Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREZ 95-138_PLANNING N�����VIII�� IIVIV��IN�V�I�NII�IR� SEPARATOR SHEET aoN c�Y> — 13v — oiy vvo,eCrxum eez r I'IIUJE.I; i SUMMARY SHE FILE E ''s 9.57 183 Planning Department PROJECTTYPE• Rezone PUD MAY 3 0 1995 APPLICANT; Grubbs Roger Oroulite,Camorma ADDRESS: 403 Skyline Blvd . , Oroville , CA 95966 OWNER; Grubbs , Roger ADDRESS' 403 Skylilne Blvd . , Oroville , CA. 95966 REPRESENTATIVE; ADDRESS; PROJECT DESCRIPTION- Rezone from to C-2 , located on the Northwest corner of Olive Hwy , and Canyon Dr . , Oroville , CA 95966 PROPERTY ZONED' PUDLOCATED• on the northwest corner of Olive Hwy . & Canyon Drive , Oroville , CA 95966 AP NO.- 068-130-014 , 043TOWN/AREA• Oroville GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION- Commercial 1. Application Complete: Amount: Receipt No.: L Comments sent to: & Comments received from: 4. Rezone Petition Signatures Checked: . s. Mailing UstlLead-In Sheet: 0. Assigned To: + 7. Environmental Determination: Categorical ExempUon-CEOA# State Clearinghouse No.: �egative Declaration _MlUgated Negative Declaration Subject to Fish A Game: Environmental Impact Report ` Gen.Rule Ex.-CEOA t115061.(bx3) Other 6. Staff Report: Project Video: 9. Clearinghouse circulation required:Yes No Date Sent to SCH: 10: Publlcatlon Notice Written: Display Ad Prepared: 11. Notices Mailed: Number of Notices: IL Newspaper Publication Date: / ^ O C P G B R 13:: Planning Commission Hearing(s): /���� 9S�i �� IQ• /h Action taken• Special Conditions: Commission Resolution No. / r 14. Board of Supervisors'Hearing(*): i Action taken- &2/Lr1 as c 1 9 Board Resolution No.: Ordinance No.: 30? 3 Adopted: 15. Type Use Permit/Send for Signature: ts. N.O.EJN.O.DJAPPENDIX G: Fish&Game Fees Paid: Yes No 17. Send validated Use Permit: $is. Assessor's Memo: 19. Copy of Use PermlWarlance to Planning'technician: _� ,� sho SOL 7SAe(] OC 313 dl .00 ` ®llv3, llddb f ii l" 96-18 Public hearing-Roger Grubbs-consideration of a rezone(item on which a negative declaration regarding environmental impacts has been recommended) from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-2 (General Commercial), property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway and Canyon Drive, identified as AP 068-130-014, -043,'Oroville. (1945)(**00) MOTION: I MOVE TO FIND 1) ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: A- AN INITIAL STUDY WAS COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH'- THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IDENTIFYING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT THE PROTECT MAY HAVE. PROVISIONS AND THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT WILL MITIGATE SUCH EFFECTS TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE; B. A PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND C. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS f INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED, ANALYZED, AND CONSIDERED THE PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES PRIOR TO MAKING ITS DECISION ON THE PROJECT, , AND THE NEGATIVE ` DECLARATION REFLECTS THE INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF BUTTE COUNTY, AND 2. SUBDIVISION MAP ACT 96-18 FINDINGS: A- THE+PROPOSED REZONE OF C-1 IS CONSISTENT AND CONFORMS TO THE POLICIES, INCLUDING THE TEXT AND MAP, OF THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN; B. THE REZONE TO C-1 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GYRAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF COMMERCIAL AND COMPLIES WITH GOVERNMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPATIBILITY AND CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, INCLUDING THE ZONING - FACTORS LISTED IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT. SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUBDIVISION MAP ACT FINDINGS, I MOVE TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES FOR A —BUTTE-COUNTY,-BOARD -OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES - January 9, 1996 e REZONE ON AP 068-130-014, -043, AND ADOPT ORDINANCE i -3236 APPROVING THE-REZONE-FOR ROGER GRUBBS-ON t AP 068-130-014, -043. - M S VOTE: y 1-Y 2 Y-= 3 Y' 4 Y S Y(Unanimously Carried) (DIRECT STAFF TO RETURN TO THE BOARD, BEFORE"THE REZONE BEFORE US TODAY BECOMES EFFECTIVE,'WITH EITHER A DEFINITION OF MINI STORAGE THAT COMPLIESWITH WHAT THE BOARD ASKED FOR HERE TODAY, OR A REQUEST FOR BOARD INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS IT APPLIES TO MINI STORAGE) BUTTE ."COUNTY''.BOARD''OF•.SUPERVIS;ORS,MINUTES - January 9, 1996 A - C. Roger:Grubbs - proposed Negative Declaration regarding environmental` impacts and Rezone from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-2 (General Commercial)for property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway and Canyon Drive, identified as AP 068-130-014, 043, Oroville. (SH) (95- 183) (VIDEO) Mr. Hackney described the surrounding property uses and zoning. He noted that Highway 162 is a busy street with lots of noise from traffic. HEARING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC Roger Grubbs said that he would like to include outdoor storage in his Use Permit, in order to be allowed to store boats and RVs as is normal in many mini-storage facilities, but I apparently outdoor storage requires C-2 zoning. Mike Ista, a neighbor on Canyon Drive adjacent to the property, wanted to know what are the various commercial zoning designations? Mr. Hogan noted the various commercial designations. He said that Staff is recommending a C-1 designation, but the applicant wants a C-2 designation. Mr. Ista was concerned about what a C-2 designation would allow. Mr. Hogan noted that a C-1 zone would be less intense than a C-2 zone. Mr. Ista was concerned about heavy traffic at the intersection which would be a problem for any other use than a mini-storage. Mr. Ista and another neighbor do not object to a mini-storage, but are concerned if another owner should construct a mini-mart for example. Chairman Nelson asked if Mr. Ista would object to storage of RVs and boats? Mr. Ista did not object to outdoor storage. He was concerned about the potential for some of the more intense uses allowed by the proposed zoning. Commissioner Lambert said she is also concerned that,the applicant indicates he wants such facilities as a car wash and mini-mart with gas pumps at some future time. She said a Planned Unit Development could include all the applicant's desired uses and the Commissioners could decide what uses would be appropriate_ She would prefer to see the planstfor the whole 5 acres rather than approving zoning that would allow uses Without further discretionary review. Mc. Hogan described the various uses which would be allowed in a C-2 zone. ; Chairman Nelson suggested that the applicant bring in plans describing exactly what he wants to do, and that plan be specifically approved as would be the case in a PUD. Mr. Hogan said that if a rezone is approved, any of the uses allowed in the zone would be ' allowed on the property. Restrictions cannot be placed on the applicant. Butte County Planning Commission - November 9 , 1995 Mr. Hackney said,that a PUD was discussed with the applicant. The applicant mainly wanted the C-2 none_ for the possibility of a car wash. However, the C-2 zone would allow uses that may be.inappropriate in light of'the conditions on Olive Highway. The applicant waenot interested in the uses allowed under the current PUD, such as a restaurant or-strip mall, however he was.interested in having .options. C-1 would allow mini-storage an'd be consistent with the neighboring properties which are also zoned C-1. Commissioner Lambert suggested that the applicant could apply for an entirely new PUD. i Mr. Hackney said that applicant preferred to apply for the C-2 zone, but Staff felt that C-1 was more appropriate. Mr. Hogan said that the way the PUD has been used in the past would be very restrictive and would require an amendment process if the particular uses were not feasible and the ii applicant desired to change them. 'I 'i Mr. Ista asked if there would be a public hearing for a mini-mart? Mr. Hogan said that if the zone is changed to either C-1 or C-2, there would be no further review for a mini-mart. f' Mr. Ista explained the drainage situation in the area, and that his property already receives an excess of water. He is concerned that blacktop on the Grubb's property will have an adverse effect on an already bad drainage situation. He noted that the soils in the area do not perc well. The County has a drainage problem on Canyon Drive which has not been solved. Commissioner Lambert said that. drainage problems cannot be addressed at-this time. This is only a hearing for a rezone. A PUD could or would allow addressing drainage at the zoning level since it would be a Specific Plan of the entire project. I Commissioner Lynch said that Public Works reviews drainage on-site plans, but that would not guarantee that there won't still be flooding problems. Mr. Hogan noted that the peak flow off-site can not be increased, although there might be a longer duration of flooding. Mr. Ista said that he and his neighbor can not sustain any more water and the corner cannot tolerate any more traffic. He has no opposition to a mini-storage as long as the drainage is taken care of. Chairman Nelson explained the difference between a PUD with specific plans, and a zone j with a variety of possibilities. Mr. Hogan said that the PUD zone would allow the Commission to suggest to the Board of Supervisors to adopt an Ordinance to rezone the property to PUD with an adopting Land Use Plan and Development Plan. That way, it could be recommended to the Board that the PUD be amended to include those uses that are listed in the C-1 zone, but are subject to an approval of a Land Development Plan by the Planning Commission. Butte County Planning Commission- — November 9 , 1995 Commissioner Lambert thought that would be defeating the purpose of the PUD. Mr. Hogan said it would be the more"true"purpose of the PUD for development proposals and site plans. The issue would not so much be the use of the property, but rather issues such as drainage and landscaping and access. Also it could be stated that certain uses would require a Use Permit. The PUD would in effect be a mini Specific Plan. That would give the applicant flexibility while still being restricted. Mr. Grubbs said he requested a"blanket" zone change since he did not know what would be feasible for the property until he investigated it. Because of the access situation, he decided to do a mini-storage. The C-1 zone would allow the mini-storage. Mr. Grubbs has given up his original idea of access off Highway 162; he will put the driveway where the County wants it. His only problem with the C-1 zone is that he would like to have outside boat and RV storage, which the C-1 does not allow. -Commissioner Lambert asked if Mr. Grubbs would be agreeable to submitting a map that shows the RV storage and mini storage and have that specific plan approved. Mr. Grubbs said he did not want to experience more delays. Commissioner Lambert was opposed to both the C-1 and C-2 zones, but would be .in favor of. a Specific Plan.• The,corner has lots of traffic, drainage, and access concerns, and even the C-1 zone would be too permissive. -- Ted Crawford, of CDF, said that approval of a C-1 or C-2 zone would not allow CDF to have input regarding fire protection and fire water supply. A Specific Plan or Use Permit would allow CDF to require the necessary fire protection system. Since there is no Uniform Fire Code incorporated in the County, any kind of building could be constructed without hydrants being required. Mini-storage should have a pressurized water supply for fire protection which cannot be required if the C-1 zone is approved. HEARING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC Commissioner Cage asked if a PUD or Specific Plan would require a Use Permit later on? Mr. Hackney said that specific land uses would be approved with a PUD and not require a later Use Permit. The current PUD on the property allows extensive development of the parcel —much more than what the applicant has said he intends to do. For instance, a gas station could be built under the current PUD. The applicant has applied for a change in the zoning because he does not want to build a gas station, restaurant or strip mall, but is subject to the strict requirements of the existing PUD which does not allow a mini- storage. Approval of a C-1 zone would allow many uses without any further review, such as a mini-mart. However, a car wash would require a Use Permit. Under C-2 zoning, a car wash would not require a Use Permit. Commissioner Lynch said that the conditions of the current PUD are not available so the Commissioners do not know exactly what can be done on the property at this time. The allowable uses would be specifically what was approved for the PUD. Butte County Planning Commission =—November Mr. Hogan said the existing PUD could be modified to include those uses desired by the applicant. Chairman Nelson said that the applicant wants a less intense use for the property than what is currently allowed. It should be possible to streamline the process. Commissioner Lynch was also opposed to requiring the applicant to jump through unnecessary hoops. Mr. Hogan said the PUD process is very detailed and would require comments from various entities, and would involve approval of a development plan. Basically a PUD is a site plan review as well as a zoning process. There was a discussion of the adjacent zones. Commissioner Lynch noted that several of the allowed uses in a commercial zone, such as launderette and restaurant would probably not be possible on the property due to poor j perc for septic. Mini-storage would probably be the least intense commercial use for the property. i Commissioner Cage asked what the property is presently used for? It was noted that the property is presently vacant land. Commissioner Cage thought a site plan might be appropriate. Commissioner Lynch was in favor of a C-1 zone on the property to be consistent with the adjacent zones, and to let the economics and the perc capabilities of the land itself dictate the use. Commissioner Cage was in favor of continuing the item to December 14, 1995 and require that a map be submitted by the applicant showing a specific use. She so moved, which was seconded by Commissioner Lambert. Chairman Nelson asked the applicant what he wanted at this point? Mr. Grubbs said after discussion with the Planning Staff he had tried to proceed with his plans based on a CA zone. He could do something now with the property that would bring in 1200 cars a day. A mini-storage would have less than 60 cars a day. Commissioner Lambert said she did not oppose mini-storage or RV storage. She would support the plan as part of a PUD. She felt the CA zone is too permissive for the location. Mr. Grubbs said that the property will not perc for a car wash. Mini-storage does not require perc. It would be the best use for the property. Mr. Hogan said that if the applicant does not intend to submit a site plan, there would be no point in a continuance. A-denial would-move the proposal on to the Board of Supervisors. "Butte County Planning Commission -- No eV m eL 9;19-9' Commissioner Cage said the reason for her motion, was for input from the various agencies such as the Fire Department. Mr. Hogan said that requirements could be placed on a map that could not be required by a rezone to C-1. Commissioner Lambert said it would be possible to make a motion to deny the C-1 zone, _ and recommend that the Board of Supervisors consider an amendment to the existing PUD. Commissioner Cage withdrew her motion and Commissioner Lambert withdrew her second to the motion. Commissioner Lynch asked if a denial would automatically go on to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Hogan said that is correct. It was moved by Commissioner Lambert and seconded by Commissioner Cage to deny the C-1 request and recommend that the Board of Supervisors consider an amendment to the PUD. Mr. Hogan said that the Board of Supervisors could concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation and direct Staff to work with the applicant to revise the site plan for Board action or they could send it back to the Planning Commission. Chairman Nelson asked if conditions could be placed on the zone regarding requirements of the Fire Dept. and other agencies. There should be a way to allow the applicant to do . what he wants and still limit the uses on the property without going through a complicated process. Mr. Hogan said that conditional zoning can "get lost in the shuffle" but could be done. Chairman Nelson said there could be a condition on the C-1 zone to require comments from the various departments. Commissioner Lambert was opposed to such an action. Commissioner Seegert thought the applicant should not be penalized. He said the adjacent C-1 properties could do all the things possible in a C-1 zone. This one parcel cannot solve all the problems in the area. Commissioner Lynch agreed with that comment and felt that unnecessary red tape should be avoided. It should be possible to approve a C-1 zone and require that requirements of the Fire Dept. be met. Mr. Hogan said that would be possible_ _ Butte County Planning Commission -- November 9 , 1995 There was a motion for denial of the C-1 zone on the floor, made by Commissioner Lambert, and seconded by Commissioner Cage, to send the proposal forward to the Board of Supervisors, with a recommendation that an amendment to the PUD be considered for ' the property at the location, which did not pass by the following vote: AYES:. Commissioners Lambert and Cage I! NOES: Commissioners Seegert and Lynch and Chairman Nelson ABSTAIN: 0 ABSENT: 0 It was moved by Commissioner Seegert, seconded by Commissioner Lynch, and carried to go ahead with the Planning Staff recommendation for a conditional rezone to the C-1 zone, with a condition to meet the requirements of the Fire Department. Mr. Hogan noted that building permit requirements would involve approval of several departments and agencies, including Public Works, Caltrans, and the Health Dept., but the Butte County Fire Dept. would not be able to place requirements unless specifically Y included in the motion. The vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Seegert, Lynch and Chairman Nelson NOES: Commissioner Lambert ABSTAIN: Commissioner Cage y Butte County Planning Commission -- November 9 , 1995 GRUBBS , ROGER ; Rezone T. 068-130-014 , 043 FILE = 95-183 30 Day Review period Eads SC:: Re�re*.v Period Ezd, CCRRESPONDE,, r=! CCMM�E�-ITS RE .:TVED 7a�e Agenc f/?srson I , I . Planninq Department MAY. 3 0~x995 PRO-TE-C-1 Y GRUBBS , ROGER : Rezone Q�� $ 068-130-014 , 043 FILE 95-183 30 Day Review Period rads 5 H Review Period E=ds OUTGOTxG AC.IylTY Date Agency/person I I I I I - I _ I I I ' I I • I MMV 9 G lnnr OrOvifslu,t wifornia.- LOG TM SHEET AT TYPE NAME AP# FILE# LOG# IN COMP. ASSIGN anninq Capanment MAy 3'"995 APPLICATION FOR REZONING BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT: Read and follow instructions set forth on last page of this form. Applicant's Name `� Phone No. 6 _360 Applicant's Mailing Address 1�.���l I'�7c Duk- f�(�V(�l�r Applicant's Interest in property(Owner, Lessee,Other) n(,k)K) �- Owner's Name and Address VOCIE CL_ Contact Person for Project(if other than applicant) Assessor's Parcel Number(s) G —[ ic -01q I 0`r? Present Zoning P A C, Requested Zoning V0Z Location,dimensions and size of area(s)to be rezoned a or- w V�AWDVJ Arz-wc-- . Way, CI? a . w H Z Street Address(if applicable) � 2 Directions for travel to property(rural and mountainous areas only) a ` �t�� 1 'vim `t-6 \..1N . oto Applicant's reasons for rezoning ( O U 2 1 �1�M i 6C AMgAN M CC& �Xo w�G Q-01k) OW tbU(_Q_ S�oz WNt L_ U1 C C(D sd (to 1P actLl d0i.A:) P ACI Proposed scheduling/Associated projects(formation of service*district,etc.) - F ' L� JSt_Lt1Ck sed RF t-- Anticipated -Anticipated incremental devello-pment(future rdevelop4REe menntplans subsequent to rezone[): ' E �' �F. ..�Qtl;� llV" im v,;t do�m, Q7, 3%4 4o"c, kmc, r�iow P,1 m\oN -4 W A "01 CZ1,1r, VAt wo�u� F a�u S o�sc 3 Cow��N�tr Existing/prbliosed sewage disposal method: C ------J QAC-W S� E C V_ M a Proximity of power and phone lines:__ OUB Rd PC 4 CL oM ` Distance to natural water course or storm drain: �-- t �IA.�1 To W(r kAS to ►+SIA I 5-7 t t ; t • rs i'.-) - t` r � t t • • Describe anticipated on and off-site drainage improvements(PUD,MHP): ko 4 -S�"r d(�f�twr�gE p_o0) NE ,%w Rms QA bq & "p wer---e-AvA01i St EE rwprzn �+u► s w iU IoE bt tl f t-�Io�t1n�t 2 Describe how on-site and downstream drainage channels will be affected(PUD,MHP): �pEC��i cA�tedvs. YkV �s No o�2�r0 _ `t�n� 'Q_'__ * QU leoL. k oQ A [ole Alavu"� Water source: Com Proximity of water for fire fighting purposes(hydrants,ponds,etc.) IZ Will excavation or grading be necessary?*Cubic yards(estimate)? S JkJ (e:)O0 04(c. UbEL List and describe and other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city,regional,State and Federal agencies: 004— Z If residential, include the number of units, whether units are single or multi-story in height, schedule of H unit sizes, and type of household size expected. Z A'a Nod K-LOL4 U a a If commercial, indicate the type, eth r ne' h orhood city or region�ll oriented, square footage of a sales area, and loading facilities d L4 w 0 t1 0-00 t k WE, If industrial,indicate type,estimated employment per shift,and loading facilities. If institutional indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities,and community benefits to be derived from the project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Identify potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the rezone. What project design features or special conditions of approval (mitigation measures) are proposed to alleviate potential environmental impacts? �s �s SCJ ce�q Aw A 'To �ow►i 2pup caa o 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topgraphy, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. �6 �� ti 5, I o RSA 15 u6 &Zj t i.l Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, F0 setback,rear yard,etc.). Z U Pp�� aQ Pr a S tU 0 4•L���LcC� d0 W�Vbto �E A o VILA_ s s lc_,�t t_e o CAN �NrZ oto odw S,4-6cON edG \AI 10%adMs N0IV(ET Ow I hereby declar4nder penalty of perjury that I have read and understand the instructions and that the foregoing statements are true,complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ,� Dated: Applicant's Signature Dated: �'2� Property owner's signature xwal_� AX Project File Number a General Plan Designation Request Consistent? Z Request: Rezone to W Location and size of parcel(s) W Ln U C a. o C M c C 2 3 a s :;; K..`, . lw� 4 L •i ` ,� �� A� Y �.1.. Y� �ry�� �� I'� r t F . t t t . � 4, .. ,� -. t . _ .'.1 _ , i t T� `\� Verify: A.P. Number(s) Location Description `�) a e � �� C C�wnners�ip Legal Description of Area �C. eoher:,v"uQ 1 Proof of Agency(if needed) Maps of Area/Development / Plan for PUD's Present Zoning U Reproducible Master Map of Development Plan(PUD's only) W Date of Application received S — a y��5� $ � � Receipt No.j 913-6 Application Taken By E C" w GCI i •� M i d r� 4 f s- • c- I r' . ''' .': ._� a� t.,z .. , , INSTRUCTIONS TO REZONING APPLICANTS 1. If applicant is not the owner, written authorization by the owner or other proof of agency must be submitted in order for the applicant to legally sign the application. Application shall be considered void if not signed by the owner or legal agent. 2. All items on application shall be filled in as completely as possible. Very few items should be marked not applicable by the term"N/A". 3. It is very important that the application include an accurate and complete description of the property proposed for each requested zone. The applicant will not be processed until we receive the following information about area(s)to be rezoned: a.Assessor's parcel number(s)from the tax bills or Assessor's Map. b. Street addresses(if available). c.Distances and directions to named streets,bodies of water or railroads. d. Legal description (subdivision lot numbers, fractions of sections or distances and bearings of perimeter dimensions). e. 3�_copies of map with rezoning area(s) outlined (Assessor's,map, subdivision map, or other map showing parcels). 4. California Government Code Section 65300 et seq. requires local zoning ordinances to be consistent with a jurisdiction's adopted general plan. County approval of a rezoning request must be supported by finding of consistency with the Butte County General Plan. Applicants may request changes in General Plan designations by filing an Application for General Plan Amendment. 5. The Application for Rezoning is subject to public hearings and approval by both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The procedures for County action on rezoning applications are stated in CChapter 24/off the Butte County Code. 6. Applicant fees as of �oL_�`T� �� (date)are$ c2s 9 ' Fees may be paid in cash or by check made payable to Treasurer of Butte County. 7. Before submitting a rezoning application, applicant is requested to discuss with staff all questions about application requirements, County procedures, consistency with the General Plan,and the provisions of existing and requested zoning classifications. Planning Department MAY 3 0 1995 Orovit;';i,-....,ivnia Recorj al it Ia He0dcr5i Ut .alley Title A Escrow Coin/3a• I 95-0105931 Rec Fee •Orr:er No. 15. 00 Escrow No. 146734D5-3 Recorded DOC 99. 00 I Check N O#ficial Records I 114• 00 WH�N�ECORDED MAIL TO: County of I ROGER M. GRUBBS Butte I Cuindace J. Grubbs 1 CHRISTINE E. GRUBBS Recorder I 403 SKYLIILLE,[JC 1. 95 Recorder 30-Mar--95 I MVTC VS 4 tJRt7VILLG, CA. 95966 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $35.17.0 Computed on the consideration or value of property conveyed; OR SAME AS ABOVE _ Computed on the consideration or value loss Eons or encumbrancos remaining at time W sale. Thp ltndPrsignPrl [a'rantnr rlpciarpS Signature of Dectarenl or Agent determining lax-Firm Name GRANT DEED 068-130-014-000 068-130-043-000 FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CAROL J. BERNERD, an unmarried woman AND JOHNNIE A RIPPY AND LOUISE RIPPY, husband and wife hereby GRANT(S) to ROGER M. GRUBBS AND CHRISTINE E. GRUBBS, husband and wife, as Joint Tenants the real property in the Unincorporated Area of the County of BUTTE ,State of California,described as FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE ATTACHED Dated March 9, 1995 '�..:� •� �;�'';\'�:..._� STATE OF CALIFORNIA }ss. COUNTY OF } LOS ANGELES i NIE A. RIPPY- On MARCH 21, 1995 betore personally appeared .4 p:Ippyrpg L PA TnTITSR RTPPY***** proved to me on the basis of satisfactory encs 49ft ss) whose name(s) are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that /they executed the t -' :'=`. *= % '•"_ ?�=fes?=` same In /lhelr authorized capacity(ies), an that by /their u!i i(.ta;.S1,61.�� ;'� signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon all of -: �'..? ":�t S. KELLOGG n which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 1ti:;!'c :.` t, I•,:,'i:i::i:,oNrsA WITNESS my hand and official seal. ku! r. •. '` i°I,; n::?%l Ufl iCt�Irl Signature ORDER NO. BU-141610-3 DESCRIPTION ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF BUTTE, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: A PORTION OF LOT 47, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED, "OFFICIAL MAP OF OROVILLE—WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT NO. 211, WHICH MAP WAS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON MARCH 7, 1927, IN BOOK 11 OF MAPS, AT PAGE(S) 11 AND 12, AND ALSO A PORTION OF LOT 52, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED, "OFFICIAL MAP OF OROVILLE—WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT NO. 3", WHICH MAP WAS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON OCTOBER 10, 1927, IN BOOK 11 OF MAPS, AT PAGE(S) 19 AND 20, WHICH PORTIONS ARE MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 52, WHICH POINT IS DISTANT SOUTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 140.09 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 52; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 58 DEG. 56' WEST, 326.88 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 52; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOTS 52 AND 47, A DISTANCE OF 648.36 FEET; THENCE EAST 280 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY IN A STRAIGHT LINE, 479.67 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. J*PAlRCEUft9I4:. A PORTION OF LOT 47, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED, "OFFICIAL MAP OF OROVILLE—WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT NO. 211, WHICH MAP WAS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON MARCH 7, 1927, IN BOOK 11 OF MAPS, AT PAGE(S) 11 AND 12, AND PART OF LOT 52, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED, "OFFICIAL MAP OF OROVILLE—WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT NO. 3" WHICH MAP WAS RECORDED IN.THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON OCTOBER 10, 1927, IN BOOK 11 OF MAPS, AT PAGE(S) 19 AND 20, WHICH PORTIONS ARE MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 52, OROVILLE—WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT NO. 3, ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF OROVILLE—QUINCY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 58 DEG. 56' WEST, ON SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 52, A DISTANCE OF 140.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 386 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 181; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE THEREOF NORTH 479.68 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 78 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 238; THENCE EAST 150 FEET TO CENTERLINE OF CANYON DRIVE; THENCE ON EASTERLY Planning Department CONTINUED MAY 3 0 1995 ,. PAGE 5 ORDER NO. BU-141610-3 PARCEL II: CONTINUED LINE OF LOT 47 IN CENTERLINE OF CANYON DRIVE SOUTH 381.53 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 89 DEG. 001 WEST, ON SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 47, A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 52, THENCE SOUTH 25.34 FEET TO POINT OF COMMENCEMENT. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 5,, 1957, IN BOOK 820, PAGE 318, OFFICIAL RECORDS. Plannina DRnartment MAY 3 0 1995 PAGE 6 /�yy' L; 068 140 035 000 STAR.: ACT I VF h1 _I NTURF HASKEL 4630 OLIVE HWY OROVILLE CA 95966 1 L-. 068 140 036 000 STATUS: ACTIVE L 068 130 014 000 STATUS: ACTIVE RUSSELL ERWIN WAYNE & MARGARET H ' BERNERD CAROL JETAL - 4642 OLIVE HWY 4876 FOOTHILL BLVD OROVILLE CA 95966 OROVILLE CA 95966 L: 068 140 049 000 ''STATUS: ACTIVE - ZERBA HELEN ETAL JT L: 068 130 056 000 STATUS: ACTIVE VERBA MATTHEWISTA MYRON W & TAMARA I_ JT 4620 OLIVE HIGHWAY '- OROVILLE CA 95966 .... ` 26 CANYON DR OROVILLE CA 95966 L: 068 140 094 000 STATUS: ACTIVE TAMOR I CAF:OLEE G L: 068 130 057 {%1{%0 STATUS: ACTIVE ' -'- ••' TEAGUE LARRY E SS 27 SKYLINE BLVD j 34 CANYON DR OROVILLE CA 95966 OROVILLF_ CA 95966 L: 068 140 026 less?0 STATUS: ACTIVE LISS FRANK A & CHRISTIE D L. 068 130 061 000 STATUS: ACTIVE HURLEY DONNA LOUISE SS FO BOX 1211 50 CANYON DR OROVILLE CA 95965 '- OROVILLE CA 95966 L: 068 140 029 000 STATUS: ACTIVE - •- STATUS: ACTIVE FARRENS ARTHUR M E: EL I td M L: !%168 13{%1 {?162 {%1{%1Q1 MCDONALD ROBERT F & JEANETTE JT 4694 OLIVE HWY ' OROVILLE CA 95966 _ 42 CANTON DR OROVILLE CA 95966 L: Ole 140 -040 000 _'STATUS: ACTIVE - - ----- -_ BESSEY GERALD L & GARNET J L: 068 139 062 vfy_f(f STATUS: ACTIVE DOTSON BETTY RUTH ETAL 4678 OLIVE HWY WANGLER BETTY S OROVILLE CA 95966 60 CANYON DR OROVILLE CA 95966 L: 069 410 075 000 STATUS: ACTIVE L: l%168 130112 {%1s fy1 STATUS: ACTIVE BROWN REX B & JESSIE h1 - MUSIC ERNEST W JR & MARILYN R 43 CANYON DR OROVILLE CA 95966 80 WALNUT AVE OROVILLE CA 95966 L: 619 411 s%feO 000 STATLIS: ACTIVE ' - '---------- —_ ._..._ . KLEIN BARBARA I_: 06B 13!%1 i 13 {?svgs-1 STATUS: ACTIVE FIANT BURLDEAN & PATRICIA S JT 91 CANYON DR 4619 OLIVE HWY OROVILLE CA 95966 OROVILLE CA 95965 L: 069 410 030 000 STATUS: ACTIVE L: 068 140 WAS— '713 sirs%1S%1 STATUS: ACTIVE EDWARDS. ALLEN r RUTH •• BOESCFI RUTH A • 4753 OLIVE HWl' _ 2241 MONTAZUh1A DR OROVILLE CA 95966 CAMPBELL CA 95008 L: 069 420 020 000 STATUS: ACTIVE L: 1168 14l%1 s%152 000STATUS: ACTIVE BERTRAMS PAUL E & BERTHA F' BUTLER RICHARD L & DONA J CF' 4735 OLIVE HWY OROVILLE � CA 95965 4607 OLIVE HIGHWAY c OROVILLE CA 95965 L: 069 420 034 000 STATUS: ACTIVE SCHLIESMAYER ROBERT N ETAL - 124 QUINCY PL OROVILLE CA 95965 �ti 3 , i r i N SQaEdMQ� Q G:iO � I ' 6 ho 5S0 acv a 1I i �►Snw Z I l . � � NOSsO�I ZQO . psis a I so ri i ' rr '1, � � _ s ., .. f" .j ,.O A � ~. 1 t r � � }, +, � � ' 4 , ' . ♦ ` `1 F 1 \ � � � ! 1 ,. '� 1, 1 '�.� �. � { ., =V, Inter-Departmental Memorandum TO: Butte County Assessor's Office FROM: Butte County Planning Department SUBJECT: Roger Grubbs DATE: January 31, 1996 Pursuant to Section 65863.5 of the Government Code, the following parcels identified as AP 068-1309-014, 043, were: Rezone from PUD to C-1 zoning district. /Ir COUNTY OF BUTTE Oroville, California GENERAL CLAIM CLAIMANT: Roger Grubbs ADDRESS: 403 Skyline Boulevard CITY & STATE: Oroville, CA 95966 DATE OF CLAIM: February 22, 1996 IMPORTANT.• SEE INSTRUCTIONS SUBMIT CLAIM TO DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GOODS OR SERVICES ON REVERSE SIDE DATE DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM (DESCRIBE FULLY TO AVOID DELAY) AMOUNT 2-22-96 Rezone, File No.95.183-REFUND $138. 31 TOTAL . $138. 31 I,the undersigned,declare under penalty of perjury that the services or articles claimed have been performed or delivered,and that thplis true and correct as stated(. Dated this 2 v day of �2 � 19%.. �L Calif. Stature of Claimant I,the undersigned,'hereby certify that,to the best of my knowledge,the services or articles specified above have been performed or delivered and that there is a Budget Appropriation PN or Specific Board Approval [ ] (Check one)for the same. Dated this day of ��� , 19�,at 0(Lo-v Calif. Department Head or Authorized Deputy Dept.Code 480-001 Exp.Code 4210900 PAYABLE FROM GENERAL FUND DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS UNE-AUDITOR'S USE ONLY DEPT. &SUB. PROD. SUB.OBJ. CLAIM NO. INV. NO. INV. DATE ENCUMB. GROSS AMT. Date 02/28/96 -elopment Services Departlnt Time 9:51 am Applicant Billing Worksheet Page 1 95-183 REZ * Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Boulevard Oroville, CA 95966 In reference to : Rezone, AP#068-130-014,043 Rounding : None j Full Precision : No Last bill / / Last aging Last charge 02/08/96 Last payment / / Amount $0.00 Date/Slip# Description HOURS/RATE AMOUNT TOTAL 05/22/95 Larry / P 0.75 44.25 #5671 Processing 59.00 05/29/95 Linda / C 1.50 51.00 #5770 Clerical 34.00 06/12/95 Craig / P 0.50 29.50 #6043 Processing 59.00 07/01/95 Craig / P 1.00 59.00 #6683 Processing 59.00 07/03/95 Steve H / P 6.00 354.00 #6224 Processing 59.00 07/17/95 Steve H / P 2.50 147.50 #6238 Processing 59.00 07/31/95 Steve H / P 2.00 118.00 #6393 . Processing 59.00 08/12/95 Steve H / P 1.00 59.00 #6458 Processing 59.00 08/12/95 Craig / P 0. 75 44.25 #6469 Processing 59.00 09/25/95 Steve H / P 6. 75 398.25 #6800 Processing 59.00 10/09/95 Larry / P 1.25 73. 75 #6925 Processing 59.00 10/09/95 Steve H / P 3.25 191. 75 #6937 Processing 59.00 Date 02/28/96 ]development Services Departtnt Time 9:51 am Applicant Billing Worksheet Page 2 95-183 REZ * :Roger Grubbs (continued) Date/Slip# Description HOURS/RATE AMOUNT TOTAL 10/09/95 Craig / P- 1.50 88.50 #6945 Processing 59.00 10/23/95 Lynn / C 0.50 22.50 #6975 Clerical 45.00 10/23/95 Steve H / P 0.50 29.50 #7002 Processing 59.00 11/06/95 Lynn / C 0.25 11.25 #7093 Clerical 45.00 11/06/95 Steve H / P 4.00 236.00 #7127 Processing 59.00 11/06/95 Diana / C 2. 10 71.40 #7149 Clerical 34.00 12/04/95 Steve H / P 1.50 88.50 #7281 Processing . 59.00 01/01/96 Steve H / P 3.00 177.00 #7549 Processing 59.00 01/29/96 Lynn / C 1.00 45.00 #7697 Clerical 45.00 TOTAL BILLABLE TIME CHARGES 41. 60 $2,339. 90 Date/Slip# Description OTY/PRICE 10/09/95 Lynn / $0 1 21. 79 #6867 Publish Legal Notice in Oroville 21. 79 Mercury Register TOTAL BILLABLE COSTS $21. 79 Date 02/28/96 Development Services Depart•t Time 9:51 am Applicant Billing Worksheet Page 3 95-183 REZ * :Roger Grubbs (continued) TOTAL NEW CHARGES $2, 361. 69 PAYMENTS/REFUNDS/CREDITS 05/24/95 Deposit - Receipt #14850 (2,000.00) 01/04/96 Deposit - Receipt #15164 (500.00) 02/28/96 Refund/Claim Form to Auditor 138.31 TOTAL PAYMENTS/REFUNDS/CREDITS ($2, 361. 69) NEW BALANCE TOTAL NEW BALANCE $0.00 ORDINANCE NO. 3236 AN ORDINANCE ZONING A PORTION OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AN C-1 (LIGHT COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-29. 1 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, 2 under and pursuant to Section 24-29 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 q 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 10 County know currently as AP #068-130-014 and 43, more particularly shown on 11 Attacment A.- 12 13 SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be and it is hereby declared to be 14 in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after the date of its passage, 15 and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage,-this 16 17 Ordinance shall be published once with the names of the members of the Board 18 of Supervisors voting for and against it in the Chico Enterprise Record, a 19 newspaper published in the County of Butte, State of California. 20 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the 21 County of Butte, State of California, on the 9th day of January , 1996, by'the 22 23 following vote: 24 AYES: Supervisors Meyer, Dolan, Houx, Thomas and Chair McLaughlin 25 NOES: None 26 ABSENT: None 1 NOT VOTING: None 2 IVtC 3l CHAIRMAN Asupervisors Butte County Board 4 5 ATTEST: JOHN S. BLACKLOCK, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board 6 7 8 By 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Wa � AR-1 . A U C' P oje t Locatio C-1 AP# 68- - 4,04 R-1 A-R EXHIBIT A C NOTICE OF DETERMINATION 0 d TO: Office of Plan.& Research Dept. JAN 2 41996 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 CCANUACE J.CRUBBS,BUTTE CO.CLDEPUERK X Butte County Clerk FROM:.Butte County Planning 7 County Center Dr.,Oroville 95965 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title: Rezone PUD: File#95-183 AP Number: 068-130-014,043 Applicant: Roger Grubbs State Clearinghouse Number(If submitted to clearinghouse): Contact Person: Steve Hackney Telephone Number: 538-7601 Project Location: Located on the north west corner of Olive Hwy. and Canyon Drive, Oroville Project Description: Rezone from PAC to C-1 This is to advise that the Butte County Board of Supervisors has approved the above-described project on January 9, 1996 and has made the following determinations regarding the above-described project: 1. The project will,_X will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. `X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were,_X were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of overriding considerations was, was not, adopted for this project. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the general public at: Date received for filing and posting at OPR Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 % B rry ogan nning Manager APPENDIX G NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the project described below has been reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code 21100, et. seq. ) and a determination has been made that it will not have a significant effect upon the environment. Assessor's Parcel No. 068-130-014, 043 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Rezone to C-1 3. LOCATION OF PROJECT: Located on the north west corner of Olive Hwy. and Canyon Drive, Oroville. 4. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Roger Grubbs, 403 Skyline Blvd. , Oroville 5. MITIGATION MEASURES: None 6.. A copy of the initial study regarding the environmental effect of this project is on file at 7 County Center Drive, Oroville. This study was: X Adopted as presented. Adopted with changes. Specific modifications and supporting reasons are attached. . 7. A public hearing on this Negative Declaration was held by the decision, making body. Hearing Body: Butte Count} Board of Supervisors Date of Determination: January 9. 1996 Determination: On the basis of the initial study of environmental impact, the information presented at hearings, comments received on the proposal and our own knowledge and independent research: X We find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. We find that the project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, but will not - in this case because of attached mitigation measures described in item 5 above, which are by this reference made conditions of project approval. A conditional NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. � 1 Ed McLaughlin, hairman Butte _County Board of Supervisors Date: At (1 0i 7QQC STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION' USING AGENCY PETE WILSON Govemor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 3 P.O.BOX 911 MARYS U E,CA 95901 TDD Telephone(916)741-4509 FAX(916)7415346 Telephone(916)7414539 December 28, 1995 GBUT212 03-BUT-162 PM 17.6 Rose/Key Carwash Preliminary Plan Request For Assistance Mr. Ron Key,Engineer Key Engineers and Associates 1646 Poole Boulevard Yuba City,CA 95991 Dear Mr. Key: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced document, which you delivered to us on December 6, 1995. COMMENTS: An Encroachment Permit from Caltrans will be required for any work conducted in the State right of way. Only one driveway will be allowed on this parcel's State Route (SR) 162 frontage, and it must be located at least 26 feet away from any existing driveways to the adjacent parcels. The driveway must be designed as per Caltrans commercial road approach standards. A dedication to Caltrans of right of way to at least 50 feet from Centerline of State Route (SR).162 will be required. The sidewalk should be at least 5 feet wide. The Encroachment Permit application should include a Site Plan to illustrate the above improvements. The Site Plan should also include the following details on the curb and gutter: existing adjacent elevations to the East and West, and proposed slope and elevations of the improvements. The elevations should be called out at key areas of proposed development to reflect your intent to direct stormwater runoff to the South. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Terri Pencovic, Inter Governmental Review/CEQA Coordinator,at(916) 741-4199. Sincerely, Planning DOT"Oln"t •� '( p 2 ��� E. A. "LIB" HARAUGHTY, Chief Urge",,,.., _ Office of Transportation.Planning- Rural s cc: Barry Hogan,Manager,Butte County Planning Division STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE GIL'SON 'Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP04WTION - DISTRICT 3 P.0.BOX 911,MARYSVILLE,CA 95901 TDD Telephone(9161 741-4259 January 5, 1996 Reference: 03-But-162-21.2 EA 911379 Grubbs, Access Control Parcel # 031469 Mr. Steve Hackney Butte County Planning Division Dear Mr. Hackney As -per your request for a legal description to convey the access control for the above referenced development, find attached said description. Please have the owners of record sign and notarize the deed, send the original back to this office for acceptance and recordation. Should you have any questions in regards to this matter please feel free to contact me or Mr. Scott Jackson at .(916) 741-4307. Sincerely, JAMES R. DAY . District Right of Way Engineer Space above this line for Recorder's Use QUITCLAIMDEED District County Route Location Number (INDIVIDUAL) 03 BUT 162 PM 21 .3 031469 (DEDICATION) does hereby release and quitclaim to the State of California any and all abutter's rights of access to the State Highway from all that certain real property in the unincorporated area County of Butte , State of California, described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO Form RW 6-1(1) (Revised 4/95) 031469 01/04/96 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT "A" That property conveyed by Grant Deed to Roger M. Grubbs and Christine E. Grubbs, recorded in said County's Official Records as Document Number 95-010593 . This real property description has been prepared b me,or under m direction,in conformance with P Y Y the Professional Land'Surveyors Act. Npl. LAIVO Signature Profs ' nal Land Surveyor Date Cl(V - Ir SCOTT J.JACKSON O a Name 6358 Number CAL�F�� Form RW 6.1(H) (Revised 4/95) 031469 01/04/96 Page 2 of 3 • Dated this day 00 19 STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS PERSONAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT County of On this the day of 19_, before me, Name, Title of Officer-E.G., "Jane Doe, Notary Public" personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s) ❑ personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Notary Public's signature in and for said County and State) (for notary seal or stamp) THIS IS TO CERTIFY, That the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation (pursuant to Government Code Section 27281), hereby accepts for public purposes the real property described in the within deed and consents to the recordation thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of ' 19- Director 19Director of Transportation By Attorney in Fact Form RW 6.1(H) (Revised 4/95) 031469 01/04/96 Page 3 of 3 -m-5,7 • uttecounty DIRECTOR'S OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 January 10, 1996 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 Re: Rezone, File 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Board of Supervisors held January 9, 1996, Ordinance No. 3236 was adopted which rezones from PAC to C-1 that property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway and Canyon Drive,.identified as AP 068-130-014, 043, Oroville. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this Department. Very truly yours, Williarfi Farrel Development Services Director WF:lr cc: Clerk of the Board a counN DIRECTOR'S OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965.3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 FAX: (916)538-7785 December 26, 1995 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Boulevard Oroville, CA 95966 RE: Rezone, File No. 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors set a public hearing for Tuesday, January 9, 1996, at 10:30 a.m., to consider your request for a rezone from PAC (Planned Area Cluster)to C-2 (General Commercial), for property located on the northwest corner of Canyon Drive and Olive Highway (SR 162), within the Oroville urban area. The meeting will be held in the Board of Supervisors'Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. A copy of the Agenda Report will be mailed to you prior to the Board meeting, generally a minimum of five calendar days prior to the meeting. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, >lliam Farrel irector of Development Services WF.jb �,. Eu ite counfq .4 PLANNING DIVISION �• DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVIL LE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 November 13, 1995 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 Re: .Rezone, File 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Commission held November 9, 1995, " your request for rezoning from PAC to C-2 for property located on the northwest corner of Canyon Drive and Olive Highway (SR 162), Oroville, was recommended for approval to C-1. A report of this matter will be made to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at which time she will set the public hearing date. You will be notified of the date and time. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. Very truly yours, hartMg er BKH:lr cc: Clerk of the Board k:\letters\PD112 ` - u tocounfg , LAiND C ` `•! ATURAL A . TH A (\, D BcAUTY ~ PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE. CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916)538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 January 2, 1996 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Boulevard Oroville, CA 95966 RE: Rezone, File No. 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: Enclosed is a copy of the agenda report which has been submitted to the Board of Supervisors. A public hearing will be held in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County i a Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California,a, on Tuesday, January 9, 1996, at 10:30 a.m., to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of a rezone from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-1 (Light Commercial), for property located on the northwest coiner of Canyon Drive and Olive Highway (SR 162), within the Oroville urban area. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the enclosed agenda report, please contact the Planning Division of the Department of Development Services at 538-7601. Sincerely, Stephen Hackney Associate Planner SH:jb Enclosure AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Chair and Board of Supervisors FROM: Department of Development Services, Planning Division BY: Barry K. Hogan, Planning Manager and Stephen Hackney, Associate Planner DATE: December 7, 1995 REQUEST: Rezone 95-183 - Roger Grubbs on APN 068-130-014: A request to - rezone two contiguous parcels of approximately five (5) acres of land, from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-2 (General Commercial), for property located on the northwest corner of Canyon Drive and Olive Highway (SR 162), within the Oroville urban area. [The County currently uses the classification "PUD" - Planned Unit Development - instead of PAC.] The request is consistent with the Commercial General Plan land use designation. This project is located in Supervisorial District 1. FOR: Board of Supervisors Meeting of January 9, 1996 SUMMARY: This is a request to rezone two contiguous parcels of approximately five (5) acres, from PAC to C-2. Staff recommends a rezone to C-1 instead. A C-1 zoning classification would allow the primary uses the applicant seeks, while requiring a use permit for any future general commercial uses such as a car wash. At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Commission held November 9, 1995, this request for rezoning from PAC to C-2 was recommended for approval to C-1. DISCUSSION: The current zoning allows specific uses that may result in more intensive development than the applicant proposes. In 1973, the County approved a PAC rezone allowing development of 24,000 square feet of retail store space and a full-service gas station. Two vehicular accesses to the site, one from Olive Highway and one from Canyon Drive were approved. The applicant requested a rezone for the property from the current zone of PAC to C-2, to be relieved of the specific development requirements of the PAC. The C-2 zone allows for a variety of uses, including general retail and service stations. The applicant has indicated that he wants to construct a mini-storage/RV& boat storage facility, and perhaps later, a convenience store with gas pumps and car wash facilities. Some of the uses allowed in the C-2 zone may not be compatible with the surrounding area. The County has several areas of concern that may be exacerbated by uses permitted in a C-2 zone. After extensive study of the project - (site visits, discussions with County Public Works, Environmental Health, Caltrans and others; research of the 1973 PAC; consideration of response to comments, and other input) - staff determined a C-1 zoning classification is more consistent with surrounding land uses and would result in less significant potential impacts than would a C-2 zoning classification. The applicant would still be able to proceed with his planned uses. A rezone to C-1 still gives the applicant relief from the PAC zone allowing him to meet one of his immediate goals: developing a mini-storage. The C-1 zone also allows convenience stores, which is Butte County Department of Development Services - Planning Division � 1 I a use in which the applicant has expressed an interest. The other uses proposed by the applicant, outdoor boat and RV storage and a car wash, are uses that may be allowed subject to a Use Permit in the C-1 zone. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: This application has been defined as a project under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and is subject to the requirements of CEQA. An Initial Study has been prepared by County staff. Based upon the a review of the Initial Study, staff has determined that any potential project impacts can be fully mitigated with the implementation by the applicant of the pre-condition stated in Section 3 Subsection C, and the normal 'requirements by the County at time of building and encroachment permits necessary for any commercial development of this site. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS: This application requires that a public hearing be advertised and held. Advertisement of the public hearing was published in a local newspaper and were mailed to all property owners within a 300 foot radius of the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and adopt an Ordinance approving the Rezone on AP# 068-130-014 and 043 to C-1, subject to the following findings. Section 1: Environmental Findings. A. An Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act identifying potentially significant environmental effects that the project may have. Provisions and the design of the project will mitigate such effects to a level of insignificance; and B. A proposed Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and C. The Board of Supervisors has independently reviewed, analyzed, and considered the proposed Negative Declaration with mitigation measures prior to making its decision on the project, and the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgement of Butte County; and Section 2: Subdivision Map Act Findings A. The proposed Rezone of C-1 is consistent and conforms to the policies, including the text and map, of the Butte County General Plan; B. The Rezone to C-1 is consistent with the General Plan designation of Commercial and complies with Government Code requirements of compatibility and consistency between the General Plan designations and zoning classifications, including the zoning factors listed in the Land Use Element. Butte County Department of Development Services- Planning Division 2 Section 3: Action A. Subject to the findings indicated in Sections 1 and 2 of this report, move to adopt a Negative Declaration with mitigation measures for a rezone on AP 068-130-014, 043. B. Subject to the findings indicated in Sections 1 and 2 of this report, move to adopt an ordinance approving the rezone for Roger Grubbs on AP 068-130-014, 043. Attachments: A: Project and Surrounding Area B: Vicinity Map C: Agenda Report for Planning Commission D: Planning Commission Minutes E: Initial Study F. Ordinance Reviewed and Approved by: W2ctor Farrel Di of Development Services Butte County Department of Development Services - Planning Division 3 ATTACHMENT "A" AR-1 c c 3 ea o V m C-1 1 Pr 'ec a a AR-1 A-R BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Applicant: Roger Grubbs Owner: Same Hearing Date: November 9, 1995 @ 9:00am Existing Zone: PAC(Planned Area Cluster). N Request: Rezone from PAC to C-2. No Scale Assessor Parcel No: 068-130-014,043 File: 95-183 i i ATTACHMENT "B" a 3 s m o� a ti Proje t L tion M Ida 4k VICINITY MAP AP# 068-130-014, 043 REZ 95-183 tte7m, 7 T PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916)538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 October 25, 1995 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 Re: Rezone, AP 068-130-014, 043, File 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: Enclosed is a copy of the Agenda Report concerning your application for a Rezone from PUD to C-2 for property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway and Canyon Drive, Oroville. Should you have any concerns with the report or conditions of approval, please contact us in advance of the meeting so that we may resolve these concerns. A public hearing has been set for November 9, 1995, at 9:00 a.m. This meeting will be held in the Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. The Commission recommends that the applicant or their authorized representative be present at the hearing to respond to any questions the Commission may have. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Hackney, of this office, at 538-7601, between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Very truly yours, Barry K. Hogan Planning Manager Stephen Hackney Associate Planner SHJr Enc. k:\1efters\pd102A AGENDA ITEM AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Co 'ssion FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Planning Manage BY: Stephen Hackney, Associate Pl er DATE: October 23, 1995 REQUEST: Rezone 95-01 - Roger Grubbs on APN 068-130-014, 043: A request to rezone two contiguous parcels of approximately five (5) acres of land, from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-2 (General Commercial), for property located on the northwest comer of Canyon Drive and Olive Highway (SR 162), within the Oroville urban area [The County currently uses the classification "PUD" - Planned Unit Development - instead of PAC.] The request is consistent with the Commercial General Plan land use designation. This project is located in Supervisorial District 1. RELATED ITEMS: None FOR: Planning Commission Meeting on November 9, 1995. ABSTRACT: This is a request to rezone two contiguous parcels of approximately five (5) acres, from PAC to C-2. Staff recommends a rezone to C-1 instead. A C-1 zoning classification would allow the primary uses the applicant seeks, while requiring a use permit for any future general commercial uses such as a car wash. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is located in an area above Oroville that is characterized by gently rolling foothill terrain, with an elevation of approximately 680+/- feet. Vegetation consists of Oak Foothill Woodland. The project area represents a small undisturbed area that provides habitat for some animals. The surrounding area is characterized by undeveloped parcels (zoned C-1, east and west) and rural residential uses (north and south) on parcels ranging from one to 20 acres. The nearest urban area is Oroville, approximately one mile away. Canyon Drive borders the property on the east and Olive Highway (SR 162) borders the property on the south. North of the project site are five residential parcels of one acre each in size. These parcels are zoned AR-1 (Agricultural Residential - one acre minimum). The Kelly Ridge Fire Station, on land zoned P-Q, is located directly north of the project site. Parcels zoned AR-1, varying in size from 3 ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 1 ' AGENDA ITEM to 10 acres, are located south of the project site, across Olive Hghway. Adjacent parcels, east and west, are zoned C-1 (Light Commercial). The C-1 parcel on the east, across Canyon Drive, is undeveloped. This parcel will probably remain undeveloped for commercial uses due to the inability of the parcel to pass soil/perk tests and the lack of sewer as an alternative. PROJECT AND SURROUNDING ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION, AND EXISTING LAND USE Described below are the project and surrounding zoning, general plan land use designation and the existing land uses. Direction Zoning General Plan Existing Land Use Project: PAC (PUD) Commercial Undeveloped North: AR-1, P-Q . Agricultural Residential, Public Residential, Fine Station South: AR 1 Agricultural Residential Residential, Undeveloped East: C-1 Commercial Undeveloped West: C-1 Commercial Commercial ANALYSIS: Approval of the applicant's request will result in changing the zoning of approximately five (5) acres from PAC to C-2. The applicant is seeking relief from the prescribed land uses of the current zoning (PAC) of this property. The current zoning allows specific uses that may result in more intensive development than proposed. In 1973, the County approved a PAC rezone allowing development of 24,000 square feet of retail store space and a full-service gas station. Two vehicular accesses to the site, one from Olive Hghway and one from Canyon Drive were approved. The C-2 zone also allows for a variety of uses, including general retail and service stations. The applicant has indicated that he wants to construct a mini-storage/RV & boat storage facility, and perhaps later, a convenience store with gas pumps and car wash facilities. The C-2 zone will permit a wide variety of commercial uses. Some of those uses may not be compatible with the surrounding area. The County has several areas of concern that may be exacerbated by use permitted in a C-2 zone. A rezone to C-1 still gives the applicant relief from the PAC zone allowing him to meet one of his immediate goals: developing a mini-storage. The C-1 zone also allows convenience stores, which is a use in which the applicant has expressed an interest. The other uses proposed by the applicant, outdoor boat and RV storage and a car wash, are uses that may be allowed subject to a Use Permit in the C-1 zone. Areas of concern for the Countyincluded ued traffic (access and congestion), drainage and land use compatibility, and zoning consistency. Traffic. Approving this rezone request may lead to land uses that will increase traffic into and out of the project site. This traffic may impact both Olive Hghway and Canyon Drive. The current zoning ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 2 AGENDA ITEM will allow land uses (i.e., retail commercial & service station) that will lead to project-specific and cumulative traffic impacts. Although the proposed development of these parcels (mini-storage, RV. and boat storage, and perhaps a convenience store and car wash at a future date) may remove a percentage of towed boats and RVs from County (and state) roads, there is no assurance what the actual development of this site will be once the property has been rezoned. Caltrans has recommended that access from the site be limited to Canyon Drive (letter, June 30, 1995). Caltrans does go on to state that the applicant would have to comply with six requirements before Caltrans would approve any access onto SR 162. Access to the site should also be limited to Canyon Drive. As a pre-condition to Board hearing, the applicant should be required to dedicate a one foot "no access strip" or relinquish abutters rights to Butte County along the frontage of Olive Pfighway (SR 162). Drainage. The project site drains to the west/southwest and west/northwest. With a C-1 or C-2 zone, as with the existent PAC for this site, intensive impervious land coverage is expected. The original requirements of the PAC (1973) did not require potential drainage impacts to be addressed. The applicant will be required to address drainage issues at time of building permit application. Land Use Compatibility. The proposal will not alter the land use in the area. The project site is zoned for commercial use. Approval of this request for either a rezone to C-2, or to the recommended C-1, allows the owner to proceed with commercial uses other than what the current PAC requires. The neighboring parcels to the east and west are zoned C-1. The General Plan designation for the site, and these neighboring parcels, is Commercial. The request for a C-2 zoning classification is consistent with this General Plan Land Use designation, but not consistent with existing zoning in the surrounding area. A C-1 rezone would be consistent with both the General Plan designation and with the neighboring zoning classification. At the same time, a C-1 rezone lessens the intensity of potential land uses as would be allowed by a C-2 rezone, or is currently allowed by the PAC zone. General Plan Consistency. The General Plan Land Use designation of Commercial lists six zoning factors that need to be met: 1. Existing types of commercial and non-commercial uses in area. 2. Traffic volumes on nearby streets. 3. Number of residents in service area 4. Parcel sizes. 5. Effects on adjacent uses, water quality, air quality, noise, traffic flow and safety, and general environmental quality. 6 Local desires. A rezone of C-1 meets these six zoning factors. This rezone would be identical to the zoning classification of adjacent parcels east and west. Traffic volumes on nearby streets may benefit from ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 3 AGENDA ITEM this rezone in that the applicant's proposed uses may result in less RVs and boats being on the roads and highways of the region (as discussed under Traffic above). Both residents in the surrounding area and beyond the immediate area may benefit from a zone that permits storage facilities. The parcel sizes of this site is adequate to accommodate commercial uses as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance for C-1. A C-1 zone would be compatible with its east/west neighbors. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: This application has been defined as a project under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and is subject to the requirements of CEQA. An Initial Study has been prepared by County staff. Based upon the a review of the Initial Study, staff has determined that any potential project impacts can be fully mitigated with the implementation by the applicant of the pre-condition stated in Section 3 subsection C, and the normal requirements by the County at time of building and encroachment permits necessary for any commercial development of this site. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS: This application requires that a public hearing be advertised and held. Advertisement of the public hearing was published in a local newspaper and were mailed to all property owners within a 300 foot radius of the subject property. As of the date of this report we have received no public comment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of C-1 zoning on Rezone 95-01 on APN 068-130-014, 043, subject to the findings listed in Exhibit A, and subject to the applicant complying with the pre-condition listed in Exhibit A prior to the Board hearing. Exhibits: A: Conditions of Approval ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 4 AGENDA ITEM EXHIBIT "A" Section 1: Environmental Findings. A. An Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act which identified potential significant environmental effects that the project may have. The conditions, specified in Section 3: Action,where the applicant shall meet said condition prior to the Board hearing, will mitigate such effects to a level of insignificance; and B. A proposed Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and C. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the proposed Negative Declaration prior to making its decision on the project, and said Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgement of the County of Butte; and Section 2: General Plan Consistency Findings. A. The proposed Rezone of C-1 is consistent and conforms to the policies, including the text and map, of the Butte County General Plan; B. The Rezone to C-1 is consistent with the General Plan designation of Commercial and complies with Government Code requirements of compatibility and consistency between the General Plan designations and zoning classifications, including the zoning factors listed in the Land Use Element. Section 3: Action. A. Subject to the findings indicated in Sections 1 and 2 of this report, recommend the Board of Supervisors adopt a Negative Declaration and adopt an Ordinance rezoning to C-1 that property identified as AP#068-130-014, 043, subject to the applicant fulfilling the conditions in subsection C, this Section, within the specified time frame; B. Prior to this project being scheduled for a hearing at the Board of Supervisors the following condition in subsection C must be completed; C. Condition of Approval: Prior to the Board hearing, the applicant is to dedicate a one foot "no access strip" or ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 5 AGENDA ITEM relinquish abutters rights to Butte County, along the Olive highway (SR 162) frontage of parcels 068-130-014, 043. ■ Butte County Planning Commission Agenda Report ■ 6 m 3 S'm m` o �6 Proje t L tion ti v y� Ida VICINITY MAP AP# 068-730-0149 043 RE2 95-183 2 7 3NI� 3 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 1g�°„b_ 9ar, se Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, November 9, 1995, in the Butte County Board of.Supervisors' ON 01 Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, na �a regarding the following items: yW S3I�N 690 ITEM ON WHICH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING 70 Sa ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED y/lb 9:00 a.m. - Roger Grubbs - Rezone from PAC (Planned Area Cluster)to C-2 (General 9e -7 Commercial) for property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway - and Canyon Drive, identified as AP 068-130-014, 043, Oroville. (SH) (95- 60a0 , 183) �SG� '103 The above mentioned application, Negative Declaration, and map are on file and available :-7 4 for public viewing at the office of the Butte County Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be ro limited to raising only those issues you or' someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning . Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing. Et' BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION BARRY K. HOGAN, PLANNING MANAGER To be.published in the Oroville Mercury on Monday, October 9, 1995. A10 STATE AALIFORNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AGOUSING AGENCY • PETE WILSON,Govemor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 3 P.O.BOX 911 MARYSVILLE,CA 95901 TDD Telephone(916)741.4508 FAX(916)741-5346 Telephow(916)741-4539 November 27, 1995 GBUT160 03-BUT-162 PM 21.2/21.3 Grubbs, R. Rezone (PUD to C-2) Re-Application 95-183 Mr. Steve Hackney,Planner Butte County Planning Division Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965-3397 Dear Mr. Hackney: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced document. COMMENTS: Caltrans recommends that access from this site directly onto State Route (SR) 162 be restricted to one driveway located at least 200 feet west of the SR 162/Canyon Way intersection. Considering the development of a gas station/mini-mart and other commercial uses, one well-placed driveway to access SR 162 would have some operational benefits. The construction of a left-turn lane on SR 162 would allow the development's eastbound customers to make left turns into the driveway noted above. Those turns could be made at the same time other vehicles make left turns to Canyon Drive,reducing the demand for left turns to Canyon Drive from SR 162, which would make it easier for vehicles to make left turns from Canyon Drive to SR 162 eastbound. The driveway and left-turn lane would also reduce potential demands for a future traffic signal at this rural location. The installation of a signal should be avoided due to the relatively high speeds and 5.1% grade of the highway. We apologize for any confusion emanating from our letter of June 30, 1995, which recommended that"access from the parcels be limited to Canyon Drive". This comment should have been clarified as addressing Phase I, the development of the boat storage facility (as indicated in our July 25, 1994, letter). Development of Phase 1 only, with access from Canyon Drive, would not have required any highway improvements. If the County does not wish to allow any direct access onto SR 162,significant improvements will be required at the SR 162/Canyon Way intersection. Widening to provide a right-turn lane on the east leg, a longer left-turn lane on the west leg, and separate right and left-turn lanes on the Canyon Way leg would be necessary, along with standard width paved shoulders and an overlay. These improvements would minimize safety and operational problems related to the increased turning volumes, and reduce potential demands for a traffic signal. o,l e Mr. Steve Hackney,Planner November 27, 1995 Page 2 In response to your question as to whether Caltrans could accept abutters rights: we have enclosed a copy of a June 18, 1993,letter to Mr. Stuart Edell from Caltrans Right of Way Department describing Access Control Clauses that the County can use to establish a deeded reservation of abutters rights. An Encroachment Permit from Caltrans will be required for any work conducted in the State right of way, including any new or revised access. Since an encroachment permit will be required, the proposed agreement between the County and the developer to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts should be reviewed and approved by Caltrans. Please provide us a copy of the staff report and Conditions of Approval for this Rezone. If you have any questions regarding these comments,please contact Terri Pencovic, Inter Governmental Review/CEQA Coordinator, at(916) 741-4199. Sincerely, 8 E. A. "LIB" HARAUGHTY, Chief Office of Transportation Planning- Rural Enclosure cc: Jon Clark,Butte County Association of Governments i " Ji STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON. ag DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 3 O. BOX 911. MARYSVILLE. CA 95901 . D 916 741-4509 wX 9163 741-4490 �. €916) 741-4259 June 18, 1993. Mr, Stuart Edell Butte County, Land Development Division 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Edell: 03-But - All Locations Access Control Clauses Attached is a listing of the Access Control Clauses that Caltrans uses to control the vehicle access onto State highways. If they are acceptable to you, in the future please use this format in lieu of the one foot dedication currently required. If you should have any.questions or need clarification of any of these clauses,-please feel free to contact-meat (916) 741-4259 or Scott Jackson.at*(916) 741-4307.- Thank you . for your cooperation in this matter. Original Signed by JIM DAY Right of Way Engineer cc: File Scott Jackson Jim Waugh SJ:slg (butcoacc) 6.06.00.00 : STANDARD CLAUSES.FOR FREEWAY DEEDS 12.50 feet of the course described above 6.06.01.00 Classification of Clauses as N. 45° 38' E., 838.34 feet. The centers of said access openings lie For the purpose of acquiring access rights and northwesterly, 'at right angles, opposite abutter's other appurtenant rights on freeway and Engineer's Station A-49+00 and expressway projects, a "DF" series of clauses known Engineer's Station A-68+67.82 as the "DF", "DFA", and "DFO" clauses have been respectively of said survey." devised. Other clauses have also been devised for specific circumstances and are shown under their own In case of adjoining cross streets which are to be Sections. closed and will not connect into the proposed freeway, add a phrase to the above clause such as 6.06.02.00 "DF" Series--Access Only follows: "DF"• clauses merely acquire the abutting owner's "...over and across the northerly line of the above rights of ingress and egress to or from the freeway. described parcel and also .over and across that portion of the easterly prolongation of the said 6.06.02.01 DF-1 Fee or Easement Deeds northerly line included within the side lines of Smith Street, 60 feet wide, as said street is shown on said "This conveyance is made for the purpose of a map of Tract No. 211." freeway and the grantor hereby releases and relinquishes to the grantee any and all abutter's rights 6.06.02.02 DF-2 Fee or Easement of access, appurtenant. to grantor's remaining Ouitclaim Deed property, in and to said freeway." "This quitclaim deed is made for the purpose of a If access rights are to be acquired on only a portion freeway and the undersigned hereby releases and of the highway frontage, add a phrase such as one of relinquishes to the grantee any and all abutter's the following: rights of access, appurtenant to the remaining property in which the undersigned has some right, A. "...over and across the westerly 510 feet title or interest, in and to.said freeway." of the southerly line of the above described parcel of land.." 6.06.02.03 DF-3 .Partial Reconveyance Under.Trust Deeds B. "...over and across courses '(2)', and `(4)' and the easterly 10 feet of course "This partial reconveyance is made for purposes of `(3)'hereinabove described." a freeway and said Trustee hereby reconveys without warranty, to the person or persons legally entitled (In this case, courses in metes and bounds thereto, any and all abutter's rights of access, would be previously numbered:) appurtenant to the remaining property described in . said Deed Of Trust, in and to said freeway." C. "...Reserving, however, to the grantor, grantor's successors or assigns, the rights606:0204 DF4 Partial Release of of access to the freeway over and across Mo ave the following described lines: "This partial release is made for purposes of a (Describe lines over which access is to be freeway and the mortgagee hereby releases from the permitted)" lien of said mortgage any and all abutter's rights of access, appurtenant to the remaining property D. "...Reserving, however, to the grantor, described in said mortgage in and to said freeway." grantor's successors or assigns, the right of way access through the opening to the freeway over and across the S.W. I5 feet of the N.E. 81:06 feet of the course `._ described above as N. 45°38'E., 121.23 feet and over and across the Southwesterly 6.06 --1 T i+';" uRr:;}:..:` ::�.::y'�l_L:jS-.T:i�-:�'r..ay.���.- �Y�'T'•'r'-•�:�-'��,-Y� I�.wiRO'` -- f;�-•--- :�. :ta�'e�-I 6.06.02.05 DF-5 Conveying Property on One to Relinquishment of Access Rights" shall be used. Side of Highway and Relinquishing Access Rights on Other Side "For value received . Trustee(s), and Beneficiary(ies) under that certain Deed of Trust "The undersigned grantor being the owner of the executed by dated and. real property described as follows: recorded in Book_at Page Official Records of the County of_ . State (Description) of California, hereby agree(s) that a relinquishment of access rights as set forth in that certain ...does hereby release and relinquish to the grantee instrument described as Relinquishment of Access any and all abutter's rights of access appurtenant to . Rights executed by , dated the said property in and to said freeway." day of 19_, and to be recorded concurrently herewith, shall be and remain NOTE: This clause is to be added following paramount, prior and superior to, and forever bind DF-1. the interests of the undersigned under said Deed of Trust for all.purposes as fully as though said X6:.06:02:6'DF-6 Conveyance of Access Relinquishment of Access Rights had been executed Rights—No Property Acquired and delivered prior to the creation of said Deed of Trust and the latter made and accepted specifically , Where access rights only are being relinquished (no subject and subordinate thereto." property acquired), the following clause "Relinquishment of Access Rights" shall be used. "The undersigned, Beneficiary(ies) under said Deed of Trust, hereby request(s) "I, (WE) being the owner(s) of the -Trustee(s) thereunder to join in the execution real property in the County of . State hereof. of California, described as: Dated this_day of . 19_ _ (Description of grantor's property). Beneficiary do hereby release and relinquish to the STATE OF By: CALIFORNIA, any and all abutter's rights of Trustee" access, appurtenant to the above described property, in and to the adjacent State highway right of way as Where access rights only are being relinquished from described in deed recorded in Book . Page properties encumbered with mortgages and the of Official Records of said County." ' subordination agreement is a separate document, the following clause "Subordination of Mortgage to (NOTE: See notes following Clause DF-1 for Relinquishment of Access Rights"shall be used. acquisition of access rights on only a portion of highway frontage, etc.) "For value received . Mortgagee under that certain Mortgage recorded in Book "This conveyance is made for the purpose of Page of Official Records of County, establishing said State highway by the grantee as a hereby agrees that a relinquishment of access rights freeway and it is agreed that grantor's(s) above as set forth in that certain instrument described as described property shall have no access thereto Relinquishment of Access Rights executed by (except as above set forth)." dated the day of 19_, and to be recorded concurrently herewith, shall be and "IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set remain paramount, prior and superior to and our hands and seals this_day'of . 19—. forever bind the interests of the undersigned under said mortgage for all purposes as fully as though said Relinquishment of Access Rights had been executed and delivered prior to the creation of said Mortgage and the latter made and accepted Where access rights only are being relinquished from specifically subject and subordinate thereto. properties encumbered with deeds of trust and the _ subordination agreement is a separate document, the Dated this_day of 19_. following clause "Subordination of Deed of Trust Mortgagee" 6.0672. n...... county PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 November 16, 1995 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 RE: Additional funds for deposit for processing Rezone project File# 95-183 Dear Roger: The Planning Division has calculated the number of hours utilized in the processing of your Tentative Parcel Map application to date. A partial accounting --.through October 9 -- is included. Additional Planner time -- another six (6) hours -- has not been accounted. Your project has received "recommended approval" from the Planning Commission. Your project will be scheduled for the next appropriate Board hearing (probably January 9, 1996). In order to continue the processing of your project please submit an additional $700.00 deposit. We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions regarding this matter please feel free to call Stephen Hackney at 538-7601. Very truly yours, JB ge Planning De;)ariment N®V 16 1995 Orovii(e,�aiiiornia . S+r \ uite couftfq PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916)538-7601 FAX: (916) 538-7785 October 24, 1995 Roger Grubbs 403 Skyline Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 Re: Rezone, File 95-183 Dear Mr. Grubbs: The Butte County Planning Division has completed the Initial Study (checklist) of potential environmental consequences anticipated in connection with the above-mentioned project, a copy of which is being forwarded to you. Please review the enclosed checklist, noting particularly any environmental problems which could be minimized or avoided by the care and manner in which the project is carried out. Also, please review any recommended mitigation measures. After reviewing the checklist, you may see ways to improve the project design. Design improvements to minimize problems are encouraged. If you note any errors or omissions in our evaluation, please bring them to our attention. If we do not hear from you within 14 days, we will assume that you concur with our evaluation. You will be notified of the time and place of the public hearing for your project. If you have any questions regarding environmental review, please contact Stephen Hackney, in this office, at 538-7601, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Very truly yours, Barry K. Hogan Planning Manager Stephdn Hackr ity� Associate Planner SH:Ir Enc. k:\Iefters\pd101 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 COUNTY OF BUTTE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND A. Roger Grubbs Rezone B. File No.95-183 and AP No.068-130-014,043 C. 403 Skyline Boulevard,Oroville,CA 95966 D. Project Description and Location: This is a request for a Rezone of two contiguous parcels,from PA-C to C-2,located on the northwest side of Highway 162 and Canyon Drive,Oroville. The site does not contain any structures. The approximate five(5)acre site is bordered on the north by AR-1 zoned land that includes five parcels each with single family dwellings. The project site is bordered on the east and west by undeveloped land zoned C-1. On the south,across SR 162,the land is zoned AR-1 with rural residential characteristics. The applicant requests this rezone in order to obtain approval to build a mini-storage structure(s),provide storage for boat and recreational vehicles,and at a later date to possibly build a convenience store and car wash. Water will be provided by O.W.I.D.,and sewage treatment will be provided by septic system. The current zoning of a PA-C limits the applicant to specific uses delineated in the PA-C for these parcels. The property is located in the Oroville urban area. Additional project description and area description can be found in the data sheet at the end of this document. IL EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EMPACTS 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal may require approximately 600 cubic yards of grading, but there will be no use of explosives (see application;pens.comm.R.Grubbs). Arty fill placed on site for road or commercial construction will have to meet the requirements of Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code and will be compacted to accepted engineering standards and will not represent a hazard. Therefore, the project will not create any unstable earth conditions or result in changes to geologic substructures. Mitigation: None required. b. Disruptions,displacements,compaction or overcovering of the soil? Yes No Maybe X Response: This proposal will result in some soil disruption, displacement, compaction and overcovering of the site as a result of development of structures, driveways, leachfields, and the installation of commercial development. This was anticipated when the property was zoned for commercial development(PA-C). Based on this information the project will not result in significant soil # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 1 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 impacts. Mitigation: None required. C. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? Yes No Maybe X Response:The proposal may substantially change ground surface features. Any cut-and-fill work will alter the topography. This is especially true for the commercial development of this property(pers. comm. with the owner who expects 60%-70%potential impervious ground coverage where presently there is 100%vegetative ground cover). The project site has already been zoned for intensive commercial development This proposal is for a similar commercial purpose but with different uses than those delineated in the present PA-C. Mitigation: None required. d. The destruction,covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? Yes No X Maybe Response: The site has no unique geologic or physical features as verified by the Butte County Geologic Map, the USGS Oroville Quadrangle topographical map,and a site visit. Mitigation: None required. e. Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils,either on or off-site? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not cause substantial erosion of the soils. With commercial development of the site, the majority of the ground cover will be impervious material,while approximately 10-I5%of the site will be landscaped with vegetative cover. Mitigation: None required. f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands,or changes in siltation,deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of any lake? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect any watercourse. No water course flows near the project site. Mitigation: None required. g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas? Yes No X Maybe Response: This project site does not contain any prime agricultural soils(Soil Map/Soil Survey, Oroville). Mitigation: None required. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 2 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043,File#95-183 h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,landslides,mud-slides,ground failure,or similar hazards? Yes No X Maybe Res onse: All of Butte County is in a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. The subject property is located approximately 1 1/2-2 miles east of the Oroville Aftershock Epicenter Region(Butte County Constraints Map). Construction of buildings to Uniform Building Code standards will provide adequate protection to occupants in case of seismic activity. Mitigation: None required. 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? Yes No X Maybe Response: Butte County is in non-anainment status in meeting federal air quality standards. The proposal may incrementally affect air'quality, but there will not be a substantial impact of ambient air quality.. Mitigation: None required. b. The creation of objectionable odors? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not create objectionable odors,smoke or fumes. Mitigation: None required. C. Alteration of air movement,moisture,temperature,or any change in climate,whether locally or regionally? Yes No X Maybe Res onse: Only large projects such as the construction of a large high-rise buildings, the creation of a large water body(such as a lake or thousands of acres of rice fields), massive defoliation, or introduction of large tracts of vegetation where there was previously none, would have the climactic effects discussed in this question. Since this project has none of these characteristics it will not result in any change in air movement, moisture, temperature,or climate. Mitigation: None required. 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements,in fresh waters? Yes No X Maybe Response: There are no watercourses on the project site and therefore no impacts will occur to change the current or course of any fresh waters. Mitigation: None required. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 3 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 b. Substantial changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff on-site or into any water body? Yes No X Maybe Response: The property has the potential to be developed in an intensive manner with commercial uses(as allowed in the current PA-C)regardless of this project The property is located within the Oroville Urban area. A permanent solution to drainage will be required for development on this property regardless of the approval of this project. Mitigation: None required. C. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements,including vegetation removal,channelization or culvert installation? Yes No X Maybe Response: Drainage improvements that meet County standards will be required at time of building permit issuance. Mitigation: None required. d. Alternations to the course or flow of flood waters? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not significantly affect arty flood control channels or watercourses. Mitigation: None required. e. Discharge into surface waters,or in any alteration or surface water quality,including,but not limited to,temperature,dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposed rezone will not result in an increase in pollutants being added to surface water runoff. The use of Best Management Practices for the treatment of stormwater runoff should be used when designing the drainage system. Mitigation: None required. f. Alteration of the direction of rate of flow of ground waters? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect the direction or flow of ground waters. Mitigation: None required. h. Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions or withdrawals,or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not directly affect any aquifer because water will be served by O.W.I.D.which uses surface water as # Butte County Development Services Department,# Planning Division # 4 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 a supply. Mitigation: None required. i. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Yes No X Maybe Response: A substantial reduction in public water supplies will not occur as a result of project approval because O.WILD. will supply water and has the capacity to serve this site. Mitigation: None required. j. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Yes No X Maybe Response: The project site is not within a designated flood zone area and therefore no people or property will be subject to a flood hazard. Mitigation: None required. 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of any native species of plants(including trees,shrubs,grass,crops and aquatic plants)? Yes No X Maybe Response: The property is located in an urban area and the proposed project should not significantly affect the diversity of the area plant life. While any development of commercial uses will require clearing the site of the present vegetative cover, this work will not significantly change, alter or affect the diversity of number of each species in terms of their foothill habitat. A number of plant species on site are not native species, but rather are exotics brought into the area over the past century. Mitigation: None required. b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,rare or endangered species of plants? Yes No X Maybe Response: The property does not contain habitat that would support any unique, rare or endangered plant species and therefore the project could not affect any such species. .(Site visit,July 1995) Mitigation: None required. C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation,or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Yes No X Maybe # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 5 s a Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 Response: Approval of this request will not result in the introduction of exotic plant species into the area. Mitination: None required. d. Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Yes No X Maybe Response: The site does not contain any agricultural crops and presently is not being used. Development of this property will not result in the removal of any land that could potentially grow some type of crop that would be economically feasible on this five(5) acre site. Meson: None required. 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals(birds,land animals,reptiles,fish,shellfish,benthic organisms or insects)? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not result in a substantial change in animal habitat. The project site is not located in an identified Critical Deer Habitat area. The vegetation on site may provide habitat to the normal range of birds and small animals associated with this Foothill Oak Woodland type of habitat. Located in the Oroville Urban Area, development of this site, as a result of this project,will not result in substantial impacts to any species of animals. (Site Visit,July 1995) Mitigation: None required. b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,rare or endangered species of animals? Yes No X Maybe Response: The properly does not contain habitat that would support any unique, rare or endangered species of animals(Site Visit, July 1995). Mitigation: None required. C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area,or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? Yes No X Maybe Response: This project will not result in the introduction of any new species of animals into the area. Mitigation: None required. d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Yes No X Maybe Response: The site does not contain extensive fish or wildlife habitat that would be significantly impacted by the project. (Site visit, # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 6 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 July 1995) M, rt�att'on: None required. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial increases in existing noise levels? Yes No Maybe X Response: The proposal may result in a substantial increase in noise created on-site or in the vicinity. Rezoning this property to a C-2 classification allows for such permitted uses as bars and cocktail lounges,pool halls, bowling alleys, hotels and motels, repair garages, gas stations, restaurants with drive through facilities, and other similar uses, as well as all uses permitted in a C-1 classification. Some of these uses generate more noise than other uses. Some of these uses may cause substantially higher noise levels than the uses proposed by the applicant. Once this project is given approval for a C-2 zoning classification all of the uses mentioned above(see Section 24-145&24-140, Butte County Zoning Ordinance). Any noises resulting from C-2 permitted uses may not be significant because the area is planned for commercial. However, residences are located in the area,e.g.,adjacent on the north side of the property. Mitigation: None required. b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Yes No X Maybe Response:The property will not expose people to any severe noise levels. Any noise generated by commercial development allowed under a C-2 zone will beat levels normally expected and allowed for such uses. See discussion in Item 6(a). The C-2 zone allows for residential uses. Development of any residences will expose the residents to normal traffic noise associated with a state route (i.e.,SR 162). Mitigation: None required. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Yes No Maybe X Response: The proposal may result in a substantial increase in light or glare created on site. With proposed uses such as a mini- storage,'storage for R.Vs and boats;a convenience store and car wash, light and glare affecting traffic along SR 162 may pose a hazard With proper design and installation of lighting,any potential lighting that may impact SR 162 can be directed away from the highway. The potential impacts can be reduced to less than significant by requiring the owner to comply with Conditions of Approval prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation: None required. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not alter the land use in the area. The project site is zoned PA-C(previous designation for PUD)which # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 7 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 allows for comparable commercial uses of this site. Approval of this request for a rezone to C-2 allows the owner to proceed with commercial uses other than what the current PA-C requires. The General Plan designation for the site is Commercial. The request for a C-2 zoning classification is consistent with this General Plan Land Use designation. The land use already planned for this site, will remain the same,the speck uses maybe different. The C-2 zone allows for a variety of uses ranging from professional offices to bowling alleys and hotel/motel facilities. Mitigation: None required. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resource? Yes No X Maybe Response This project will allow for the construction of commercial development. The use of natural resources will be limited to those products needed to construct the facilities and energy to heat,cool,and light those facilities. Mitigation: None required. b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? Yes No X Maybe Response: See discussion in Item 9a. Mitigation: None required. 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances(including,but not limited to,oil,pesticides,chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Yes No X Maybe Res once: The proposal will allow for the construction and use of commercial facilities. Any hazardous substances(i.e.,petroleum products)that may be associated with a C-2 allowable use will be regulated by state and county laws and ordinances(e.g.,gas station type uses). The presence of oil packaged fo" retail purposes pose no more a hazard to the general public than any oil found in stores selling this product for retail purposes. Mitigation: None required. b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? Yes No X Maybe Response: There is not an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan that for this area and therefore the proposed project will not affect any such plan. Mitigation: None required. 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,distribution,density,or growth rate of the human population of an area? # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 8 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not significantly affect the population of the area because the project is a commercial development planned to serve the existing population. Mitigation: None required. 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? Yes No X Maybe Response: This proposal will not significantly affect housing demand. Mitigation: None required. 13. TranVortation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes No Maybe X Response: This proposal may generate a substantial addition of vehicular traffic to the local area. The proposed purposes of any commercial uses on this site is to capture business from people already travelling on Canyon Drive to/from Lake Oroville,or from local through traffic to/ivm Oroville. This causes a change in the flow of traffic and volume of ingresses/egresses from the project site onto/from Canyon Drive and SR 162. Although the proposed development of these parcels(mini-storage,R.V and boat storage, andperhaps a convenience store and car wash at a future date)may remove a percentage of towed boats and R.Vs.from County (and state)roads, there is no assurance what the actual development of this site will result in once the property has been rezoned to C-2. Any potential congestion that may result from this proposal will be addressed by requiring the owner to meet Conditions for Approval required by Butte County Department of Public Works and Caltrans prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation: None required. b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect parking because compliance with the parking standards contained within Butte County Code Section 24-240 will be enforced. Mitigation: None required. c. 'Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems,including public transportation services? Yes No X Maybe Response: No increase in requirements on area roads and on public transportation services is expected as a result of project approval. Mitigation: None required. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 9 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Yes No X Maybe Response: See discussion in Item 13a. Mitigation: None required. e. Alterations to waterborne,rail or air traffic? Yes No X Maybe Response: The project is not located near any railroads, harbors,or airports and will therefore have no effect on those facilities. Mitigation: None required. f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes No X Maybe Response: This project may not result in traffic related hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. Any time a commercial project is developed the potential for an increase in traffic hazards exists, with traffic moving on site%ff site.Arty potential traffic hazard impacts that may result from this project will be addressed by requiring the owner to meet Conditions of Approval required by Butte County Public Works and Caltrans prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation: None required. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire Protection? Yes No Maybe X Response: The project is located in an area having an extreme fire hazard classification. The project site is located less than a 1/4 mile from the Kelly Ridge Fire Station. The proposal will result in an incremental increase in demand for fire protection in the area. Arty potential fire hazards that may result from this project will be addressed by requiring the owner to meet Conditions of Approval required by Butte County Fire Department/California Department of Forestry that will require a pressurized water system and all the fire safe regulations of Butte County and PRC 4290. Before development may occur on this site, a pressurized community water system forfrre protection will be required. In lieu of bearing the cost of installing afire hydrant the developer may pay into the O.W.LD. hydrant fund. Mitigation_: None required. b. Police protection? Yes No X Maybe Response: A development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities is required to be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3,Article H of the Butte County Code,prior to issuance of building permits or use permit in the case of a mobile home park Said fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the.date of application for the building permit or use permit. Mitigation: None required. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 10 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 C. Schools? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal may result in an incremental increase in 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. 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 and takes the position that the existing fee structure addresses the impacts of the project. Mitigation: None required. d: Parks or other recreational facilities? Yes_ No X Maybe Response: Development of the site may be subject to the collection of park and recreation impact fees. Mitigation: None required. e. Maintenance of public facilities including roads? Yes_ No X Maybe_ Response: The proposal may result in an incremental increase in the need for maintenance of roads and other public facilities in the area. These increases should be offset by the collection of increased property tax and sales tax from the commercial activities. Mitigation: None required. f. Other governmental services? Yes _ No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not result in an incremental increase in demand for all other governmental services in the area. Unlike a residential development, a commercial development, such as has been discussed for this site, does not generate as great a need for additional governmental services. Where a residential development may negatively impact the fiscal health of the County due to the increase in services required,a commercial development such as proposed by this project,generally presents a positive fiscal impact for the County. Mitigation: None required. 15. . Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Yes_ No X Maybe Response: This project will allow for the construction of commercial facilities in a commercial zone. For the short term, the use of energy will be limited thatfuel needed to operate the machinery needed to prepare the site,and construct the commercial structures. For the long term,energy will be required to heat, cool, and light those facilities. Mitigation: None required. b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not substantially increase the demand for energy. The project is located in and area that is already served by Pacific Gas and Electric, which forecasts energy consumption of their service area and provides for future facility planning. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 11 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 Mitigation: None required. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. , Power or natural gas? Yes No X Maybe Response: Pacific Gas and Electric currently has distribution lines in the area and can serve the energy requirements of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities. The cost of extending new service lines may have to be borne by new residents. Mitigation: None required. b. Communication systems? Yes No X Maybe Response: Pack Telesis currently has distribution lines in the area and can serve the communication needs of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities. The cost of extending new service lines may have to be borne by new residents. Mitigation: None required. C. Water? Yes No X Maybe Response: Water will be supplied by O.W.I.D.. Mitigation: None required. d. Sewer or septic tanks? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will have to meet the requirements of the Butte County Environmental Health Division and the Butte County Subdivision Ordinance. The previously approved PA-C received clearance from the Butte County Environmental Health Division. The change in possible commercial uses will,of course,require anew review and approval from Butte County Environmental•Health. Mitigation: None required. e. Storm water drainage? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will have to provide a permanent solution for drainage in accordance with the requirements of the Butte County Department of Public Works for development in urban areas. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant will have to submit a Drainage Plan for review and approval by Butte County Public Works. The Drainage Plan should specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and achieve no increase in the peakflow runoff above current levels. Mitigation: None required. d. Solid waste and disposal? Yes No X Maybe Response: Currently, the Butte County Landfill still has capacity to serve the additional development proposed by this project. Mitigation: None required. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard(excluding mental health)? # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 12 • Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not create any health hazard. Mitigation: None required. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not expose people to any health hazard. Mitigation: None required. 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not result in an aesthetically offensive view. Mitigation: None required. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in.an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not result in an impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities in the area. Mitigation: None required. 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect archaeological sites. The property is located in an area designated as having moderate-to- low archaeological sensitivity. (Site Visit,July 1995;Butte County Constraints Map) Mitigation: None required. b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to the prehistoric or historic building,structure or object? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect historic sites. Mitigation: None required. C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? I # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 13 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect cultural resources. Mitigation: None required. d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes No X Maybe Response: The proposal will not affect religious resources. Mitigation: None required.) # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 14 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 III. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 1. 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 or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or.prehistory? Yes No X Maybe Response: As discussed in Section II of this document and more specifically subsections 4(a-d)&5(a-d),this project will not significantly degrade the quality of the environment. 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief,definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure will into the future.) Yes No X Maybe Response: The project,as discussed in Section II and subsections la-g,2a-c,3a-e,6a-b,8,9a-b,13a-f,and 15a-b of this Initial Study,will not result in short-term benefits of the expense of impacting long-term environmental goals. 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small,but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) Yes No Maybe X Response: As discussed in Section II,subsection 14a of this document,this proposal may have a significant cumulative impact on the environment, but can be reduced to less than significant by requiring owner comply with Conditions of Approval prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? Yes No Maybe X Response: As discussed in Section II and subsection 7 of this Initial Study,this proposal may have a significant adverse effect on human beings,but can be reduced to less than significant by requiring owner comply with Conditions of Approval prior to issuance of building permits. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 15 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: i X 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 the mitigation measures described herein have been added to the conditions of approval for the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: December 7, 1995 Prepared by: Stephen Hackney Reviewed by: Craig Sanders # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 16 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014,043, File#95-183 DATA SHEET A. Project Description 1. Type of Project: Rezone--Legislative Act 2. Proposed Density of Development: Unknown,property is zoned for commercial use 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Potentially substantial 4. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Property fronts Hwy 162 5. Method of Sewage Disposal: Septic system 6. Source of Water Supply: O.W.I.D. 7. Proximity of Power Lines: Along property boundary lines 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: Additional land divisions can occur . There are no minimum lot size requirements for a C-2 zone except as required to meet parking and building site development requirements and minimum sewage disposal requirements. Residential uses shall meet the requirements of Section 24-75 and 80. B. Environmental Setting 1. Terrain a General Topographic Character: Gently sloping foothill terrain b. Slopes: 2%to 9%+ C. Elevation: 680+feet above sea level. d. Limiting Factors: None 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: Auburn: moderate permeability,general drainage is well,erosion hazard is slight b. Limiting Factors: None 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. Approximately 1 to 1 1/2 mile to west is the Oroville Aftershock Epicenter Region(County Constraints Map). b. Erosion Potential: High in areas with 15%to 30%slopes C. Landslide Potential: None to Low d. Fire Hazard: Extreme/unclassified-urbanized e. Expansive Soil Potential: None 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: None b. Ground Water: Unknown C. Drainage Characteristics: The parcel drains to the southwest,west,and northwest d. Annual Rainfall(normal): 30 inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: None 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Good. 6. Acoustic Quality: Poor,the property is impacted by road noise from Hwy 162 and Canyon Drive. 7. Air Quality: Good,except when stagnant air conditions persist in the valley. 8. Vegetation: Variety of oaks(Blue Oak,Interior Live Oak,Scrub Oak),variety of pine trees,manzanita,grasses,shrubs 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small birds and animals common to foothill woodlands. 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: Moderate-to-low including unknown 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Commercial 12. Existing Zoning: PA-C 13. Existing Land Use on-site: undeveloped 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Mixture of rural residential,undeveloped commercial-zoned land and undeveloped residential land. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 17 • Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 b. Zoning: C-1,AR-1,P-Q C. Gen.Plan Designation: Commercial,Agricultural Residential,Public d. Parcel Sizes: 1/2+to 10+acres 15. Character of Site and Area: undeveloped commercial,rural residential 16. Nearest Urban Area: Oroville urban area 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: City of Oroville 18., Improvement Standards Urban Area: none 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County(State)Fire Station: Kelley Ridge Fire Station approximately 1/4 mile away. b. Water Availability: OWID 20. Schools: Union School District(s). Oroville Elementary School. I I I " I I # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 18 Grubbs Rezone APN 068-130-014, 043, File#95-183 ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL 1. Butte County Planning Department. Earthquake and Fault Activit�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-1,Scenic Hi hg_way 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. Arcl'iaeological 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. AQxicultural Preserves Map,established by Resolution No.67-178. Oroville,CA: Butte County Planning Department, 1987. 13. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Mans. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1989. 14. USGS Quad Maps. 15. Soil Map,Chico 0 925)/Oroville 0 926)Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico 0 925)/Oroville(1926)Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Mme. Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989. # Butte County Development Services Department # Planning Division # 19 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, November 9, 1995, in the Butte County Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following items: ITEM ON WHICH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED 9:00 a.m. - Roger Grubbs - Rezone from PAC (Planned Area Cluster) to C-2 (General Commercial) for property located on the northwest corner of Olive Highway and Canyon Drive, identified as AP 068-130-014, 043, Oroville. (SH) (95- 183) The above mentioned application, Negative Declaration, and map are on file and available for public viewing at the office of the Butte County Planning Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION BARRY K. HOGAN, PLANNING MANAGER To be published in the Oroville Mercury on Monday, October 9, 1995. ....., r� DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR COMMENTS 0 JOB Li ,013 gam- b3 SEWERS x County Public Works Richvale Sanitary District County Environmental Health L.O.A.P.U.D. , County Building Division Skansen Subdivision (CSA #21) City of Biggs Stirling City Sewer Main. Dist. City of Chico Thermalito Irrigation District City of Gridley Butte Water District City of Oroville Town of Paradise IRRIGATION WATER Planning Department Biggs-W. Gridley Water District State Transportation Department Butte Water District Durham Irrigation District . DOMESTIC WATER 'OWID Butte Water District Paradise Irrigation District California Water Service Co. Richvale Irrigation District Del Oro Water Co. Table Mountain Irrigation 'mac OWID District Thermalito Irrigation District Thermalito Irrigation District Other DRAINAGE DISTRICT UTILITIES PG&E North (Chico) PG&E South (Oroville) Pacific Bell RECLAMATION DISTRICT Chambers Cable Viacom TV Cable FIRE PROTECTION OTMM COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS E1 Medio Fire Protection Dist. Paradise Pines Architectural County Fire Department/CDP Control Committee Butte County Farm Bureau MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT Community Association: Durham, Oroville or Butte County Lime Saddle Community Service POLICE PROTECTION District State Highway Patrol Butte County Air Pollution �e County Sheriff Control District Butte Environmental Council SCHOOL DISTRICT RECREATION FACILITIES Chico Area Recreation District Durham Area Rec. & Park District Feather River Rec. & Park District Paradise Rec. & Park District G Richvale Rec. & Park District State Parks & Rec. Department RESOURCE MANAGEMENT iT�T PK { State Water Resources Department j U.S. Forest Service U.S. Bureau of Land Management Butte County Mining Committee State Department of Fish & Game California Native plant Society State Div. Forestry - attention: Craig Carter 9 be aPlanning A Regional Water Quality Control Board rtment MAY 3 0 1995 orovalu,VacnvTeztJ BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING-DIVISION COMMENT SHEET TO: Enviromental Health DATE: May 30, 1995 AP NO.: 068-130-014,043 RETURN BY: June 30, 1995 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone, from PUD to C-2 APPLICANT: Grubbs, Roger ENGINEER: Ron Graves CONDITIONS AND/OR COMMENTS: J, a W-To S �� �► v`s'� b� .,o r d✓ `�/1- ( `��a I VA e 17 C-0/V' ,-f )p4av4 We w 3 d 4 v 16,Atj- r* Vim/ ire Yv�-- LD 1170 (6/92) BY: I� BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION COMMENT SHEET TO:#Publiccm-w'orks� DATE: May 30, 1995 AP NO.: 068-130-014,043 RETURN BY: June 30, 1995 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone, from PUD to C-2 APPLICANT: Grubbs, Roger ENGINEER: Ron Graves CONDITIONS AND/OR.COMMENTS: 1,2 la/t 00Z Q-1<n^e- <°�r/ o' Ice) , LD 1170 (6/92) BY: k..-)%jTY 4F OUTTE MAY 3 V95 "arid pevelopment'Sec. ` .R Planning Department JUN 01 1995 BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Oroville,Caiiiornia PLANNING DIVISION COMMENT SHEET TO: County Fire Department / CDF DATE: May 30, 1995 AP NO.: 068-130-014,043 RETURN BY: June 30, 1995 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone, from PUD to C-2 APPLICANT: Grubbs, Roger ENGINEER: Ron Graves CONDITIONS AND/OR COMMENTS: LD 1170 (6/92) BY: —740��J .r ��,� STAPt'JFCAkIFJRNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION A USING AGENCY • PETE WILSON,Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT P.O.BOX 911 MARYSVILLE,CA 95901 TDD Telephone(916)741-4508 FAX(916)741-5346 Telephone(916)741-4539 June-30--1995 GBUT070 03-BUT-162 PM 21.2/21.3 Grubbs, R. Rezone_(-PU-D-to C-) Application 954 Mr. Ron Graves, Engineer Butte County Planning Division Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Oroville,CA 95965-3397 Dear Mr. Graves: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced document. COMMENTS: The dedication to Caltrans of right-of-way to a minimum of 50 feet from Centerline of State Route (SR) 162 should be required for development of this boat storage facility and mixed commercial development. Additional right-of-way may be required to accommodate cut or fill slopes along the highway frontage. Enclosed is a summary of Caltrans District 3 procedures for accepting the dedication. Caltrans recommends that access from the parcels be limited to Canyon Drive. Access onto SR 162 would not be approved without the following: • A detailed layout submitted for Caltrans review which shows the existing lane widths and geometrics of the roadway, along with the proposed improvements. Minimum four-foot shoulders within the proposed road improvement limits. • An AC overlay in the same limits. • A single common driveway for both parcels,located at least 200 feet from the property corner at the SR 162/Canyon Drive intersection. • Extension of the median width for the left turn pocket to Canyon Drive back to the left turn pocket at Skyline Boulevard to provide a two way left turn lane. • Widening on the inside of the 1000 foot radius curve west of the project to accommodate the left turn lane and to improve horizontal sight distance. Grease and oil separators capable of removing all visible sheen from discharging waters, will be required to intercept any contaminants directed to SR 162. All surface runoff from parking,storage, and/or refueling areas shall be directed toward the separators. The following items should be submitted for our review: • Calculations for pre- and post-project runoff,using a storm frequency of at least 25 years. Mr. Graves June 30, 1995 Page 2 • Topographical site plans for existing drainage and proposed changes, particularly those affecting SR 162 drainage. An Encroachment Permit from Caltrans will be required for any work conducted in the State right-of-way,including any new or revised access, and for affecting the runoff directed to SR 162. Since an encroachment.permit will be required,the proposed agreement between the County and,the developer to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts should be reviewed and approved by Caltrans. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Terri Pencovic, Inter Governmental Review/CEQA Coordinator at(916)741-4199. Sincerely, E.A. "LIB" HARAUGHTY, Chief Office of Transportation Planning Rural Enclosure cc: Jon Clark,Butte County Association of Governments i i P92nninst Qenartment J U 1, 3 � 1995 Orovjjj;:, PU fie , coun!!q �' -�- .• DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC .:HEALTH DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 18-B County Center Drive 1469 Humboldt Road ' 7 County Center Drive 747 Elliott Road • Oroville,CA 95965 Chico, CA 95928 Oroville,CA 95965 Paradise, CA 95969 . (916)538-7282 (916)891-2727 (916)-338-7281 (916)872-6308 FAX (916)538-2165 FAX (916)895-6512 FAX (916)538-2140 John Reed & Gary McNichols V 1068 Nevada Avenue I ( ^� I►/� Orovil le, , CA 95965 Dear Sirs: With respect to the soil depth and percolation tests that you authorized on the two parcels at Canyon Drive and Olive Highway , Orovi Ile (AP# 68-13-14 & 43) , the tests show that e-a:c-h--p-a-r_c:e--1=i--s:, acceptable--_for - _-deve-lopmen_t_ w_i_th�conventiortal lo.w_—wa _t;e-water producing taous,-i-no`or -busi-nesses , i .e. : a single family house or - a business estab-lishmeht that generates little waste-water . A septic system permit will be issued for each of these parcels with the following , but not limited to , provisions: 1 . Complete a septic system application, and pay the .required fee . 2. If necessary , obtain approval from the Butte County Planning Department for the development . 3. Obtain a letter from the Oroville-Wyandotte • Irrigation District that they will serve treated domestic water to i each parcel . 4. Obtain any other necessary approvals: i .e. CalTrans - for ingress and egress. If you have any questions regarding this matter , please contact me at the above listed address or telephone number between 8:00 - 10:00 a.m. Monday through Thursday, closed on Fridays. V truly yours, Planning P De artmen -- Edward L. Overhouse, R.E.H.S. MAY 3 0 1995 Division of Environmental Health u A CLEAN INDOOR AIR ENVIRONMENT FOR A HEALTHIER TOMORROW „ RON GRAVES & ASSOCIATES Environmental Health A CALIF. CORP. APR 9 1994 P.O. BOX 986 OROV I L L E, CA 95965 Omville,California. . ( 916 ) 534-9587 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS The attached enclosure represents the results of percolation tests made by me or my authorized representative under my supervision. The tests were made in - compliance with "Butte County Health Department , Division of Sanitation, approved percolation test procedure. ” TEST LOCATION:. to C r__ L o- ( 62Z A--fl_D ) A. P. # �OD ' t� — 'l� 6 4( PRE-SOAK DATE:_-1-71C Ult*� CLIENT'S NAME: L JOB Ronald L. Graves , P. L. S. 4085 Test Performed :By tel/c -�7t4- nl 00 -Fe:: -rt41!S -'7' r 74!��7 7 VqA ( r4o -tel Planning Department i MAY 3 0 1995 - - C%IuYll➢�, .«.aJiia�ti Butte Comrty Health Dept. Form S40468R H Job# ?q- o43 APP�ed pe� � ,rP latian test � Environmental Health Planning Department APR 1 9 1994 Date 3 — 7.9 — 4W MAY. 3 0 1995 PERCOLATION TESTS Oroville,California Client 74=7) Oroville,i;aiitornia Ron- Graves & Associates P.O. Box 986 Oroville, CA 95965 534-9587 HME NO Presoak water? yes Method "A" fill time iv: 7-1 O:i3 10 : Z_5' T�]ne • „ 10:51 11�Z3 1K 1��2S '. ,,Drop/ IndiesMimxtes h+1� M INl �N lHt Method "B" fell time Drop/tim Drop/time • Drop/Tim Drop/`rim Drop/time Method "C` fill n V� Butte Caul' Saalth Dept- Forma S40-868R Job# Environmental Approved pp�lation testprocedure tat Health , Planning Department APR 19 1994 rite Oroville,California Cl seat MDY 3 0 1995 PERCOLATION TESTS _ Ron. Graves & Associates Oroviiiia,uscidornia P-0. Box 986 Oroville, CA 95965 534-9587 FUM NO. 21 -5- T Presoak water? �lEs V& �C-5 Yes Ya5 YES lygrs �e5 Metl] "A" fill time 10:0 U /0: 1 0 : 1 1 JQ ; I'3 /D;/ra le):/7 ' r0:-37 � 11 =r Ii I aS u 13 t It 9qme 11:o Drop/ S S ■ Minutes &Q 1 rM4 ( 0 M4 /60 v AIN 1^19 #4 1 Cao u.._114 NL,­ lOd "B" fill time /1r ... it .r✓ Drop ��� Drop/`rime Drop/'rim Drop/'rim Drop/lim Drop/fim Method wCa fiU Ql:' °IL68- 1.3 �T'I S1 R 4E ' M.D.B.O M. Environmental Health APR 19 1gQd 03 Oroville,CWtornia IOROVILLE WYANDOTTE FRUITLANDS UN/T N°•2 j 99 � � I i @181♦ I n IN.a AC /� 1 � 1 7 P/lN 46.51 � ( � i 35A , J:f J ® 1 • /L 06AC ® ( �� 988 AC 3M AG 343 AC. 1 635.09 J 813.55 __ -- - - - ---- - - -T-1 423— — TT95 1 rA7 1 �I 1 /35 S.�AC. i 6.4 2 Ac w '` i J. 1 5.54Ac r 3 --r-4 45 46 393 1 l2/ 51 ,. ' 2 150I 56 �c 9 S — 113 114 0 1 906.75 5=Ae 140 5DAe 00 0 os f 3 = ♦ g i J. 5.59 Ac PM77--49 !l8 _ I� i 9!8.18 I;OSANNA wAY 1� �P MJ 7 7 53 a pro I 'Z Planninq*Nnartment 0 11 14 - MAY 3 0 1995 � FRUST N-00 14 Orovii;t, .LE WYANDOT UN/TP 14:f 1 91093 Assessor's Jalap No. 66-13' County of Butte, Calif. REVISED:/I-9/ SECT 1010. 19th R 4E - 1.D.B. fk M. - r - 03 C)Q 910 j c. Zhc�o /A 5.02A , 76 � PGE 4.69 Ac. 5AC 23 M �� ; FRUIT ANDS UNIT NE-2 a� L PM ,02-6 37 2 D py z 01ROY/LL� WYANDOTTE '�l L 369.s+. . 1 . "1I 2/ j aass 129 ^ !2 r /60 ; - - J !28 's 2.68a h 0q 605.962 AC 1 �� 2.8 % 0 64t~ Q 5.29 Ac. 2.7AC 272.22 X 0'.575$")71L- 10.33 /0.337 AC `� / - 0.69 54 9 Z h l 2 a.52 2.15 ` O / 1 r PCE i ' , 0 , REMAN1NG 3 i o -1 200, 35 / / ` _LANDS ,p8`� / hA .,. 2 / 2.s7AC g �,2e 1 131 Np 6 �% - i * � 2 11 TL./RW� 6.72TAC 1 1 "� cy ( 188 1 R 39 �� 5.67AC RSI 10-60 a p ----- - n �se.0 c 9.B/AC 0 154.3, 3 ' '/ j PIM 46-51 1 52 / 1 35A t ! 4.81AC �Z� is N� v2 \J ® ! �0 ® l3 _ 35. on s� / y , /2 06AC. / I ! 5 3g 635.0 88 AC 11191 813. 3M AG. 343 AC. I ., 14.73AC 5.3/AC423- '119 - - - - -- - �-1 al in 423- ocsiwE 1 ./ v / 9 TT9 STA7ioa 6/ I 4.85AC 7Z 4s' aj rr 92 1 © i 2 m a ,� Pm 121-81 3 !3 ® . 5.84AC. oo i /35 �� 5�AC. is.a2Ac on B ; b ----- �r I 5.54AC ,• 3 _ " h Q I T y S3' 115 1.224c 1.95 / O '�',� i 2 515 83 1 � / �3 I 2430 aa as ^ aC tih 3 '`Y va !2f 113 i 114 /50 56 t � 0 p4c W W W IQ� a . 3��"'J �,� e8 Z 906.75 �. 'SA�Ae SDAc Im 14.756 AC B.BSAe. y / 3 .r , ! Q4) h 1 42 2.S5Ac (4AC 2M T7--49 .5.59Ac /t7 g3 1S ' - -'918.%8 HOSANNA WAY �P M'47r7 513 /5 /4 _ . N 52 r . RUT oROV1LLE wYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT �°'2 ow- V�LLE U 3 14 M.QR.-8K.11-P& 11,12 - - OROVIL.LE WYANDOTTE FRUIT LANDS UNIT N2-3- MO:R:9K.11-PG. 19920 '00� Assessor's Map No. 68=13 County of Butte, Calif. REVISED: //-9/ _ e. - W..r--rr._- . ._ __. _,., - -:•...:g.....,<........-+---_ ••-.. .+--.e„ - : -- - "'r='"s:�t. �� _s- � ....,,�t"4�.� :,�`•:.:.;sem:rt•�f O � 3 D � CD a M MUT P-0- PA- 1 2 I 141 j3 .. C-I II I II II I I II - r� I 1 •• �I I II C-I 1 AR-I I , I, i- PA- -a (/N( 14 I � 4 - - - y 1