. Butte County Planning Department. Liquefaction Potential Map 11-2, Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 3. Butte County Planning Department. Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map 111-1, Safety Element. Oroville, CA CH2M Hill, 1977. 4. Butte County Planning Department. Erosion Potential Map 11 1-2-',Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 5. Butte County Planning Department. Expansive Soils Map 111-3, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 6. Butte County Planning Department. Noise Element Map IV-1, Scenic Highway Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 7. Butte County Planning Department. Scenic Highways Map V-1, Scenic Highway Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 8. Butte County Planning, Department: . Natural Fire Hazard Classes Map 111-4, Safety Element. Oroville, CA:- CH2M Hill, 1977. 9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity May. Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983. 10. Butte County Planning Department. School District Map. Oroville, CA. 11. Northwestern District Department of-Water Resources. Chico Nitrate Study Map. Nitrate Concentration in Shallow Wells. The Resources Agency, State of California, 1983. 12. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agricultural Preserves Map, .established by Resolution No. 67-178: Oroville, CA: Butte County Planning Department, 1987. 13. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1989. 14. USGS Quad Maps. 15. Soil Map. Chico (1925)/Oroville (1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico 0925)/Oroville(1926)Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 17. Butte County Planning Department. -Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Map. Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989. K:\PROIECTS\GPA\RUSSELL.GPA\R USS ELL.IS ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 32 82 AOL AdIlk WROW -------- ------------- ,LDR LDR --------------- LDR -'------ -- ------ LDR Project Location ' 0.95 a0 LDR C `` r 5.78 ac Feather Falls 34.19 ac phir C+ Casino O ; ___-- Alverda Dr---- - ���'. --------- 132.92 ac "s o3s.3,a,sx LDR Wheeler Ave 1' 1&99 sc 17'4.76 ac 11,1.1 6 a self LDR J" _____________ '.' ---4�"e4e 4..8n I I b� i I �18 Road I e• ,w d ,•1 V� d,rw d° t •l.r. ml d d, G L 1 AR Fr P o II , GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL MAP AMENDING Exhibit'- B-1 OROVILLE AREA LAND USE PLAN File: GPARZ 99-03 Resolution Date Butte County Board of Supervisors N. .; EXHIBIT B-2 • Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 COUNTY OF BUTTE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND: L Name of Proponent: Shirley Prusia, Mooretown Rancheria 2. Address: 1 Alverda Drive Oroville. CA 95966 Phone: 530-533-3680 3. Name of Proposal: Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone (GPA/RZ 99-03� 4. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment and Rezone 5. Project Description: General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial and Rezone from A-R (Agricultural Residential) to C-1 (Light Commercial) for 5.48 acres located on a 38.62-acre parcel. The applicant has intentions to develop a parking lot with 300 parking spaces to be used in conjunction with the Feather Falls Casino. The parking lot will be paved with 2-inches of asphalt concrete, and will include a stormwater detention basin for management of storm .water run-off. The proposed C-1 zone will be limited to the construction of the-parking lot through the use of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. The applicant has provided additional information, which indicates that the existing concert facility at the Feather Falls Casino exceeds parking availability during concert events. The concert facility provides seating for+/-1000. The current parking lot provides 315 standard and handicap parking spaces. When this parking lot becomes full, concert patrons park in unauthorized areas. The proposed new parking lot will provide 300 additional parking spaces and 6 bus spaces to alleviate parking demands during concert events. More recently, the Mooretown Rancheria disclosed plans to enlarge the existing casino into the existing casino parking lot. This would displace existing parking spaces, and increase demand for parking. The expansion will take place over the period of one-year. 6. Location of project: The property is located south of and adjacent to Alverda Drive, approximately 2000 feet east of Lower Wyandotte Road and 200 feet west of Lorene Court, opposite the Feather Falls Casino and Mooretown Rancheria, in the south Oroville area. 7. Setting: The site is undeveloped, although a dwelling, well, septic system, workshop and pond are present in other locations on the property. The Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District (OWID) ditch is shown to course through the proposed parking lot. However, according to OWID, this ditch has been abandoned. Area soil consists of the Redding gravelly sandy loam series, which is described as having low agricultural value, but does Butte County Department of Development Services G Planning Division n 841 of. Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 ERROR: timeout OFFENDIIfto��R e t Rto&tgrazing land. Site drainage is primarily to the south. The federally STACK: recognized Mooretown Rancheria is adjacent from this site to the north. The Mooretown Rancheria includes a 50 lot residential subdivision, tribal administration building and the Feather Falls Casino. Access is provided by Alverda Drive, from which two driveway locations will serve the proposed parking lot. Alverda Drive is a private road, serving the Mooretown Rancheria. 6. Assessor's Parcel Numbers:.036-310-162 7. Date Checklist Submitted: August 2, 2000 8. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of Public Works. H. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,- and nvironment;and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. % I find that althoughthe.. proposed tproject COULD have a significant effect on the environment,:there will NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions have been made by- or agreed" to, by the ' project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required._ ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 2 85 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 . Prepared by: Daniel C. Breedon, Senior Planner Date .Rev'ewed by: andy Wilson, Principal Planner Dat M. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. X Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources X Air Quality 0 Biological resources 0 Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils 0 Hazards/Hazardous Materials . . X Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Land Use/Planning . ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population VHousing ❑ Public Services c ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 0 Utilities/Service Systems EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead..agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone. A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants based on a project-specific screening analysis.) 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) . Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than ;D Butte County Department of Development Services E. Planning Division 3 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence*that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and. adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures-, For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,'.' describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier,document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. ;_; Butte County Department of Development Services 10 Planning Division 4 87 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant. ., No Impact Incorporated Impact... Impact IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? )t b) Substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X d) Create a new source of substantial:. light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Response: The site is not located along a State or County designated scenic highway. The proposed . parking lot will include lighting for security and safety reasons. All external lighting shall be directed downward and be contained within the parking lot boundaries. This is recommended as a project mitigation measure. The proposed 5-acre parking lot will create significant light and glare and substantially degrade the existing visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. Landscaping treatment is recommended to help soften the visual impact of the paved area, and reduce heat gain from the paved surface. Landscaping treatment is recommended as a project mitigation measure. Mitigation Measure #1 Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division u 588 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact In order to reduce the impact of light and glare on surrounding properties, all external lighting shall be directed downward and shall be contained within the parking lot boundaries. Mitigation Measure#2 In order to soften the visual impact of the paved area, and to reduce heat gain on the paved surface, the applicant shall provide a Landscaping Plan, conforming to the below list of requirements. This mitigation shall be incorporated by reference into the Conditional Zoning Agreement: 1. In accordance with Butte County Code Section 24-240.10 (e), a total of 5 percent of the gross parking lot area(11,935 square feet) shall be devoted to landscaping. Each planter area shall be surrounded with a six-inch raised concrete curbing, or equivalent. 2. The parking lot shall be planted with trees of not less.than 15 gallon size to reduce heat gain from the paved surface and to soften the visual impact of the paved area. Trees shall be planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so that at tree maturity;.15.years, at least 5.0 percent of the total paving area, not including driveway entrances,.shall be shadedras determined by a qualified arborist or landscape architect. 3. An irrigation system shall be installed in each separate planter and landscaped area. 4. The landscape and irrigation plan, consistent with the landscaping requirements and. project site plan, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to grading, site development and issuance of any associated building permits. 5. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving conditions, free from weeds, trash, and debris, during the term of this permit. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland . Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or - Butte County Department of Development Services CI Planning Division 7. 6 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- . agricultural use? 7t b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act . contract? X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X Response: The property is:not considered;pfime agricultural land, and is not under a Williamson Act Contract. Soil information indicates that the property provides marginal grazing land. No impact shall be incurred to agricultural resources. Mitigation: None required. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 1t b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 1t c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 7 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X d)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? �t e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 1t Response: a. - d. Future proposals must also consider the standards as set forth by both the California Air Resources Board and the Environmental Protection Agency. These standards have been established to,protect human health and welfare. Counties are designated in attainment:ifthe standards are met and in nonattainment if they are not met. Butte County; and all-.Northern,Sacramento Valley Air Districts, have been designated as being,"moderate" nonattainment areas for the State standards for ozone and fine particulate matter defined as smaller than 10 microns (Particulate Matter 10, or "PM10"). Currently, Butte County is in attainment for all the federal air quality standards which are less stringent than the State of California standards. The Air Quality Management District (AQMD) reviewed the request for this General Plan Amendment and recommends incorporating measures necessary to control fugitive dust emissions from all road and other construction activities during project. improvements. Measures may include site and driveway watering and/or use of other acceptable soil palliatives. AQMD's requirements are recommended as project mitigations. e. This proposal wily not create significant objectionable odors, smoke or fumes. Mitigation Measure #3 In order to avoid fugitive dust conditions, the applicant shall ensure that all road and other ' construction activities taking place during site development are sufficiently watered and/or treated with a soil palliative. These measures will be carried out to the satisfaction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District. Butte County Department of Development Services (_1 Planning Division 8 i Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either'directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 9t b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community,identified'inlocal or regional.plans, policies, regulations or.;by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 1t c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but riot limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? K d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites" 1t Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 992 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. 1t f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? �t Response: a. The project site is not known to contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or.by the California Department of Fish and.Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A"de minimus" impact finding;is recommended with regard to the project's impact on fish, wildlife or their habitat. The project is not known to be inhabited or provide habitat for any rare, endangered or sensitive plant or animal species. Fish and Game fees pursuant Public Resources Code Section 21089 and as defined by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, are not recommended to be'collected. b. The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans-, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service. C. The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. d. The project will not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e. The project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 10 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f. The project will not conflict with the.provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Mitigation: None required. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? K c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?- d) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Response: According to Butte County constraints mapping, the project site is located in an area considered to have a low archeological sensitivity. Often such sites are found in foothill areas, areas with high bluffs, rock outcroppings, areas overlooking deer migratory corridors, or above bodies of water. This mapping is general in nature and basis the probability of archeological significance on the physical characteristics and history of different areas of the County. There is still the potential that underlying archaeological resources may be disturbed during the project's development. However, the site's low archeological significance, does not warrant any specific mitigation. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, 0 Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 1193 Project:Mooretown Raricheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact- including the risk of loss,injury, or death involving: X 1) Rupture of a known earth- - -- - quake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other sub- stantial evidence of a know fault? Refer to Division of Mines and .Geology Special Publication 42- X 2) Strong seisnlic,ground.. Shaking? x 3:) Seismic-related ground failure, including,liquefaction? X 4) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating sub- stantial risks to life or property? X Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 12 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General PlanAmendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No. Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal or waste water? 1t Response: a.1. The Seismic Safety Element indicates that all of Butte County is in Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. The closest mapped Fault-Rupture Zone is the Cleveland Hills Fault line which is located approximately 2 miles to the east. No impacts are anticipated as a result of fault rupture and no seismic related requirements are necessary. a.2. This site is shown to be located approximately 2 miles north of the epicenter of the Oroville earthquake, which occurred in 1975. The site is also shown to be within the Oroville After-shock Epicenter Region. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific sit.e.depends on.the characteristics of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake, and,om the local 4geologic soils and conditions. At present, there is insufficient data•to predict. accurately the expected ground motions at various locations in Butte County. A.3. The Butte County Seismic Safety Element's Liquefaction Potential Map indicates that the site has a low potential for liquefaction. No impact is anticipated. a.4. The Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that there is no potential for landslides in this area. No Impact is anticipated. b. The Erosion Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that there is high erosion potential at this site. Mitigation Measures 95 and 6 are recommended to reduce potential erosion impact to levels not considered significant. C. No impact is anticipated from instability, landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. d. The Conservation Element's Expansive Soils Map indicates that the project site has a low expansive soil designation. No impact is anticipated. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division !: 13 Project:Nlooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant . Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e. The Butte County Environmental Health Department indicates that the project is located in an area where soils are very shallow and contain a large fraction of clay underlain with a water impermeable clay hardpan. The soils are not well-suited for development of on-site sewage disposal. systems. This project is. limited to construction of a parking lot and no on-site sewage disposal is proposed. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: . a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and . accident conditions involving the release of hazardous!materials into the environment? 1t C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed schools?. % d) Be located.on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 1t e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such.a plan has.not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division n 1496 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less . Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact residing or working in the project area? X 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? )t h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are.adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 1t Response: a. - g. The project will not interfere with any airport or emergency response plan nor is located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. h. Although the General Plan classifies the fire hazard in thisarea. as extreme, the construction of the parking lot should not contribute to a situation that results in significant loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. The parking area should enhance area traffic circulation, and provides a safer area for patrons of the Casino. The parking area is correcting a situation where patrons illegally park in adjacent fields and roadsides. The parking area will alleviate this problem and may help to avoid the fire risk associated with parking over dry plant material and roadside brush. The project application was reviewed for wildland fire impacts by the Butte County Fire Department. The Fire Department had no conditions provided the parking lot is restricted to parking only. This limitation will be required through a Conditional Zoning Agreement: No impact to residences shall be incurred as no residences are proposed under this proposal, Mitigation: None required. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 15 97 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03.. Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? �t b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with . groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? �t c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? �t d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a . manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? 1t e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runolF? 1t f) Otherwise substantially degrade C Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 16 98 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 . Less Than Significant Less Potentially VVith Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact water quality? `1t g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X I) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 1t j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1t Response: a. The project does not involve a use that will have the potential to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. No impact shall be incurred. b. The project does not involve a use tht will substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. No impact shall be incurred. c.-f. The project includes the development of a stormwater detention pond to accept additional runoff from the parking lot. In the interim, staff recommends that erosion control be implemented on all cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height, due to the erosive nature of the soil. This will be accomplished with a native grass seed mix or hydroseed application. This is recommended as a project mitigation measure. Prior to site development and issuance of any building permits a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. ❑ Butte County Department of Development Services D Planning Division .. 17 99 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. This requirement is recommended as a project mitigation measure. g. - I. The property is shown to be outside the area of the 500-year flood according to Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel #06007C0985C, dated June 8, 1999. No impact shall be incurred with respect to flooding. j. The property is not located in an area prone to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact shall be incurred with respect to these natural hazards. Mitigation Measure #4 Due to the potential for soil displacement through erosion during construction, all cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height shall be stabilized with a native grass seed mix or hydroseed application. The seed should be maintained for a period of two years to establish stable soil conditions, and an 80 percent cover should be established at the end of two years. The Planning Division shall ensure compliance with this mitigation. Mitigation Measure #5 Prior to site development and issuance of any building permits, a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project? a) Physically divide an-established community? 1t b) Conflict with an applicable land use pian, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division G 18 i0o Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X c) Conflict with any applicable habitat -conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Response: a. The parking lot will serve the Mooretown Rancheria's Feather Falls Casino complex. The Mooretown Rancheria is a federally recognized Rancheria containing a 50 lot subdivision, tribal administration .building and the Feather Falls Casino. The Rancheria is not considered part of the County of Butte. However, the proposed parking lot falls outside of Rancheria jurisdiction and is regulated by the County. The parking lot will benefit the Rancheria, and may ultimately be accepted into the Rancheria at some future time. This parking lot is integral to the operation of the Rancheria and its community-and will not physically divide the community. b. The project will not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal. program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. C. The proposal will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents or the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local Butte County Department of Development Services LD Planning Division 19 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? K Response: a. - b. The property is not known.to contain any important mineral resources of value to the region. No impact shall be,incurred. Mitigation: None required. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a)Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels: x c) A substantial permanent,increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X d) .A substantial.temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division ij 20 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? )t e once: a. -b. The project will result in a temporary increase in noise and vibration levels as construction takes place. However, since this construction activity is temporary, the project will not result in noise levels in excess of local standards. C. Existing ambient noise levels in the area are high due to the projects proximity to the adjacent Feather Falls Casino. The casino includes a 315 space parking lot. The use of the project area for a parking lot is not expected to significantly alter the existing ambient noise level. d. . The parking lot's ambient noise level will be similar to the adjacent parking lot and Feather Fall's Casino. The project.will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project e. This project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. No impact is anticipated. Mitigation: Done Required. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsev,-here' X Butte County Department of Development Services _. Planning Division . 21 101 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1t Response: a. -c.. Although the construction of the parking lot constitutes an extension of existing infrastructure,the parking lot is intended to serve existing patrons of the casino and concert facility, which are currently not served with adequate parking facilities. The proposal will result in the loss of 5.48 acres of land now designated for Low Denstity Residential uses by the General Plan. This designation allows for the development of 6 dwelling units/acre, provided that acceptable services can be provided. However, this area is currently not provided with sewer service, and allowable densities would be much lower.. Additionally, the Environmental Health Department indicates that on-site disposal of sewage is very difficult due to the poor soil conditions of the area. It is unlikely that additional dwellings may be developed without full sewer service to the area. The Mooretown Rancheria is in the process of providing additional housing for tribe members within the Rancheria itself. Through this planning process, adequate housing will be provided for the Rancheria community, and the loss of residential land represented by this proposal will not significantly effect housing availability in the area. Mitigation: None required. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public,services? % Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 22 102 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Fire protection? x c) Police Protection? )t d) Schools? x e) Parks? x f) Other public services? 1t Re onse: a. The development of the Feather Falls Casino has been recognized by the County Public Works Department to warrant certain off-site road improvements in order to maintain adequate traffic flow and circulation. These improvements include the widening of Lower Wyandotte Road to include a continuous left-hand turn lane and signalization of the intersections of Lower Wyandotte Road, Ophir Road;and Upper Palermo Roads and the intersection of Ophir Road and Lincoln Avenue. With the exception of the signalization.of Ophir Road and Lincoln Avenue, the work has been completed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The Ophir Road/Lincoln Avenue signalization is scheduled for the Summer of 2001, according to the Department of Public Works. The Mooretown Rancheria was required to submit fair-share contributions for this work. Any additional impact associated with the proposed parking lot has been mitigated by the work completed and scheduled by the Department of Public Works. No additional impact is anticipated. b. The California Department of Forestry/Butte County Fire Department indicates that the proposal will have no impact on fire protection services provided the parking lot is not used for any other use besides parking. The Conditional Zoning Agreement shall ensure that the use is limited to a parking lot. No impact shall be incurred. C. The project will not generate any impacts related to police protection. No impact shall be incurred. d. The project will not result in additional growth or housing. No impact shall be incurred to school services. e. - F. The project will not result in additional growth or housing. No impact shall be incurred to parks or other public services. Butte County Department of Development Services ::: Planning Division 23 103 �- 1,- - Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation . .Significant No Impact . Incorporated Impact Impact . Mitigation: None required. 14. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? x Response: a - b. The project will not result in additional growth or housing. No impact shall be incurred to recreation services. Mitigation: None required. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? x - b) Exceed, either individually or cumula- tively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? X Butte County Department of Development Services = Planning Division 24 1. 04 Project:,Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially : With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in- substantial safety risks? )t d) .Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp"curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 1t e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with accepted policies, plans. or programs supporting alternative" transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? �t Response: " a - g. The development of the Feather Falls Casino has been recognized by the County . Public Works Department to warrant certain off-site road improvements in order to maintain adequate "traffic flow and circulation. These improvements include the widening of Lower Wyandotte Road to include a continuous left-hand turn lane and signalization of the intersections of Lower Wyandotte Road, Ophir Road, and Upper -Palermo Roads and the intersection of Ophir Road and Lincoln Avenue. With the exception of the signalization of Ophir Road and Lincoln Avenue, the work has been completed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The Ophir Road/Lincoln Avenue signalization is scheduled for the Summer of 2001, according to the Department of Public Works. The Nlooretow•n Rancheria was required to submit fair-share contributions for this work. Any additional impact associated with the proposed parking lot has been mitigated by the work completed and scheduled by the Department of Public Works. However, additional impact is not anticipated since the proposed parking lot is expected to service existing demand"from the casino. Butte County Department of Development Services G Planning Division 25 Project:blooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact. . i The Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) indicates that the BCAG . traffic model for Butte County shows a Level'of Service (LOS) of"B" for the main roads in the immediate vicinity of the project (Ophir, Upper.Palermo, Lower Wyandotte, and Lincoln).- An LOS of`°B"-is indicative of free-flowing traffic and a- good progression of vehicles. . Mitigation: None required. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. . Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality. Control Board? X b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,-the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity.to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the . provider's existing commitments? X Butte County Department of Development Services t� Planning Division 26 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?. g) Comply with federal, state; and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? �t Reponse: a. - g. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone proposal will not have an impact to these utilities and service systems 17. MANDATORY 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 hist or prehistory? % b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively consider- able" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current Butte County Department of Development Services ;_: Planning Division ... 27 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? it c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? x Response: a. and d. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone will not degrade the environment, or have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. b. The project does have the potential to contribute impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable with respect to cumulative impact to Initial Study Checklist Section 1, Aesthetics; Section 2, Air Quality; and Section 8; Hydrology and Water Quality; Cumulative impacts from these areas will be mitigated due to the inclusion of Mitigation Measures #1 - 5 as itemized under Section V. -Mitigation Measures 'and Monitoring Requirements. Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division 28 . Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: Mitigation Measure#T In order to reduce the impact of light and glare on surrounding properties, all external lighting.shall be directed downward and shall be contained within the parking lot boundaries. Mitigation Measure#2 In order to soften the visual impact of the paved area, and to reduce heat gain on the paved surface, the applicant.shall provide.a Landscaping Plan, conforming to the below list of requirements. This mitigation shall be incorporated by reference into the Conditional Zoning Agreement: 1. In accordance with Butte County Code Section 24-240.10 (e), a total of 5 percent of the gross parking lot area(11,935 square feet) shall be devoted to landscaping. Each planter area shall be surrounded with a six-inch raised concrete curbing, or equivalent. 2. The parking lot shall be planted with trees of not less than 15 gallon size to reduce heat gain from the paved surface and to soften the visual impact of the paved area. Trees shall be planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so that at tree maturity,15 years, at least 50 percent of the total paving area, not including driveway entrances, shall be shaded as determined by a qualified arborist or landscape architect. 3. An irrigation system shall be installed in each separate planter and landscaped area. 4. The landscape and irrigation plan, consistent with the landscaping requirements and .project site plan, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to grading, site development and issuance of any associated building permits. 5. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving conditions, free from weeds;trash, and debris,,during the term of this permit. Mitigation Measure #3 In order to avoid fugitive dust conditions, the applicant shall ensure that all road and other construction activities taking place during site development are sufficiently watered and/or treated with a soil palliative. These measures will be carried out to the satisfaction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District. Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division 29 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 Mitigation Measure #4 Due to the potential for soil displacement through erosion during construction, all cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height shall be stabilized.with a native grass seed mix or hydroseed application. The seed should be maintained for a period oftwo years to establish stable soil conditions, and an 80, percent cover should be established at the end of two years. The Planning Division shall ensure . compliance with this mitigation. Mitigation Measure#5 . Prior to site development and issuance of any buildingpermits, a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall.provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. - Butte County Department of Development Services `.Planning Division 30 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 DATA SHEET A. Proiec� t Description 1. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment and Rezone 2. Proposed Density of Development: Not Applicable 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: 5:48 acres 4. Access and Nearest Public Road: Access is provided by Alverda Drive, a private road,which intersects Lower Wyandotte Road, a County Road, approximately 2000 feet to the south. 5. Method of Sewage Disposal: Not applicable 6. Source of Water Supply: Not applicable 7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property. 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: None. B. Environmental Setting 1. Terrain a General Topographic Character: Gently sloping hillside. b. Slopes: 0 - 5 percent. c. Elevation: 325 feet above sea-level. d. Limiting Factors:.None. 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: Corning:gravelly sandy loam series. b. Limiting Factors: Poor agricultural value. 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. b. Erosion Potential: High. C. Landslide Potential: Low. d. Fire Hazard: Extreme. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Low. 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation Ditch (abandoned). b. Ground Water: Abundant valley aquifers. C. Drainage Characteristics: Southerly as sheet flow. d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 26-inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: None. 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Good. 6, Acoustic Quality: Good. 7. Air Quality: Good, except when stagnant air conditions persist in the valley. 8: Vegetation: Oak trees, shrubs and grasses. 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small mammals and birds. 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: Low sensitivity area. ❑. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 31 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03- 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Low Density Residential 12. Existing Zoning: A-R(Agricultural Residential) 13. Existing Land Use on-site: Undeveloped. 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: North: Mooretown Rancheria Indian Reservation . South: Undeveloped. East: Undeveloped. West: Undeveloped.. b. Zoning: North: A-R South:.A-R. East: A-R. West: A-R .. C. General Plan Designation: North: Low Density Residential. ' South: Low Density.-Residential. East: Low Density.Residential..West: . Low Density Residential. d. Parcel Sizes (acres): North: 5.7 South: 19 East: 132 West: 22 1.5. Character of Site and Area: Recreational and residential and open land. 16. Nearest Urban Area: City of Oroville 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: City of Oroville (also located within the County General Plan's Oroville Urban Reserve). 18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: None. 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station: Station number 63 approximately 5 miles away. b. Water Availability: Fire tankers only. 20. Schools: Palermo Unified School District. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL 1. Butte County Planning Department: Earthquake and Fault Activity Map 11-1_ Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 2. Butte County Planning Department. Liquefaction Potential Map 11-2, Seismic Safetv Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 3. Butte County Planning Department. Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map 111-1. Safetv .Element. Oroville, CA CH2M Hill, 1977.. 4. Butte County Planning Department: Erosion Potential Map 111-2. Safety Element. Oroville; CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 5. Butte County Planning Department. Expansive Soils Map 111-3. Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 6. Butte County Planning Department. Noise Element Map IV-l: Scenic Highway Element: Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. c 7. Butte County Planning Department. Scenic Highways Map V-1, Scenic Highway Element. . Oroville, CA: CMM Hill, 1977. 8. Butte County Planning Department. Natural Fire Hazard Classes Map.111-4, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division 32 Project:Mooretown Rancheria General Plan Amendment and Rezone 99-03 . 9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity Map. Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983. 10. Butte,County Planning Department. School District Man, Oroville, CA. 11. Northwestern District Department of Water Resources. Chico Nitrate Study Map.Nitrate ' Concentration in Shallow Wells. The Resources Agency, State of California, 1983 12. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agricultural Preserves Man. established by Resolution No. 67-178. Oroville, CA: 'Butte County Planning Department; 1987. 13. National .Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Federal Emergency. Management Agency. 1989'. 14. USGS.Quad Maps. 15. Soil Map, Chico (1925)/Oroville(1926) Area. United States.Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico (1925)/Oroville(1926)Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Maw Butte County Fire Department and California Department.of Forestry, 1989. .: Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division 33 11- 3 LJ HIE_ ------------- ---------- ------ Shortho r ------ -------'--- R o Gra e R ad -------------------- T7 pio -- --------------- Rio I Iravo Dr - -- --- --- "-e- -- Area to be A ul• General Plan Project*Location m 0 Ed Hays Subdivision: 341-acre lots (unrecorded) 047-350.015 33.87 P Y • 047350-014 Approximate relocation area 10.15 G of the P-Q Zone and"Public' •J• '+ 9 General Plan Designation tifti�ti ; ' J.J•J• 047-M-O 3 .,+ fti�ti j ti J•�•f�r�r .J■fti ti•ti• i .f ■J■J � ; 19.68 ti• "•JtiJ ■J J•J•f C; ti•tirti 5.91 + J. Approximate relocation area 4.87 of the P-Q Zone and"Public" D General Plan Designation ss Pheas t Ru Ct CL Pro"ect Locafion U m _ P 3 0 U AR - -- - -R inc o_ oa --- -- -- AR ------- --- ------ --- -- __ I MAP AMENDING Exhibit- C-1 CIHICO AREA LAND USE PLAN File; GPA/RZ 00-05 Resolution Date Butte County Board of Supervisors N 14 EXHIBIT C-2 • Proica:Gnieral Plan AmendmenvRezonerrentative Subdivision Map ;Stephcn J.Schuster.GPA'RZ 00-05;TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) COUNTY OF BUTTE . INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I, BACKGROUND: 1. Name of Proponent: Stephen J. Schuster 2. Address: 3406 Keefer Road, Chico, CA 95973 Phone: 530-894-0894 3. Name of Proposal: General Plan Amendment/Rezone/Subdivision Map (Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit 1M 4. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment/Rezone/Tentative Subdivision Map 5. Project Descriptions: General Plan Amendment and Rezone (GPA/RZ 00-05) The applicant requests a General Plan Amendment and Rezone involving a 5 (+/-) acre neighborhood park area currently�zoned P=Q (Publid-Quasi Public) and designated as "Public" by the General Plan. This proposal constitutes:an alteration to the North Chico Specific Plan's policies and exhibits. The applicant proposes altering the location of the park, rezoning the OS (Open Space)zone and a portion of lands zoned SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1 acre parcels), which lies adjacent to Keefer Slough as shown on the North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP), to the neighborhood park zone (P-Q). Additionally, the NCSP General Plan designations for this area will be amended from "Agricultural Residential" and "Open-Space" to "Public". The original location for the neighborhood park will be rezoned from P-Q to SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1 acre parcels) and the NCSP General Plan designation will be amended from "Public" to "Agricultural Residential". This proposed action will serve to relocate a 5-acre area reserved for park use under the NCSP. The new location is currently occupied by residential and open_space zoning along Keefer Slough. The proposal will result in the removal of approximately 3:3 acres of Open Space from the NCSP. This acreage will be replaced with SR-1 zoning, which will allow for 3 additional dwellings upon subdivision of the area. Butte County Department of Development Services L Planning Division115 1 Project:General Plan AntendlnentlRezone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster,GPA/RZ 00-05.TSM 00=03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Tentative Subdivision Map The Subdivision Map proposes 30, 1 (+/-) acre residential parcels, one, 1.47 acre parcel (Lot "A") for community sewage disposal, one, 5 (+/-) acre parcel (Lot "B") for the future neighborhood park,and one, 1 (+/-) acre parcel (Lot "C") for,a storm water retention area. The project will be provided with water service by individual domestic wells. Roads shall be dedicated for public use. Note: This project has been reviewed for consistency with the Adopted North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP) goals and polices and will utilize the adopted Certified Environmental Impact Report (CEIR) prepared for the plan as the basic environmental document. The NCSP is a mixed-use large scale development plan, which serves as a broad reaching site planning tool for larger developments in the unincorporated North Chico area. These documents were adopted by the Board of Supervisors in March of 1995. Pursuant to Government Code Section 21083.3, if an EIR has been certified for the adoption of a Specific Plan, the application of CEQA shall be limited to effects upon the environment which are peculiar to . the parcel or to the project and which were not addressed as significant effects in the prior CEIR. 6. Location of Property: This property is located east of and adjacent to Garner Lane, approximately 1.6 miles south of Keefer Road, north of Keefer Slough in the north Chico area. 7. Assessor's Parcel Number: 047-350-013,,-014; and x015 8. Setting: This property is currently undeveloped, but may have been used as an almond orchard or other agricultural use in the past. The property is level, with no dominant physical characteristics. The area's vegetation is characterized as fallow grassland and pasture, noxious weeds, primarily starthistle, is predominant. Several small almond and valley oak trees are present on the site. A complete list of plants identified at this site is attached to this Initial Study. Keefer Slough is located along the south margin.of the property.. No other wetlands or water features are located on the property. Keefer Slough is ani unimproved natural drainage, but contains no riparian vegetation at this location. Access is provided by .Garner Lane, a County Road. Subdivision access will be provided by one through road and one looped collector road. The project lies within the North Chico Specific Plan Area, County Service Area 87 (CSA 87) and the Chico Area Recreation District (CARD). 9. Date Checklist Submitted: 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Airport Land Use Commission, Chico Area Recreation District, Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 2 Project:General Plan AtttendntenoRezone/Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPVIZZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) II. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE 'DECLARATION will be prepared. % I find that although the proposed project. COULD .have' a significant effect. on the environment, there will NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL RAPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment,.but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. '❑ I find that although the.proposed:project could.have.a significant effect on theenvironment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to. applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier E1R or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or nu 's res that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is requi Prepared by: Daniel Breedon, Senior Planner Date Reviewed by: Ran ilson, Principal Planner bate C Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 0 3 Proiea:General Plan Amendment/Rezone/Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05.TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. X Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources X Air Quality X Biological resources ❑ Cultural Resources X Geology/Soils X Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Vdater Quality X Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources X Noise ❑ Population VHousing X Public Services X Recreation . X Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems X Mandatory Findings of Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone. A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., 1 the project will not expose sensitive receptors.to pollutants based on a project-specific screening analysis.) 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination.is made,an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they,reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 4118 Project:General Plan.4mendment/Rezone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster,GPA/RZ 00-05;TSM 00.03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Section 15063 (c)(3)(D): In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures: For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the-project. . 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation ofeach:issue should:identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact.to less than significant. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 5 Project:General Plan AntendmentiRezonerrentalive Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No . Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially. damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual. character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X d) Create a new source:of substantial.Jight�.or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Response: The existing parkland is consistent with the NCSP as indicated in Chapter 8 of the NCSP CEIR. The relocation of the 5 acre neighborhood park from its existing location to the new location adjacent to Keefer Slough could have aesthetic impacts. However, the current location is visually consistent with the surrounding property, and this location does not appear to have been chosen to protect any aesthetic resource. The new location may have a more positive aesthetic effect, since it is adjacent to Keefer Slough, and views of the creek will be protected by additional parkland. NCSP Policy 3-5 (2) provides for the integration of open space, parks and recreational amenities, which will improve the quality of life for'residents of the plan area and the greater Chico area. Approximately 3.3 acres of Open Space zone will be removed from the site, under the current proposal. This may result in impacts to aesthetic values. -Adding additional parkland to the new location could help to mitigate this loss, while promoting both an open space use and a recreational use. However, the existing proposal may not provide enough parkland outside of the 100 foot open space area required by the NCSP along Keefer Slough. The Chico Area 0 Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division 6 Projm:General Plan A nendmenVRezone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA'RZ 00-05;TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Recreation District (CARD) indicates that a minor increase to the amount of parkland proposed could be considered to allow for development of recreational uses outside the 100 foot Open Space setback. Establishment of a 100 foot no-development setback within the park, and inclusion of additional parkland in this area is recommended as project mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure #1 At the time of conveyance of any deed dedicating or transferring the property zoned P-Q (Public Quasi-Public) to a public entity, a 100 foot no-development setback easement shall ' be executed, which shall prohibit any development activities within a 100 foot linear area measured from the top of the bank of Keefer Slough. This no-development setback is necessary to allow for the establishment of.riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough, in accordance with policies of the North Chico Specific Plan. The no-development setback shall not prohibit conservation efforts intended to benefit the establishment of riparian habitat or grasses along Keefer Slough provided it is approved by the California Department of Fish & Game. i Mitigation Measure-#2,. . The current proposal removes approximately 3.3 acres of Open Space zoning from the North Chico Specific Plan. This Open Space zone is intended to protect the natural resources and promote growth of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough. In order to allow for parkland development and to provide for the necessary 100 foot no-development setback as described under Mitigation Measure 91, additional parkland will be necessary along Keefer Slough. This area should be of a sufficient size to allow for the development of the park with recreational uses in accordance with the NCSP's intentions for this neighborhood park, while remaining clear of the 100 foot no-development setback with park development. The size of this additional parkland area shall be determined by the Chico Area Recreation District. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. World the.projecl: i ❑ Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 7 '121 � s Project:General Plan Amendment/RezonoTentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant. Mitigation "Significant No Impact . Incorporated Impact Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources;Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, ora Williamson Act contract? X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X Response: a c. There is no Williamson Act contract affecting this property. The proposed parkland relocation does not involve any agricultural resource. No impact is anticipated to agricultural resources as a result of this General Plan Amendment/Rezone and Subdivision Map: Mitigation: None required. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? X c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X Butte County Department of Development Services D Planning Division 8 Project:General Plan AnlclldmenVReZone,Tenlative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/PZ 00-05;TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated . Impact Impact e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?. X Response: The relocation of the 5-acre park site as proposed under the General Plan Amendment and Rezone will not result in any change to air quality. No impact is anticipated. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map conforms to the NCSP and as indicated in Chapter 10 and Table 16-3 of the NCSP EIR, the proposed subdivision may result in a contribution to indirect emissions associated with project-related automobile use, and to the cumulative exceeding of emission thresholds contained in the Air Quality Attainment Plan. Project elements incorporated into the NCSP reduce these impacts to less than significant. However, the Butte County Air Quality Management District had additional recommendations for this project. The District-.recommends incorporating measures to control fugitive dust emissions from all road and other construction.activities during project improvements. Measures may include site and driveway watering and/or use,of other acceptable soil palliatives. Mitigation Measure #3 1. A. Measures shall be taken to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Measures may include site and road watering and/or use of other acceptable soil palliatives. Questions regarding fugitive dust control may be directed to the Butte County Air Quality Management District at phone number(530) 891-2832. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, submit an improvement plan with respect to fugitive dust and air pollution to the Butte County Air Quality Management District for review and determination of adequacy. Said plan shall include measures to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development, including the construction of dwelling units. Measures determined to be acceptable -by the Air Quality Management District shall be implemented during all development activities on the site. A copy of the approved plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and Department of Development Services, Building Division, prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 9 Prcieet:General Plan Amn�f(e endmezone/rentative Subdivision Map • (Stephen 1.Schuster,GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially . With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact B. Place a note on the owner's statement,the deed,or any other instrument to be recorded that states: "Measures shall be taken to control fugitive dust emissioris from all driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Approved dust control measures are found in the fugitive dust control plan for the site approved by the Butte County Air Quality Management District,a copy of which can be obtained from the Butte County Department of Development Services, Building Division." 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of.Fish and Game or US-Fish and Wildlife Service? X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. X- 0 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communitv Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 10 Project:General Plan AmendmertZlCone/Tentative Subdivision Map • (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05.TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III j Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X Res nse: a. - d. The proposed project conforms to the NCSP as indicated in Chapter 6 and Table 16- 3 of the NCSP CEIR. The subdivision of property can result in the potential loss of or disturbance to, riparian habitat,vernal pools and other ephemeral wetlands, and the disturbance or loss of special status plants that occur due to grading and development. Project Elements incorporated into the plan reduce these impacts to less than significant level. A survey for sensitive species of vascular plants was conducted on the project site on April 7, 2000. The survey did not find any present or past evidence of sensitive plant . species and stated that mitigation was not necessary. The plant survey did reportthat four small valley oak trees (Quercus lobata) were present on the.property. Since development pressure in valley areas of the County influence valley oaks and their habitat, the DF&G encourages developers to preserve as many trees as possible, with an emphasis on larger, more mature trees. The County of Butte has no official oak tree preservation policy. Although valley oaks are not an endangered species and are not protected by local ordinance, efforts should be made to ensure that projects protect native valley oak trees, since development is decreasing their numbers to the point that they may become endangered in the future. The Sensitive Plant Survey recommends that as a mitigation measure for these projects, any valley oaks removed during construction activities be replaced on a two for one basis after development. The replacement of the Open Space zoning with the parkland may have an impact on the 100 foot no development setback established along Keefer Slough by the NCSP under Resource Protection Policy 7.4-1. Some uses allowed under the parkland (P- Q)zone would involve land development. According to the NCSP this park area is to be used for active and passive recreational opportunities, including play fields, tennis courts basketball courts, picnic areas and children's play areas. The Open Space zone along Keefer Slough is intended to protect a 10.0 foot wide area from development and to protect riparian vegetation, provide habitat for wildlife and to allow for re-establishment of trees and riparian habitat within the corridor. The 5 acre [' Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division E, 125 11 Project:General Plan Amend,nenlelrentative Subdivision Map • (Stephen J.Schuster,GPAIRZ 00-05.TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit 111) Less Than . Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact park proposed for this area can promote these same goals. Although Keefer Slough has the potential to provide riparian habitat at this location, no vegetation typical of riparian habitat is present, with the exception of some local grasses and noxious weeds,with star-thistle being the most predominant plant. Star-thistle is considered an invasive non-native plant, that is typical of disturbed •sites in.the. County. Development of the park could bring better management strategies to the Keefer . Slough corridor that would help promote riparian growth, and eradicate invasive weeds such as star-thistle. Park land development could provide for recreational activities while promoting riparian revegetation and preservation. However, grading and associated development involved with some uses of the park could result in the loss of or disturbance to riparian habitat. In addition, NCSP Environmental Protection Policy 1 indicates that impacts to riparian areas should be minimized through avoidance. This issue can be addressed by restricting development of the active amenities of the parkland to an area 100 feet distant from Keefer Slough. This . is recommended as a project Mitigation Measure. This project will not have an impact to fish or wildlife habitat. Department of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Fish.and.Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) and 14 CCR 753.5 are not required.. C. A wetlands delineation was prepared for this property under the NCSP CEIR. Figure 6-2 of the CEIR shows that no wetlands are present on the subject property. Keefer Slough is identified on Figure 6-2., which borders the south margin of the property, and also borders the south margin of the .proposed park area. Alteration or disturbance to Keefer slough is not anticipated as a result of the General Plan Amendment/Rezone. The Army Corps of Engineers commented on this project, indicating that the work proposed would not involve the discharge of dredged or fill materials into the waters of the United States. The Army Corps did indicate that Keefer Slough was included in a proposed Army Corps flood control project. Any work in or near Keefer Slough may have to be coordinated with the Planning Division of the Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District. e. Policy 7.4-3 of the NCSP requires that pre-construction avian surveys be conducted for the black-shouldered kite (Elanus caeruleus) during the nesting/breeding season in the vicinity of Keefer Slough between Garner Lane and Hicks Lane. The NCSP EIR indicates that kites have been observed nesting in a small group of trees along Keefer Slough just north of the quarry area. These trees are located in the vicinity of ❑ Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 12 Project:General Plan Ainendmeez: ezone:?entative Subdivision Ma • Project: P (Stephen J.Schuster.GP.a RZ 00-05:TS\t 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact the project area. The black-shouldered kite is a California Department of Fish and Game"species of special concern". Additionally this species is also considered to be fully protected under California Fish&Game Code Section 3 5111..Black-shouldered kites prefer to nest in tall trees, generally in dense groves, and forage in grasslands and fallow croplands. NCSP elements that mitigate development impacts to the kite includes designation of the open space corridor along Keefer Slough, inclusion of over 500 acres of open space uses in the plan area, preservation and protection of trees in the plan area known to contain nesting sites, and recommendation for pre'- construction surveys as described in Policy 7.4-3 above. In order to ensure that no construction takes place within 300 feet of any active nest until after the young have been fledged, the avian survey required by Policy 7.4-3 shall be required as a project mitigation. The proposal will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. f. The proposal will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Mitigation Measure #4 At the time of conveyance of any deed dedicating or transferring the property zoned P-Q (Public Quasi-Public) to a public entity, a 100 foot no-development setback easement shall be executed, which shall prohibit any development activities within a 100 foot linear area measured from the top of the bank of Keefer Slough. This no-development setback is necessary to allow for the establishment of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough, in accordance with policies of the North Chico Specific Plan. The no-development setback shall not prohibit conservation efforts intended to benefit the establishment of riparian habitat or grasses along Keefer Slough provided it is approved by the California Department of Fish & Game. Mitigation Measure #5 In accordance with North Chico Specific Plan Policy 7.4-3, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified professional along Keefer Slough and vicinity to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black-shouldered kite are occurring. Any portion of the subject property that lies within 300 feet of an active nest shall be surrounded by an orange fence during construction activities. Any construction activities planned for areas.that are within 300 feet of any active nest shall be delayed until after the young have been.fledged. The survey shall take place prior to Subdivision Map recording. The survey and all findings shall Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 13 Project:General Plan AmendmenttRezonrrTentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05;TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With .Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact. be provided to the Planning Division. The Planning Division shall ensure that compliance with any limitations on construction activities in the vicinity of any identified kite nests. 5. CULTURAL. RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.59 X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Response: The proposed project conforms to the NCSP and as indicated in Chapter 7 of the NCSP CEIR, Project Elements and mitigations incorporated into the plan reduce impacts to archaeological resources to-less than significant level. The proposed Subdivision is shown to be outside the area designated as having high archaeological sensitivity. However, the new location'of,the proposed park site, is an area that has been identified as having a high archaeological sensitivity (NCSP Figure 7-1). The NCSP CEIR'indicates that the highest sensitivity areas within the plan area are lands located within 100 to 200 feet from stream courses. A majority of these areas are already afforded protection by the 100 foot no-development setback required along Keefer Slough. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would not authorize any additional construction or activity that will impact archaeological resources. However, a pedestrian level archaeological reconnaissance will be required prior to development of any area located outside the 100 foot setback along Keefer Slough, in accordance with NCSP Policy 7.4-4. Mitigation: None required. Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division C] 14 Project:General Plan A►nrndntent/Rezonerlentative Subdivision Ma • Project: P (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05;TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: - 1) Rupture of a known earth-quake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other sub-stantial evidence of a know fault?Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. X 2) Strong seismic ground Shaking? X 3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X 4) Landslides?. X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating sub-stantial risks to life or property? X e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal or waste water? X Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division ❑ 15 Project:General Plan AmendnVezonelrentative Subdivision hfap • (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III j Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: The project will not create any significant geophysical or topographical impacts that will result in any deterioration of the environment or place people at any significant risk. The project conforms to the land uses planned for in the NCSP as indicated in Chapter 4 and Table 16-3 of the NCSP CEIR, The Conservation Element's Expansive Soils Map indicates that the project site has a low to high expansive soil designation. Many valley areas within Butte County have a high potential for structural damage from soil shrinking and swelling. The Conservation Element's Policy 6.1 instructs to protect development in valley areas with expansive soils. This is to be accomplished through the implementation of mitigation measures for large.developments and major facilities when there is a potential for significant damage. Building site development will take place in accordance with the Uniform Building Code through Butte County's building permit process. Typical commercial construction techniques, when in conformance with the UBC, can protect from structural damage caused by•expansive soils. At the time of building plan checking, the Butte County-Building Division requires that soil tests be conducted on soils that have a high potential ,for expansion.: Itit is determined that the project site contains such soils, the Building Division will ensure that appropriate measures are taken to prevent damage to structures from expansive soils. Staff recommends that as a mitigation for this project all foundations for this project be designed by a registered Civil Engineer or licensed architect and that this requirement be disclosed on the final map. Mitigation Measure 96: Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states:' "Prior to site development all foundations shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer or licensed architect." 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X . Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division 16 Projecc General Plan Atnendtn ezone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schutter.GPA/RZ 00-05;TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X C)Emit hazardous.emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed schools? X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan lias not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X 0 For a project within the:vicinity of a private airstrip,. would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires; including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized.areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X Response: a - d. The project will not create any hazardous materials, and is not located on or near any sources of hazardous materials. .e - f. The project is within the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the Chico Municipal Airport. The airport's runways lie approximately 1.25 miles to the Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 17 Project:General Plan.4mendmentl ,.".Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster,GPARZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact southeast of the project's boundaries. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed the General Plan Amendment and Rezone, together with the proposed Subdivision. Their staff indicate that the proposed'General Plan Amendment and Rezone is more compatible with airport operations than the original plan layout, because relocation of the 5-acre parkland to an area adjacent to Keefer Slough places more non-residentially zoned acreage in the more restrictive Overflight Protection Zones A and B. However, the existing SR-1 zoning is still found to be inconsistent with the density as recommended by ALUC. The.ALUC staff notes that the changes have apositive feature, in that the potential usable open space for emergency landings are grouped together between the park, roadway and detention basin proposed for the subdivision. However, ALUC has found the General Plan Amendment, Rezone and proposed Tentative Subdivision Map inconsistent with the 1978 Chico Municipal Airport CLUP, as amended on October 21, 1998 and December 29, 1999. ALUC's recommendations to make the project consistent with the CLUP, are attached to this Initial Study as Exhibit "A". State law allows for local governments to make findings necessary to override a decision.made by ALUC. The.applicant has expressed a desire to pursue an override of ALUC's decision with�the:Butte County Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors will be required:to adopt overriding findings by a 4/5 vote. At the time of its adoption, the proposed SR-1 zone located within the NCSP was deemed to be consistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. However, the NCSP was adopted on an override of ALUC'S decision, which found the NCSP inconsistent with the 1978 CLUP. ALUC's determination of incompatibility was based on the urban designations in the"town center" area of the NCSP, south of Mud Creek. ALUC amended the 1978 CLUP on December 29, 1999. The impact of the NCSP on the CLUP has not been reassessed. by the Board of Supervisors. The consideration of overriding findings for this project, and the consistency of the NCSP with the 1999 CLUP amendment constitutes a policy decision that must be addressed by the Board of Supervisors. It should be noted that ALUC adopted the 2000 CLUP on December 20, 2000. Even though this project is not subject to the new 2000 CLUP, ALUC staff notes that the project would be inconsistent with the 2000 CLUP, which recommends one dwelling unit per five acres. D Butte County Department of Development Services D Planning Division 18 . 132 Project:General Plan Ainendmciit i zone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen I Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05.TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit 111) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ALUC also considered the 1.46 acre gross average lot size.of the Subdivision, and recognized that it was more conforming to the 1999 CLUP criteria, but still did not achieve a 2.5 acre gross lot size required by the CLUP. The project site is located outside the 55 CNEL (community noise level equivalent) noise contour. The 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook does not identify one acre development as a potential safety hazard in the airport overflight zone. Mitigation for this project's impact on the Chico Municipal Airport involves two options, 1) amending the project to conform to ALUC's recommendations; or, 2) provide for approval of the project under the Board of Supervisor's adoption of overriding findings regarding the 1999 Chico Municipal Airport CLUP. h. The project is located within a State Response Area for wildland fires and construction of homes in this area makes fighting wildland fires more difficult because fire resources must protect structures before protecting wildlands. Regulations pursuant to Public Resources Code 4290 (Fire Safe Regulations) are recommended to be included as conditions of the Subdivision Map. Mitigation Measure 97. . In order to address the significant impact of this project on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) of the Chico Municipal Airport, perform one of the following two options: 1. Amend the project to conform to ALUC's recommendations as follows: A. The lot design shall be amended to show no single family residential building sites within either the Overflight Protection Zone A or B. No residential lot.for a single family dwelling shall be less than 2.5 acres in gross size. B. A condition shall be required on any future Final Map stating that prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts. Butte County Department of Development Services D Planning Division 19 Project:General Plan AnlendulellURezonelrentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less . Potentially With Than . Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact QR- 2. . Overriding findings regarding ALUC's decision finding this project inconsistent with'the Chico Municipal Airport CLUP must be considered by the Board of Supervisors for this General Plan Amendment/Rezone, and the concurrently submitted Subdivision Map, in accordance with the process outlined within Chapter 5 of the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, prepared for CalTrans Division of Aeronautics, December, 1993. If. overriding findings cannot be supported by the Board of Supervisors for this project, it cannot be approved. S. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X b) Substantially, deplete groundwater:supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge.such:that there would be-a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local. groundwater table.level (e.g:,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of . surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? X e) Create or contribute runoff Water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems-or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X. D Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division .. 20 134 ' Project:General Plan AntendmenTRezone/Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than 'Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Placehousing within a 100-year.flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X I) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X j) Inundation by seiche; tsunami, or mudflow? X Response:..: The project shall utilize a community sewage disposal system which will collect sewage from j individual septic tanks. Waste Discharge Requirements will be required from the Regional Board prior to Final Map recording. The Waste Discharge Requirements will require the sewage system to operate within limits imposed by the Regional Board. Water supply to the individual parcels will be provided by on-site domestic wells. No additional water service is required. A portion of the property resides within the 100-year floodplain (Zone A) of Keefer Slough according to FEMA map 06007C0320D dated April 20, 2000. None of the 30 lots proposed by the Tentative Subdivision Map are within the floodplain. The proposed park is located within the floodplain. The proposed park should not involve the construction of any uses that would impact, or be impacted by the floodplain. However, this floodplain is designated as a "floodway" by FEMA maps. Section 26-24 (a)(6) prohibits all development within a floodway unless certification by a registered professional engineer demonstrates that the encroachment within the floodway will not result in any increase in flood levels when the floodway is at capacity. D Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division C 21 Project:General Plan Amrndtnent'Razone Tentative Subdivision Ma 1 P (Stephen J.Schuster.GPAAZZ 00-05;TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The proposal could affect surface water quality due to siltation resulting from erosion caused by development of new dwelling units, private roads, driveways, and a leach field. This site is level and the soil is not prone to erosion. No impact is anticipated. Drainage patterns will be altered by construction of residences and private roads.. Drainage will be directed to a retention pond located on Parcel "C". Adherence to the drainage standards of the Butte County Public Works Department will address impacts to the drainage system, and will serve to ensure that drainage is transported in an orderly manner to the detention pond. No water features or wetlands are located at the current park site or within the proposed subdivision area. No impact is anticipated with respect to hydrological resources. Mitigation: None required. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project? a) Physically divide an established community? x b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or revelation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? x c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? x Response: a. This proposal will not physically divide an established community. The relocation of the parkland enhances access to the site by the public and residents of the area proposed for subdivision. b. The proposal reduces the overall open space of this property by 3.3 acres, which may be inconsistent with the NCSP. The reduction in the amount of open space will allow for the development of 3 additional dwellings within the proposed SR-1 zone. However, by placing the 5-acre park along Keefer Slough, the proposal meets the ❑ Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 22 '136 Project:General Plan Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/PZ 00-05;TSNI 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact NCSP goals and policies related to open space and protection of Keefer Slough. To ensure the overall intent and goals of the NCSP are met with regard to 1) protecting and enhancing the riparian area along.Keefer Slough, and, 2) providing a park with amenities envisioned within the NCSP, Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 are proposed. The decision to modify the NCSP and reduce the amount of Open Space zoning in this area by 3.3 acres is policy driven, and must be considered by the Planning Commission prior to recommending any action on the General Plan Amendment and Rezone to the Butte County Board of Supervisors. NCSP policies involving open space and recreation facilities and Figure 6-3, Drainage Concept, Figure 5-1, Parks & Open Space must be either amended or the project's design must be made to conform.to the NCSP as interpreted by the Planning Commission & Board of Supervisors. As a condition of the Tentative Subdivision Map, the applicant has extended an offer to dedicate 5-acres of parkland along Keefer Slough to the Chico Area Recreation District (CARD). This dedication may have mitigating effects on the impact of this project to CARD. 'This.proposed General Plan-.Amendment and Rezone will make the proposed subdivision front on only one side of Guntren Road to allow unrestricted access to the proposed neighborhood park land. This design feature conforms to the NCSP's provisions for circulation to public areas (NCSP Circulation Policy 3, Table 2-3). According to NCSP Policy 7.4.1, all trails must be located outside of the 100 foot open space setback along Keefer Slough. Figure 4-2 of the NCSP indicates that a path or trail is to be developed along Keefer Slough at this location. The proposed park will not preclude development of trails or paths. CARD indicates that the new location of the park under this General Plan Amendment and Rezone is desirable because the trail or path can be integrated into the design of the park. Circulation Policy 6 of the NCSP indicates that such a trail or path located within subdivided lands shall be required to be designed and improved by the developer of the subdivision in accordance with the requirements of the NCSP and good planning and engineering practice. Maintenance of these areas will be the responsibility of County Service Area 87. The Airport Land Use Commission determined that the project was inconsistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). (See Initial Study Checklist Item 7 e. - f. for a complete discussion.) Mitigation Measure 97 is D Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division C: 23 Prodect:General Plan.-lmenmenvRezone entative SubdivisionMap P (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA%RZ 00-05;"rSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit 111) Less Than Significant Less . Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incorporated Impact Impact proposed to address the conflict of this proposal with the Chico Municipal Airport CLUP. C. The property is not within a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan No impact shall be incurred. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents or the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Response: a. - b. The property is:not-known to4contain any important mineral resources of value to the region: No impact shall,be incurred. Mitigation: None required. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a)Exposure.of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or groundborne noise levels: X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X Butte County Department of Development Services G Planning Division 24 Project:General Plan AmendlnenURezonerrentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.SCI1ll5ter.GPA'RZ OM5;TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d).A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? . X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Response: a. - f Ambient noise on and around the project area is affected primarily by vehicle traffic on Garner Lane. Noise from Garner Lane is not expected to be significant due to light traffic volumes and.,the distance to the subdivision. The proposed project-area conforms to the NCSP and, as indicated in Chapter l 1 and Table 16-3 of the NCSP CEIP, development in this area may result in the exposure of some residents to noise caused by overflying aircraft landing at or departing from the nearby Chico Municipal Airport. According to the NCSP CEIR, the project site is located outside of the 55 dB CNEL noise contour. Residential uses are compatible in areas that have a noise level less than 55 dB CNEL. Future dwelling units located on lots adjacent to.major arterial may be subject to high levels of noise from vehicles on these roadways. The NCSP requires that all.dwelling units adjacent to arterial roads have an interior noise level no greater than 45 dB CNEL. This requirement can normally be achieved through standard construction practices. The Airport Land Use Commission deemed the project inconsistent with the revised Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport. Mitigation Measure 97 is recommended to address significant impacts of the project on the Chico Municipal Airport. (See Initial Study Checklist Item 7 -Hazards, for further discussion). -: Butte County Department of Development Services Q Planning Division U: 25 . 1- 39 Project:General PlanAnu-ndnient/Rezone/reniative Subdivision Map (Stephen .I.Schuster..GP.VRZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No - Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Construction activities on the site will temporarily generate high noise levels on and adjacent to the project site, during project development activities. This construction noise, especially grading equipment, may have a significant impact on nearby residents. Although this noise will be intermittent and short-term in nature, staff recommends a project mitigation measure to restrict construction activities to the hours of 8:00 am to 8:00 pm to ensure that construction noise does not become a nuisance to neighbors Mitigation Measure#8 To ensure that construction noise does not become a nuisance to neighbors, construction activities associated with subdivision development such as clearing, road building, grading, and infrastructure development shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a)Induce substantial:population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes::and businesses:) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure?~ X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Response: a. Butte County population has grown at a rate at or below all official population projections for the past 10 years. Projected population for 1990 was 195,000, while the actual census population was 182,000. The estimated population for January 1, 1999 was 201,600. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would result in a gain of approximately 3.3 acres of residential zoning (SR-1), which would allow for 3 Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 26 1 -40 Project:General Plan Atnendutent:Rezone,Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schusler.GP.4JRZ 60-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Lviding Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than .(Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact additional parcels. This is due to the loss of approximately 3.3 acres of open space zoning along Keefer Slough, which will be replaced by the proposed parkland, and replacement of the previous parkland site with SR-1 zoning. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone will have the potential to add an estimated 8 people to Butte County (3 dwelling units x 2.6 persons/dwelling unit). This is not considered a significant amount and is consistent with the estimated growth rate for the County of about 2% per year.. . The proposed Subdivision Map is not anticipated to influence predicted growth levels in the County. The proposal is located within an area that is planned.for suburban residential growth as discussed in the NCSP and will not alter the anticipated population in the area or significantly impact the housing market of the area. As indicated in Table 16-3 of the NCSP EIR, there are no significant impacts to population and housing under the NCSP. b. - c. The project will not displace individuals or housing. If the 'land is subdivided additional housing could be developed. No impact shall be incurred. Mitigation: None,required..- 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result,in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, . the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services? X b) Fire protection? X c) Police Protection? X d) Schools? X e) Parks? X e) Other public services? X C. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division E. 27 Project:General Plan AniendnlenVRezoneiTentative Subdivision Map . (Stephen J.Schuster.GPARZ 00-05:TSA100-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit Ill) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: a. -d. Since the General Plan Amendment and Rezone project create only 3 additional parcels, no impact is anticipated in relation to these public service concerns. The proposed Subdivision Map conforms to the NCSP. The subdivision may result in a need for additional law enforcement, fire protection services, increased demand for water supplies, an incremental contribution to the generation of solid waste in excess in excess of landfill capacity and increased need for new elementary,junior and senior high school facilities. Project elements incorporated into the NCSP reduce these impacts to less than significant impacts. C. The proposal will cause an incremental increase in demand for police protection services. The cumulative impacts of increased development in rural areas impacts the ability of the Sheriffs Department to adequately provide police services to outlying areas. As a condition of project approval, the applicant will be required to place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an.additionatmap sheet.stating that "A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities, shall be-paid_pursuant to:theprovisions of Chapter 3, Article II of the Butte County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the building permit." d. The proposal will result in an incremental demand.for school facilities in the area. Tile applicant will be required to place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently. with the map or on an additional map sheet stating: "A development impact fee for school facilities shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the building permits. While the school district maintains that these fees do not fully mitigate the impacts of the project, the County is precluded from imposing additional fees by the State Legislature. e. There will be no net.loss of public. parkland as a result of this General Plan Amendment and Rezone. However; approximately 3.3 acres of Open Space Zoning will be removed from the North Chico Specific Plan. Initial Study Checklist Item 4. -Biological Resources and 9. -Land Use and Planning further discusses the loss of Open Space zoning and its impact to Keefer Slough and policies of the NCSP. Establishment of a 100 foot no-development setback within the park, and inclusion Butte County Department of Development Services C Planning Division 28 Project:General Plan.Amendment/Rezone,7entative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPARZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) .Less Than Significant Less . Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact of additional parkland in this area is recommended as project.Mitigation Measures#1 and 2. f. No impact is anticipated to any other public services. Mitigation Measure #9: Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities shall be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, Article II of the Butte County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the building permit." 14. RECREATION. a) Would.the project increase the.use:of:existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Response: a. and b. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone's contribution of three additional parcels is not considered significant enough to warrant specific mitigation for area parks and recreation facilities. Although the General Plan Amendment and Rezone proposes to relocate the existing 5-acre neighborhood park, the Chico Area Recreation District has been informed of the proposal and indicates that the new site for the park is more desirable as parkland than the previous site. The relocation may have adverse impacts on the open space area along Keefer Slough. Mitigation Measures #1 and 2 are recommended to address this impact. 0 Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 0 29 Project:General Plan Amendment/Rezone/Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen I Schuster,GP.AkRZ 00-05:TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III.) .Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact of additional parkland in this area is recommended as project Mitigation Measures#1 and 2. f. No impact is anticipated to any other public services. Mitigation Measure#9: Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities shall be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, Article II of the Butte County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the building permit." 14. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use o.f.existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that-substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?- X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Response: a. and b. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone's contribution of three additional parcels is not considered significant enough to warrant specific mitigation for area parks and recreation facilities. Although the General Plan Amendment and Rezone proposes to relocate the existing 5-acre neighborhood park, the Chico Area Recreation District has been informed of the proposal and indicates that the new site for the park is more desirable as parkland than the previous site. The relocation may have adverse impacts on the open space area along Keefer Slough. Mitigation Measures #1 and 2 are recommended to address this impact. D Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 29 11r�nect.Gcneral Plan.-unzndmenVRezoiieiTeiitativt Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GP.A.;'RL 00-05:TSM 00-03;Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact" Impact The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map conforms to the NCSP. There.will be an increase in demand for park and recreational facilities and services.in the area. Project elements incorporated into the NCSP reduce this impact to less than significant levels. As a condition of the Tentative Subdivision Map, the applicant has extended an offer to dedicate 5-acres of parkland along Keefer Slough to the Chico Area Recreation District (CARD). This dedication may have mitigating effects on the impact of this project to CARD. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? X b) Exceed,.either.individually,or'cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion.management,agency for designated roads or highways? X c) Result in a change in air traffic patters, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.; "farm equipment)? X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? -- X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 30 Pruject:General Plan.-Unendinent.Rczune.Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GP.A,-RL 00-05.TSN100-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III} Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: a. - e. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone will generate 30 additional traffic trips/day based upon 10 vehicle trips/day for each of the three additional parcels allowed based upon the trip Generation Manual of the Institute of Traffic Engineers for a single family residential use. The nearest public road is Garner Road, which is a County Road. Internal access will be provided to the proposed subdivision by collector roads and a through road which will connect to the Keefer Creek Estates Subdivision to the east. This is consistent with the circulation requirements of the North Chico Specific Plan. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map conforms to the NCSP. The proposal will result in an increase of daily trips and peak hour trips. Project elements incorporated into the NCSP reduce this impact to less than significant levels. The NCSP requires that bus turnouts and bus shelters be provided on the new arterial road. The applicant maybe required to install at least one bus turn-out and provide a bus shelter along the project frontage on Garner Lane. The location must be approved by the Department of Public Works:. In addition'Ahe NCSP requires the installation of a 10 foot wide path for pedestrian,,horseback or bicycle use, along the new collector road(Guntren Lane), and adjacent to Keefer Slough. The footpath may be earth or gravel but must be well enough drained to be passable during wet weather. The path must be located clear of the 100 foot no development setback along Keefer Slough. Additionally, a Class II bike lane is required along Garner Lane. These requirements will be conditions of the Tentative Subdivision Map.. f. The proposed parkland may have to be enlarged to allow for adequate parking, clear of the 100 foot setback required along Keefer Slough. Mitigation Measure #2 is recommended to enlarge the park, if necessary, to a size that is acceptable for the anticipated uses as determined by the Chico Area.Recreation District. g. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone will not conflict 'A ith accepted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. The proposed park will.allow for the construction of the path and trail proposed for this area by the NCSP. Mitigation: See Mitigation Measure #2 regarding Item f above. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 31 Project:Gencral Plan AnictidmentfRezone/Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA !RZ 00-05.TSM 00-03,Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16: UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Wouldthe project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X A Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e) Result in a-determination-by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X Response: a. - e. The project shall utilize a community sewage disposal system which will collect sewage from individual septic tanks. Waste Discharge Requirements will be required from the Regional Board prior to Final Map recording. The Waste Discharge Requirements will require the sewage system to operate within limits imposed by the G Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 32 Project:General Plan.Aniciidroent.'Rezone,-relitative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA/RZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated. Impact . Impact Regional Board. Water supply to the individual parcels will be provided by on-site domestic wells. No additional water service is required. NCSP Figure 5-3 must be amended if this project is approved. This Figure shows the current location of the 5-acre park as a detention area, which is necessary to mitigate a 10 year, 24 hour post development run-off. The new location can serve the same purpose, but relocating the detention area on Figure 5-3 is a policy decision because it is a modification of the NCSP. This decision must be made by the Butte County Board of Supervisors. f. The project will increase the stream of waste being deposited in the Neal .Road Landfill by a small amount,when the property is subdivided. According to the Butte County Public Works Department, the Neal Road Landfill is expected to reach maximum holding capacity by the year 2018. The project will not have an impact on solid waste disposal. g. No impact shall be.incur;edJo-federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid:waste.. Mitigation: None required. 17. MANDATORY 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? X b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ' 33 Project:General Pimi..kinendtnenti'Rezone:Tentative Subdivision Map (Stollen J.Schuster.GP.AR .00-05:'rsx-i 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Response: The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is an alteration to the North Chico Specific Plan. Consideration of this proposal will ultimately involve a policy decision by the Butte County Board of Supervisors. The proposal to alter the Specific Plan by relocating a 5-acre park, elimination of 3.3 acres of Open Space, and allowance of 3 additional parcels within the SR-1 zone may have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. In addition, the Tentative Subdivision Map .may have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable..Mitigation Measures #1 - 9 as listed under Item V. -Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Requirements, are recommended to address specific significant impacts to Initial Study Checklist items involving aesthetics, biological resources, hazards, public services, noise, recreation,air quality, geology/soils, land use planning-and traffic.. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division E 34148 Project:General Plan.�nendment I2ezonetentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GP.vi z.oo-o5:'rSM 00-03.Pheasvit Landing Subdi%ision Unit III) V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: Mitigation Measure#1 At the time of conveyance of any deed dedicating or transferring the property zoned P-Q (Public Quasi-Public) to a public entity, a 100 foot no-development setback easement shall be executed, which shall prohibit any development activities within a 100 foot linear area measured from the top of the bank of Keefer Slough. This no-development setback is necessary to allow for the establishment of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough, in accordance with policies of the North Chico Specific Plan. The no-development setback shall not prohibit conservation efforts intended to benefit the establishment of riparian habitat or grasses along Keefer Slough provided it is approved by the California Department of Fish & Game. Mitigation Measure #2 The current proposal removes approximately 3.3 acres of Open Space zoning from the North Chico Specific Plan. This Open Space zone is intended to protect the natural resources and promote growth of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough. In order to allow for parkland development and to provide for the necessary 100 foot no-development setback as described under Mitigation Measure #1, additional parkland will be necessary along Keefer Slough. This area should be of a sufficient size to allow for the development of the park with recreational uses in accordance with the NCSP's intentions for this neighborhood-park;while remaining clear of the 100 foot no-development setback with park development.. The size of this.additional parkland area shall be determined by the Chico Area Recreation District. Mitigation Measure#3 1. A. Measures shall be taken to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Measures may include site and road watering and/or use of other acceptable soil palliatives. Questions regarding fugitive dust control may be directed to the Butte County Air Quality Management District at phone number(530) 891-2882. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, submit an improvement plan with respect to fugitive dust and air pollution to the Butte County Air Quality Management District for review and determination of adequacy. Said plan shall include measures to control fugitive dust emissions from all road, driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development, including the construction of dwelling units. Measures determined to be acceptable by the Air Quality Management District shall be implemented during all development activities on the site. A copy of the approved plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and Department of Development Services, Building Division, prior to recordation of the Subdivision Map. Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division 35 Project:General Plate.atnendtuent°Rezone/rentative Subdivision Map (Stephen J.Schuster.GP.,VRZ 00-05:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) B. Place a note on the owner's statement,the deed, or any other instrument to be recorded that states: "Measures shall be taken to control fugitive dust emissions from all driveway and other civil construction associated with residential development. Approved dust control measures are found in the fugitive dust control plan for the site approved by the Butte County Air Quality Management District, a copy of which can be obtained from the Butte County Department of Development Services, Building Division." Mitigatio easure#4 /Atthe tim of conveyance f any deed dedi ating or transferring the roperty zoned P-Q (Public ase-Public) to public entity, /opme developme setback easements all be cu/con /co any eveltivities thi/t6ot line area Mn suretoof Keh. is no- back is ecessarfoshment ogetation aSlough, in accordancieh Chico S . The no-detback snot prohiattended toe establishmen hab' t orgrasses alSled it is apthe Californit ish & Game. Mitigation Measure #5 In accordance with North Chico.,Specific Plan Policy 7.4-3, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified professional along Keefer Slough and vicinity to determine if nesting/breeding activities of the black-shouldered kite are occurring. Any portion of the subject property that lies within 300 feet of an active nest shall be surrounded by an orange fence during construction activities. Any construction activities planned for areas that are within 300 feet of any active nest shall be delayed until after the young have been fledged. The survey shall take place prior to Subdivision Map recording. The survey and all findings shall be provided to the Planning Division. The Planning Division shall ensure that compliance with any limitations on construction activities in the vicinity of any identified kite nests. Mitigation Measure 96: Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet that states: "Prior to site development all foundations shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer or licensed architect." Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division •- 361. 50 Project:General Plan Amendment Rezone Tentative Subdivision Map (Stephen Schuster.GPA.-RZ 00-05.TS%.I 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) Mitigation Measure#7 In order to address the significant impact of this project on the Comprehensive Land Use Pian (CLUP) of the Chico Municipal Airport, perform one of the following two options: 1. Amend the project to conform to ALUC's recommendations as follows: A. The lot design shall be amended to show no single family residential building sites within either the Overflight Protection Zone A or B. No residential lot for a single family dwelling shall be less than 2.5 acres in gross size. B. A condition shall be required on any future Final Map stating that prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the property owner shall sign an Avigation Easement granting to the City of Chico the right of continued use of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the proposed parcels and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts. QR- 2. Overriding findings regarding ALUC's decision finding this project inconsistent with the. Chico Municipal Airport CLUP must be considered by the Board of Supervisors for this General Plan..Amendment/Rezonel-I and the concurrently submitted Subdivision Map, in accordance-withthe-process:outlined within Chapter 5 of the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, prepared for CalTfans Division of Aeronautics, December, 1993. If overriding findings cannot be supported by the Board of Supervisors for this project, it cannot be approved. Mitigation Measure #8 To ensure that construction noise does not become a nuisance to neighbors, construction activities associated with subdivision development such as clearing, road building, grading, and infrastructure development shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. Mitigation Measure 49: Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities shall be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, Article II of the Butte County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. The fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of application for the.building permit." Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 37 .151 Project:General Plan.Ainrndrnrnt-Rezoiie,7eiltative Subdivision Map. (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA,'RZ 00-05:TSNI 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit 111) DATA SHEET r A. Project Descrh,>j n 1. Type of Project:.General Plan Amendment to North Chico Specific Plan and Rezone 2. Proposed Density of Development: 1-acre parcels and 5-acre park site. 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Minimal 4. Access and Nearest Public Road: Garner Lane and internal collector roads proposed under future subdivision. 5. Method .of Sewage Disposal: On-site sewage proposed for future residential subdivision. No sewer service available. 6. Source of Water Supply: Individual domestic wells. 7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property. 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: The land may be divided further as allowed under the SR-1 zone. A total of 3 additional parcels would-be allowed under this General Plan Amendment and Rezone. B. Environmental Settins 1: Terrain a General Topographic Character: Level. b. Slopes::Level. C, Elevation: Approximately 195 to 203 feet above sea level. d. Limiting Factors: None. 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: Vina farwell, according to NCSP CEIR. b. Limiting Factors: Not considered prime agricultural land due to low permeability of substrate and rockiness. 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: .Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. b. Erosion Potential: Slight. c. Landslide Potential: Low d. Fire Hazard: Low. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate - High 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: None, Keefer Slough is adjacent along the south margin of the project. b. Ground Water: Unknown, potentially limited. Abundant valley aquifers. C. Drainage Characteristics: Trending southwest. d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 22-inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: None. 5. VisuaUScenic Quality: Good. E Butte County Department of Development Services Planning Division = 38 Project:General Plan amendment/Rezone Tentative Subdivision Atap (Stephen J.Schuster.GPA RL 0"5:TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit III) 6. Acoustic Quality: Good. 7. . Air Quality: Good, except when stagnant air conditions persist in the valley. 8. Vegetation: Noxious weeds, several small valley oaks. 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small birds and animals common to valley grasslands. 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: High Sensitivity area. .11. Butte County General Plan designation: Agricultural Residential and Public 12. Existing Zoning: SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1-acre parcels) and P-Q (Public Quasi- Public). 13. Existing Land Use on-site: Undeveloped 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Residential b.. Zoning: SR-1 C. Gen. Plan Designation: Agricultural Residential d. Parcel Sizes: 1 acres to 33.87 acres. 15. Character of Site and Area: Residential and undeveloped agricultural land. 16. Nearest Urban Area: City of Chico 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: None. 18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: N/A 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County(State) Fire Station: Station number#41 approximately 1.5 miles away. b. . WaterAvailability:-Fire tankers only. 20. Schools:,Chico.,Unified School.�District. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL 1. Butte County Planning Department. Earthquake and Fault Activity Map 11-1, Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 2. Butte County Planning Department. Liquefaction Potential Map 11-2, Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 3. Butte County Planning Department. Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map 111-1. Safety Element. Oroville, CA CH2M Hill, 1977. 4. Butte County Planning Department. Erosion Potential Map 111-2, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 5. Butte County Planning Department. Expansive Soils Map 111-3. Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 6. Butte County Planning Department. Noise Element Map IV-1. Scenic Highway Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 7. . Butte County Planning Department. Scenic Highways Map V-I. Scenic Highway Element, Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 8. Butte County Planning Department. Natural Fire Hazard Classes Map 111-4, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 39 Projea:General Plan.Amendmem/Rezone/Tentative Subdivision Map. (Stephen J.Schuster.GPAIRZ 00-05.TSM 00-03.Pheasant Landing Subdivision Unit.III) 9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity Map, Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983. 10. Butte County Planning Department. School District Map. Oroville, CA. 11. Northwestern District Department of Water Resources. Chico Nitrate Study Man. Nitrate Concentration in Shallow Wells. The Resources Agency, State of California, 1983. - 12. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agdcultural Preserves Map, established by Resolution No. 67-178. Oroville, CA: Butte County Planning Department, 1987. 13. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1989. .14. USGS Quad Maps. 15. Soil Map. Chico 1925)/Oroville 1926) Area, United States Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico(1925)70roville(1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989. 18. North Chico Specific Plan and Certified Environmental Impact Report Butte County, CA. K:\PROJECTS\GPA\SSCHUS-1.GPA\IMTIAL3.WPD Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division ❑ 401'54 C ORDINANCE NO. . AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NORTH CHICO SPECIFIC PLAN The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, 1 under and pursuant to Section 24-25.40 of the Butte County Code, ORDAINS,'as 2 follows: 3 SECTION 1. The hereinafter described area situate in the County of 4 5 Butte, State of California, shall be and it is hereby zoned as an SR-1 (Suburban 6 Residential -1 acre parcels) District, and such area shall be subject to the 7 restrictions and restricted uses and regulations pursuant to Butte County Code 8 Section 24-135 through 24-135.10, as amended by the North Chico Specific Plan. 9 Said area so.zoned being located in the unincorporated area of Butte 10 ' County, Chico area, more particularly described as follows: 11 All that portion of the NE 1/4 of Section 32, T23N, R1 E, MDM, more 12 particularly described as follows: 13 Commencing at the NE corner of the Holmes Tract, which is marked 14 by a railroad spike at the intersection of the centerlines of Keefer Road and Garner Lane; thence S 00 00' 00" E along the centerline of 15 Garner Lane a distance of 2641.58 ft.; thence N 900 00' 00" E, 30.00 ft. to the point of beginning; thence N 90° 00' 00" E, 466.69 ft.; thence 16 S 00 00' 00" E, 466.69 ft.; thence N 900 00' 00" W, 466.69 ft. to the E edge of Garner Lane; thence N 00 00' 00" E, 466.69 ft. to the point of 17 beginning. 18 Containing 5.00 acres, more or less. 19 7 SECTION 2. The hereinafter described area situate in the County of 20 21 Butte, State of California, shall be and it is hereby zoned as an P-Q (Public -Quasi 22 Public) District, and such area shall be subject to the restrictions and restricted uses 23 and regulations pursuant to Butte County Code Section 24-215. 24 Said area so zoned being located in the unincorporated area of Butte 25 County, Chico area, more particularly described as follows: 26 1 All that portion of the NE 1/4 of Section 32, T23N, R1 E, MDM, more particularly described as follows: 2 3 Commencing at the NE corner of the Holmes Tract, which is marked by a railroad spike at the intersection of the centerlines of Keefer 4 Road and Garner Lane; thence S 00 00' 00" E along the centerline of Garner Lane a distance of 4333.18 ft. to the centerline of Keefer b Slough; thence S 68° 49' 20" E, 208.63 ft. along the centerline of Keefer Slough to the point of beginning; thence continuing along the 6 centerline of Keefer Slough for the next 5 courses; 1. S 68° 49' 20" 7 E, 36.37 ft.; 2. N 49°28' 20" E, 376.65 ft.; 3. .S 59° 41' 30" E, 228.00 ft.; 4. N 47° 34' 50" E, 499.00 ft.; 5. S 76° 20' 35" E, 177.84 ft. to a . 8 point on the westerly boundary of the parcel of land described in the document recorded in Book 1375, Page 140 of Official Records; 9 thence N 0° 01' 53" W along said westerly boundary a distance of 415.62 ft. to a 3/4" iron pipe tagged "LS 5616" marking a point on the 10 southerly boundary of Guntren Road as it is shown on the map filed 11 in Book 138 of Maps, Page 35; thence along the southerly boundary of the proposed extension of Guntren Road the following 5 courses: 12 1. Along a curve to the left whose radius point bears S 00 01' 53" E, 170.00 ft., said curve having a central angle of 440 58' 07", a radius 13 of 170.00 ft., and a length of 133.42 ft.; 2. S 450 00' 00" W, 400.00 ft.; 3. Along a tangent curve to the right, said curve having a central 14 angle of 350 00' 00', a radius of 230.00 ft., and a length of 140.50 ft. 15 4. S 800 00' 00" W, 500.00 ft., 5. Along a tangent curve to the right, said curve having a central angle of 100 00' 00', a radius of 230.00 ft., 16 and a length of 40.14 ft.; thence S 00 00'00' E, 339.96 ft. to the point of beginning. 17 Containing 6.71 acres more or less. 18 19 SECTION 3. Conditional Zoning. The zoning reclassification enacted 20 by this ordinance is subject to condition(s) imposed pursuant to Butte County Code 21 Section 24-25.40, subsections (c) and (d). The conditions are as specified in a 22 Conditional Zoning Agreement to be signed by the Owner(s) of the property and by 23 the County. Said Agreement shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as 24 Exhibit A. The description of the property which is the subject of this rezoning shall 25 26 be the same in the Agreement as set forth in Section I above. The Chairman of 1 Board of Supervisors is authorized and directed to sign the Agreement.on behalf of 2 the County of Butte. 3 SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall be and it is hereby declared to be 4 in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after the date of its passage, 5 6 and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, this 7 Ordinance shall be published once with the names of the members of.the Board of 8 Supervisors voting for and against it in the Chico Enterprise Record, a newspaper 9 published in the County of Butte, State of California. 10 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the 11 County of Butte, State of California, on the day of , 2001, by the following 12 vote: 13 AYES: 14 15 NOES: 16 ABSENT: 17 NOT VOTING: 18 19 CURT JOSIASSEN, CHAIRMAN Butte County Board of Supervisors 20 21 ATTEST: JOHN S. BLACKLOCK, Chief Administrative 22 Officer and Clerk of the Board 23 24 By 25 26 Recording Requested By County of Butte And When Recorded Return to Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ; 2001, by and between Stephen J. Schuster, herein called "Owner", and the COUNTY OF BUTTE, a political subdivision of the State of California, herein called "County".- WITNESSETH County".WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of real property, herein called the "Property", situated in the County of Butte, which Property is described as follows: . All that portion of the NE 1/4 of Section 32, T23N, R1E, MDM, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NE corner of the Holmes Tract, which is marked by a railroad spike at the intersection of the centerlines of Keefer Road and Garner Lane; thence S 0° 00' 00" E along the centerline of Garner Lane a distance of 4333.18 ft. to the centerline of Keefer Slough; thence S 680 49' 20" E, 208.63 ft. along the centerline of Keefer Slough to the point of beginning; thence continuing along the centerline of Keefer Slough for the next 5 courses; 1. S 680 4920" E, 36.37 ft.; 2. N 49° 28' 20" E, 376.65 ft.; 3. S 59° 41' 30" E, 228.00 ft.; 4. N 47° 34' 50" E, 499.00 ft.; 5. S 76° 20' 35" E, 177.84 ft. to a point on the westerly boundary of the parcel of land described in the document recorded in Book 1375, Page 140 of Official Records; thence N 00 01' 53" W along said westerly boundary a distance of 415.62 ft. to a 3/4" iron pipe tagged "LS 5616" marking a point on the southerly boundary of Guntren Road as it is shown on the map filed in Book 138 of Maps, Page 35; thence along the southerly boundary of the proposed extension of Guntren Road the following 5 courses: 1. Along a curve to the left whose radius point bears S 00 01' 53" E, 170.00 ft., said curve having a central angle of 440 58' 07", a radius of 170.00 ft., and alength of 133.42 ft.; 2. S 45° 00' 00" W, 400.00 ft.; 3. Along a tangent curve to the right, said curve having a central angle of 350 00'.00', a radius of 230.00 ft., and a length of 140.50 ft.; 4. S 80° 00' 00"W, 500.00 ft., 5. Along a tangent curve to the right, said curve having a central angle of 100 00' 00', a radius of 230.00 ft., and a length of 40.14 ft.; thence S 00 00'00' E, 339.96 ft. to the point of beginning. Containing 6.71 acres more or less. WHEREAS,the Property is now zoned SR-1 (Suburban Residential, f-acre parcels) and 0 (Open Space) and is designated as Agricultural Residential and Open Space by the Butte County General Plan and North Chico Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, Owner has applied for a reclassification of zoning of the Property from its present classification to P-Q (Public, Quasi-Public) and for a re-designation from its present General Plan designation to Public; and WHEREAS, public hearings have been held upon said application before the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, and after having considered the matter presented, the Board has determined that certain conditions to the zoning reclassification and General Plan re-designation of said real property must be imposed so as not to create any problems inimical to the health, safety and the general welfare of the County of Butte. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that inasmuch as the reclassification to C-1 and General Plan re-designation to Commercial is being granted and will be enacted by ordinance and resolution, respectively, the said reclassification and redesignation shall be subject to the following condition(s): I. This Agreement is made pursuant to Butte County Code Section 24-25.40 (c), between the property owner and County of Butte, and includes the following provisions: A. At the time of conveyance of any deed dedicating or transferring the property zoned P-Q (Public Quasi-Public) to a public entity, a 100 foot no-development setback easement shall be executed, which shall prohibit any development activities within a 100 foot linear area measured from the top of the bank of Keefer Slough. This no- development setback is necessary to allow for the establishment of riparian vegetation along Keefer Slough, in accordance with policies of the North Chico Specific Plan. The no-development setback shall not prohibit conservation efforts intended to benefit the establishment of riparian habitat or grasses along Keefer Slough provided it is approved by the California Department of Fish & Game. (Mitigation Measure #1) B. In accordance with North Chico Specific Plan Policy 7.4-3, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified professional along Keefer Slough and vicinity to determine if nestingibreeding activities of the black-shouldered kite are occurring. Any portion of the subject property that lies within 300 feet of an active nest shall be surrounded by an orange fence during construction activities. Any construction activities planned for areas that are within 300 feet of any active nest shall be delayed until after the young have been fledged. The survey shall take place prior to park development. The survey and all findings shall be provided to the Planning Division. The Planning Division shall ensure that compliance with any limitations n construction activities in the vicinity of any identified kite nests. (Mitigation Measure #2) H. In the event Owner, any successor in interest of Owner, or any person in possession of the Property, violates or fails to perform any of the conditions of this Agreement within thirty(30)days after notice thereof as provided in Paragraph 3, the Board of Supervisors of County may instruct the County Counsel to institute legal proceedings to. enforce the provisions of this Agreement. The Board of Supervisors of County may also initiate proceedings to rezone the property to the classification to which it is now zoned or any other suitable classification and to redesignate the property to its present General Plan designation . III. Notice of violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be sent to Owner or successor at the address of the then current owner as identified on the current tax roll. IV. In the event suit is brought by the County Counsel of County to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, Owner agrees to pay to County a reasonable sum to be fixed by the Court as attorney's fees. V. Each and every one of the provisions of this Agreement herein contained shall run with the land and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors in interest of Owner and County, in the same manner as if they had been expressly named herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. Dated: By: Stephen J. Schuster COUNTY OF BUTTE, a political subdivision of the State of California Dated: By Curt Josiassen, Chair Butte County Board of Supervisors [Attach Notary form] K:\PROJECTS\GPA\SSCHUS-I.GPA\PHEASCZAWPD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ZONING A PORTION OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AN C-1. (LIGHT COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-25.40. 1 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, .State of California, 2 under and pursuant to Section 24-25.40 of the Butte County Code of said County, 3 ORDAINS, as follows: 4 SECTION I. The hereinafter described area situate in the County of 5 6 Butte, State of California, shall be and it is hereby zoned as an C-1 (Light 7 Commercial) District, and such area shall be subject to the restrictions and 8 restricted uses and regulations pursuant to Butte County Code Section 24-140. 9 Said area so zoned being located in the unincorporated area of Butte to County, Oroville area, more particularly described as follows: 11 Being a portion of Parcel 2, as shown on that certain parcel map for 12 Thomas A. Poole and Manuela G. Poole, which map was recorded in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Butte, State of California, 13 on April 30, 1990 in Book 119 of Maps, at pages 28, 29, and 30, 14 located in the NW 1/4 of Section 34, T19N, R4E, MDB&M, in the County of Butte, State of California, being more particularly described 15 as follows: 16 Beginning at the NW corner of said Parcel 2, said point also being the centerline of Alverda Drive; thence S 090 38' 12" E a distance of 17 371.41 ft., along the westerly line of said Parcel 2; thence N 890 57' 18 33" E a distance of 127.96 ft., leaving said westerly line of said Parcel 2; thence S 000 02' 27" E a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 890 5733" 19 E a distance of 295.00 ft.; thence N 000 02' 27" W a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 890 57' 33" E a distance of 138.00 ft.; thence N 000 02' 20 27" W a distance of 119.67 ft.; thence N 890 57' 33" E a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 000 02' 27" W a distance of 212.67 ft. more or less 21 to a point on the northerly line of said Parcel 2 and the centerline of 22 Alverda Drive; thence N 88° 23' 15" W a distance of 304.97 ft. along said northerly line and the centerline of Alverda Drive to the beginning 23 of a 5000 foot radius curve concave northerly; thence along said 5000 foot radius curve to the right, for an arc length of 299.47 ft. through a 24 central angle of 030 25' 54"; thence N 840 57' 21" W a distance of 84.45 ft. more or less to the point of beginning and the end of said 25 description. 26 . Containing 5.45 acres, more or less. I 6A2 1 SECTION 2. Conditional Zoning. The zoning reclassification enacted 2 by this ordinance is subject to condition(s) imposed pursuant to Butte County Code 3 Section 24-25.40, subsections (c) and (d). The conditions are as specified in a 4 Conditional Zoning Agreement to be signed by the Owner(s) of the property and by b the County. Said Agreement shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as 6 7 Exhibit A. The description of the property which.is the subject of this rezoning shall 8 be the same in the Agreement as set forth in Section I above. The Chairman of the 9 Board of Supervisors is authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of 10 the County of Butte. 11 SECTION 3. This Ordinance.shall be and it is hereby declared to be 12 in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after the date of its passage, 13 14 _ and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, this 15 Ordinance shall be published once with the names of the members of the Board of 16. Supervisors voting for and against it in the Oroville Mercury, a newspaper published 17 in the County of Butte, State of California. 18 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the 19 County of Butte, State of California, on the day of , 2001, by the 20 following vote: 21 AYES: 22 23 NOES: 24 ABSENT: 25 NOT VOTING: 26 1 CURT JOSIASSEN, CHAIRMAN Butte County Board of.Supervisors 2 3 ATTEST: JOHN S. BLACKLOCK, Chief Administrative 4 Officer and Clerk of the Board 5 6 By 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Recording Requested By County of Butte And When Recorded Return to Clerk of the Boaid of Supervisors 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ,2001, by and between Mooretown Rancheria Concow Maidu, a federally recognized sovereign Indian tribe, herein called "Owner", and the COUNTY OF BUTTE, a political subdivision of the State of California, herein called "County". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of real property, herein called the "Property", situated in the County of Butte, which Property is described as follows: Being a portion of Parcel 2, as shown on that certain parcel map for Thomas A. Poole and Manuela G. Poole, which map was recorded in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Butte, State of California, on April 30, 1990 in Book 119 of Maps, at pages 28, 29, and 30, located in the NW 1/4 of Section 34,.T19N, R4E, MDB&M, in the County of Butte, State of California;.being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the NW corner of said Parcel 2, said point also being the centerline of Alverda Drive; thence S 09° 38' 12" E a distance of 371.41 ft., along the westerly line of said Parcel 2; thence N 89° 5733" E a distance of 127.96 ft., leaving said westerly line of said Parcel 2; thence S 00° 02' 27" E a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 890 57' 33" E a distance of 295.00 ft.; thence N 00° 02'27" W a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 89° 57' 33" E a distance of 138.00 ft.; thence N 000 02' 27" W a distance of 119.67 ft.; thence N 89° 57' 33" E a distance of 65.00 ft.; thence N 00° 02' 27" W a distance of 212.67 ft. more or less to a point on the northerly line of said Parcel 2 and the centerline of Alverda Drive; thence N 88° 23' 15" W a distance of 304.97 ft. along said northerly line and the centerline of Alverda Drive to the beginning of a 5000 foot radius curve concave northerly; thence along said 5000 foot radius curve to the right, for an arc length of 299.47 ft. through a-central angle of 03° 25'54"; thence N 84° 57' 21" W a distance of 84.45 ft. more or less to the point of beginning and the end of said description. Containing 5.45 acres, more or less. WHEREAS, the Property is now zoned AR (Agricultural Residential) and is desivnated as Low Density Residential by the Butte County General Plan; and WHEREAS, Owner has applied for a reclassification of zoning of the Property from its present classification to C-1 (Light Commercial) and for a re-designation from its present General Plan designation to Commercial; and WHEREAS, public hearings have been held upon said application before the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte,State of California, and after having considered the matter presented, the Board has determined that certain conditions to the zoning reclassification and General Plan re-designation of said real property must be imposed so as not to create any problems inimical to the health, safety and the general welfare of the County of Butte. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that inasmuch as the reclassification to C-1 and General Plan re-designation to Commercial is being granted and will be enacted by ordinance and resolution, respectively, the said reclassification and redesignation shall be subject to the following condition(s): I. This Agreement is made pursuant to Butte County Code Section 24-25.40 (c), between the property owner and County of Butte, and includes the following provisions: A. This C-1 (Light Commercial) zone shall be limited to use as a parking lot for the Mooretown Rancheria's Feather Falls.Casino complex, which lot shall be constructed in accordance with the plan attached as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this reference. B. In order to reduce the impact of light and glare on surrounding properties, all external lighting shall be directed downward and shall be contained within the parking lot boundaries. Light pole heights shall not exceed the mature height of the trees that are to be planted in the parking lot area. (Mitigation Measure #1) C. In order to soften the visual impact of the paved area, and to reduce heat gain on the paved surface, the applicant shall provide a Landscaping Plan, conforming to the below list of requirements. This mitigation shall be incorporated by reference into this Agreement (Mitigation Measure #2): 1. In accordance with Butte County Code Section 24-240.10 (e), a total of 5 percent of the gross parking lot area (11,935 square feet) shall be devoted to landscaping. Each planter area shall be surrounded with a six-inch raised . concrete curbing, or equivalent. _. The parking lot shall be planted with trees of not less than IS gallon size to reduce heat gain from the paved surface and to soften the visual impact of the paved area. Trees shall be planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so'that at tree maturity, 15 years from the date of this Agreementt least 50 percent of the total paving area, not including driveway entranc shall be shaded as determined by a qualified arborist or landscape architect. The 5 percent.gross lot area landscaping requirement identified in Item C.l may be exceeded if necessary to meet this requirement. . 3. An irrigation system shall be installed in each separate planter and landscaped area. 4. The landscape and irrigation plan, consistent with the landscaping requirements and project site plan, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division prior to grading,site development and issuance of any associated building permits. 5. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving conditions, free from weeds, trash, and debris, at all times. D. In order to avoid fugitive dust conditions, the applicant shall ensure that all road and other construction activities taking place during site development are sufficiently watered and/or treated with a soil palliative. These measures will be carried out to the satisfaction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District. (Mitigation Measure #3) E. Due to the potential for soil displacement through erosion during construction, all. a g a cuts and fills greater than 2-feet in height shall be stabilized with a native brass seed mix or hydroseed application. The seed should be maintained for a period of two years to establish stable soil conditions, and an 80 percent cover should be. established at the end of two years. The Planning Division shall ensure compliance with this mitigation. (Mitigation Measure #4) F. Prior to site development and issuance of any building permits, a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on-site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility so that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. (Mitigation Measure #5) G. Trash receptacles shall be maintained within the parking lot at all times. The g receptacles shall be desined into the landscaping plan. The receptacles shall be . P b P � serviced by Owner on a routine basis adequate io keep the receptacles available for it trash. Il. In the event Owner,any successor,in interest of Owner, or any person in possession of.the Property, violates or fails to perform any of the conditions of this Agreement within thirty (30) days after notice thereof as provided in Paragraph 3, the Boa Of Supervisors of County may instruct the County Counsel to institute legal proceedings enforce the provisions of this Agreement. The Board of Supervisors of County may also initiate proceedings to rezone the property to the classification to which it is now zoned or. any other suitable classification and to redesignate the property to its present General Plan designation . III. Notice of violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be sent to Owner or successor at the address of the then current owner as identified on the current tax roll. IV. In the event suit is brought by the County Counsel of County to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement,Owner agrees to pay to County a reasonable sum to be fixed by the Court as attorney's fees. V. Each and every one of the provisions of this Agreement herein contained shall run with the land and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors in interest of Owner and County, in the same manner as if they had been expressly named herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. Dated: Mooretown Rancheria Concow Maidu,Owner By: Shirley Prusia, Tribal Chairperson COUNTY OF BUTTE, a political subdivision of the State of California Dated: By Curt Josiassen, Chair Butte County Board of Supervisors [Attach Notary form]