HomeMy WebLinkAbout030-260-0534
Butte County -Deportment of Development Services
TIM SNELLINGS, DIRECTOR I PETE CALARCO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
(530) 538-7601 Telephone
(530) 538-7785 Facsimile
ADMINISTRATION * BUILDING * PLANNING
November 16, 2006
Oro Bay Associates
5000 Hopyard Road, Suite 170
Pleasnton; CA 94588
Re: A06-16, AP: 030-260-053; 054
Gentlemen:
On November 15, 2006, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) found the referenced project to
be consistent subject to the following conditions:
1. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that resid-ntial development
within the C compatibility Zone shall have a minimum density of four (4; dwelling units per
acre.
2. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code tha= a deed notice be
provided for the sale of all lots resulting from development within the zone, notifying
purchasers of the proximity of the airport and the potential for possible noise -related impacts
in an ALUC-approved disclosure notice.
3. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan". zoning code that, pr --or to or concurrent
with the recordation of any Final Map, a separate Avigation Easement instrument be
recorded granting the right of continued use of the airspace above the pro-)osed parcels by the
Oroville Municipal Airport and acknowledging any and all existing or potential airport
operational impacts.
4. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that airspace review by the
Airport Land Use Commission is required for all objects over 100 feet in height in the. C
Compatibility Zone and 100 feet in height in the D Compatibility Zone.
5. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that, as a condition for -the
issuance of any Building Permit, a minimum interior noise level of 45 decibel (dB) or less is
required for all residences.
6. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that proposed open space
shall remain in open space uses in perpetuity and protected by easement, zoning, or
dedication.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact of this office at 538-, between
8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Sincerely,
Lynn Richardsori
Commission Clerk
Enc.
cc: NorthStar
City of Oroville
K:\letters\merge letters\SCHEDULE.dot
Page 1 of 1
Troester, Steve
From: Troester, Steve
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 4:42 PM
To: sandersc@cityoforoville.org'
Cc: teitelmanem@cityoforoville.org'
Subject: Oro Bay Specific Plan ALUC Hearing
Attachments: Oro Bay A06-16 ALUC Rpt.pdf
Eric & Craig,
We have agendized the Oro Bay Specific Plan project for ALUC review on Wednesday November 15 at 9:00
a.m. This project is the first hearing on the agenda. Attached is our staff report. We would appreciate any
comments on the report that you have in advance of the ALUC meting. We have also forwarded a copy to the
applicants via Jim Steven at North Star Eng for their review and comment.
Steve Troester, Associate Planner
Butte County Dept. of Development Services
#7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA, 95965
(530) 538-7153
11/15/2006
Butte County Department of Development Services
Planning Division
Airport Land Use Commission
November 15, 2006 Meeting
AGENDA ITEM — E-1
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: Steve Troester, Associate Planner
DATE: INovember 15, 2006
ITEM• ALUC File No. A06-16 (Oro Bay Associates, LLC), APN 030-260-053
and 054: A consistency review for a proposed annexation to the City of
Oroville of the Oro Bay Specific Plan site (421 acres) and amendment of
the City of Oroville General Plan and Zoning Code to create a new zone
designation called the "Oro Bay Specific Plan". This review is regarding
two parcels totaling 421 acres within the C and D Compatibility Zones of
the Oroville Municipal Airport. The proposed Specific Plan includes up
to 654 single-family parcels, 1,176 medium density residential units, 561
high-density residential units, 82.5 acres of parks and open space, 17.5
acres of public facilities, and 39.5 acres of roads. The project parcels are
located on the south side of Oro Dam Boulevard, west of the Par Four
subdivision, +/-1,050 feet west of the city limits of Oroville.
SUMMARY:
The project proposes establishment of a Specific Plan by way of an amendment of the City of
Oroville General Plan and Zoning Code for two parcels totaling 421 acres within the C and D
Compatibility Zones of the Oroville Municipal Airport. The proposed Specific Plan is to allow a
mix of various residential densities and housing types combined with various public uses,
including 82.5 acres dedicated to parks and open space. The project land, along with 152 acres
of the "Par Four Way" subdivision, 115 acres of the "Linkside Place Phase I11" subdivision, and
91 acres of other lands (6 parcels) to the south would be annexed to the City of Oroville. Staff
recommends that ALUC find the proposed specific plan, general plan amendment, rezone and
future development consistent with the 2000 Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
for the Oroville Municipal Airport.
BACKGROUND:
I
• The two project parcels (421 acres total) are currently undeveloped.
The project parcels are located on the south side of Oro Dam Boulevard, west of the Par Four
Subdivision, +/-1,050 feet west of the city limits of Oroville.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
Oro Bay Associates A06-16 0 Page 1 of 11 ■
Land Use
Proposed
City
Oroville
Zoning
Approx. Acres
Total
Dwelling
Units
Density
(dwelling
units/acre)
Proposed
Uses —
Consistency
with the
ACLUP
Low Density Residential
Specific
Plan
109
327-654
3-6
YES
Medium Density Residential
C,147
736-1176
5-8
YES
High Density Residential
Zoning
25.5
204-561
8-22
YES
Parks and Open Space *
82.5
Consistency
Current
YES
Public Facilities
17.5
(Acres)
Zone
YES
Roads
(Pre)
39.5
Current
Proposed
YES
Total
+/-137.35
421
AR -5'
AR'
AR -5'
* Parks and Open Space (82.5 acres) constitute 19.5% of the total project site (421 acres).
ANALYSIS:
• The parcels are within Airport Compatibility Zones C (Traffic Pattern) and D (Other Airport
Environs).
• The nearest residential area is located in the C zone approximately 3,600 feet west of the
nearest runway.
• The project is required to come before ALUC as a General Plan Amendment as stated in the
2000 Butte. County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), Section 1.5.1(a)
amendment to a general plan and adoption of a specific plan and a pre -zoning associated with'
a future annexation of land to a city as stated in Section 1.5.3 (a)(2).
• Parcel information is as follows:
1. AR -5: Agricultural Residential 5 -acre minimum
2. AR -10: Agricultural Residential 10 -acre minimum
3. AR: Agricultural Residential
4. RM: Resource Management
5. MDR: Medium Density Residential
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 2 of 11 ■
County
City of Oroville
Existing/Proposed
Zoning & General
Zoning
General Plan
Plan designations
Size
Airport
Gen.
Consistency
Current
APN
(Acres)
Zone
Zoning
Plan
(Pre)
Proposed
Current
Proposed
With the ACLUP
030
05353
+/-137.35
C
AR -5'
AR'
AR -5'
Specific Plan
R M4
MDR'
Yes
+/-25
D
030-260-
+/-169.84
CAR
-102
AR'
AR -102
Specific Plan
P
MDR
yes
054
+/-89
D
RM
Aggregate
307
C
-
-
-
114
D
1. AR -5: Agricultural Residential 5 -acre minimum
2. AR -10: Agricultural Residential 10 -acre minimum
3. AR: Agricultural Residential
4. RM: Resource Management
5. MDR: Medium Density Residential
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 2 of 11 ■
• Uses are proposed under a Specific Plan in the C and D Compatibility Zones:
Land Use
Proposed City
Oroville
Zoning
Approx.
Acres
Total
Dwelling
Units
Density
(dwelling
units/acre)
Open Proposed Uses —
Space % Consistency
with the ACLUP
Low Density Residential
Specific Plan
109
327-654
3-6
YES
Medium Density Residential
11147
736-1176
5-8
YES
High Density Residential
25.5
204-561
8-22
YES
Parks and Open Space
82.5
19.5 YES
Public Facilities
17.5
YES
Roads
39.5
YES
Total
421
• The aggregate of land within each of the two Compatibility Zones is approximately as
follows: -
C Zone +/-307 acres
D Zone +/-114 acres '
Total 421 acres
• Based on the open space requirements for the C Compatibility Zone, a total of 30.7 acres
would be required to meet the minimum. Compatibility Zone D has no requirement for parks
and open space'set-aside. The project is proposing a total of 82.5 acres of open space (19.5%,
of the total 421 -acre project site). Approximately 70% (+/-57 acres) of the total open space
will be located in the "C" Compatibility Zone. The proposed parks and open space meet the
minimum of the C Compatibility Zone. The proposed breakdown of parks and open space is
as follows:
Acres
Type
13.2
Community/neighborhood Parks
2.0
"Activity Spine" (north -south)
1.3
Pocket Park
6.0
Linear Parks
60
Environmental Conservation
82.5 Total Parks and Open Space
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 3 of 11 ■
• The primary compatibility criteria for the Compatibility Zones is shown on the following
table:
Zone
Residential
Density
(du/ac)
Other Uses
(people/ac)
Req'd
Open Land
Prohibited Uses
Other
Development
Conditions
< 0.2
100 (Average)
Children's schools,
Airspace review
C
-
(average
300 (Single
10%
day care centers,
required for objects
(Traffic
parcel size >
Acre)
libraries; Hospitals,
>100 feet tall;
Pattern)
5.0 acres)
390 (with bonus)
nursing homes;
Deed notice
Hazards to flight.
required.
D
Hazards to flight
Airspace review for
(Other
(Physical — Height,
objects >100 feet
Airport
No Limit
No Limit
No
visual, electronic
tall
Environs).
Requirement
interference, attraction
of birds)
Extracted from Table 2A of the 2000 ALUCP
• Section 4.1.3 of the 2000 Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan states that the
maximum noise level for residential uses in the vicinity of an airport is 55 dB CNEL. .
• The project site is outside the 55 dB CNEL noise contour as shown on Exhibit 5E (Noise
Impacts) of the 2000 Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION:
No environmental documentation has been completed for this project by ALUC staff. Your
Commission's review of the proposed project and determination of consistency is not a "project"
under the California Environmental Quality Act. Determination of environmental review will be
completed during the process of annexation, the General Plan amendment and rezone by the City.
of Oroville.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission find ALUC File No.
A06-16 Oro Bay Associates Specific Plan consistent with the 2000 Airport Land' Use
Compatibility Plan for the Oroville Municipal Airport.
Exhibits:
A: Findings
B: List of References
C: Project Location and Compatibility Zone
D: Noise Compatibility Criteria (Table 2B — ALUCP)
E Noise Impact Map - (Exhibit 5E — ALUCP)
F. ProposedLand Use Map
■ Butte County.Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
m Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 4 of 11 ■
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
CONSISTENCY FINDINGS FOR ALUC File No. 06-16 (Oro Bay Associates),
APN 030-260-053 and 054.
The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has prepared the following findings based on data
contained in the 2000 Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALU ZP) for the
Oroville Municipal Airport, as well as site specific information submitted by the. applicant and
ALUC staff.
The following findings have been prepared at the direction of the ALUC and are for the
consideration of the Lead Agency (City of Oroville) when making a decision on the project.
SECTION 1: ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
A. No environmental documentation has been completed for this project by ALUC
staff. Determination of environmental review will be completed during the
process of annexation, the general plan amendment and rezone by the City of
Oroville.
SECTION 2: CONSISTENCY FINDINGS FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
A. The City of Oroville's proposed general plan and pre -zoning designations for the
parcels are consistent with the 2000 Butte County Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan.
B. The proposed 1,267 to 2,391 residential dwellings, at a density of 4-22 dwelling
units per acre, are consistent with the "C" Compatibility Zone.
C The project . significantly exceeds the open space requirement for the C
Compatibility Zone.
SECTION 3: PROJECT FINDINGS:
A. . The 421 acre project is subject to two different Airport Compatibi-ity Zones:
• Airport Compatibility Zone C (Traffic Pattern Zone) — +/-307 acres
• Airport Compatibility Zone D (Other Airport Environs) — +/-114 acres
B. No structures of the project will extend into protected airspace.
C. The project site is outside of the 55 dB CNEL noise contour.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 5 of 11 ■
SECTION 4: PROJECT CONDITIONS:
1. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that residential
development within the C compatibility Zone shall have .0 minimum density of
four (4) dwelling units per acre.
2. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that a deed notice
be provided for the sale of all lots resulting from development within the zone,
notifying purchasers of the proximity of the airport and the potential for possible
noise -related impacts in an ALUC-approved disclosure notice.
3. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that, prior to or
concurrent with the recordation of any Final Map, a separate Avigation Easement
instrument be recorded granting the right of continued use of the airspace above
the proposed parcels by the Oroville Municipal Airport and acknowledging any
and all existing or potential airport operational impacts.
4. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that airspace
review by the Airport Land Use Commission is required for all objects over 100
feet in height in the C Compatibility Zone and 100 feet in height. in the D
Compatibility Zone.
5. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that, as a
condition for the issuance of any Building Permit, a ntirAntwR interior noise level
of 45 decibel (dB) or less is required for all residences. mlim
6. Place a requirement in the "Oro Bay Specific Plan" zoning code that proposed `.
open space shall remain in open space uses in perpetuity and protected by
easement, zoning, or dedication.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 6 of 11 ■
EXHIBIT B
List of References
Data supporting the ALUC's findings have been generated from studies and reports prepared by
recognized professionals and agencies with expertise in Airport Land Use Planning and land use
compatibility. These include, but are not limited to:
Butte County 2000 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Initial Study and Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report, Oro Bay
Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project. March 2006, Pacific Municipal'
Consultants.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 7 of 11 ■
The 421 -acre project area=
Table 2B
Noise Compatibility Criteria-
Butte
riteriaButte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
2-27
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■ .
Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page.9 of 11 ■
EXHIBIT E
Noise Impacts
Oruv0le Munldpal Airport
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commi3sion ■
■ Oro Bay Associates A06-16 ■ Page 10 of 11 ■
,1' _ � � Vit.. s . t" .• ,•
EXHIBIT F
- Yo- . - � •-
1 2 L wel U -se Diqgmijn,
� � � LEGEND t •
0 0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE t
, � �� 4 �rv,Cl'� CammnWq 1Carlt ! •t
• � �/'/ Aelriialy' Spin {' I t ' , ,
• O i•-��..� Q Lfnev Pntb
O�.•l — tsnvtrtaamemol Canser.atioa • ; _ ,
I �s,
Detenttoo Ana Overlay
i8 11 RESIDEwmS L
I Q Nelgh6afbaod taws DeruteY � (. ,
V
9 10
.. Q Nelgtborko Medium Density
Q . Ne(6bbcvbo : High Densttyt
PUBLIC,FI!OLMY
t
12 Potential 9ektlol' �t
15 O`.
Iolnt Use Pae: (Ayprafi. I.oeotloa)
14 13 O
n ,
f
• t
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Airport Land Use Commis -.ion ■ t
0 Oro Bay Associates A06-16 w Page 11 of 11 ■
A
Butte County Department of Development Services
TIM SNELLINGS, DIRECTOR I PETE CALARCO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
(530) 538-7601 Telephone
(530) 538-7785 Facsimile
ADMINISTRATION * BUILDING * PLANNING
November 6, 2006
Oro Bay Associates
5000 Hopyard Road, Suite 170
Pleasnton, CA 94588
Re: A06-16, AP: 030-260-053; 054
Gentlemen:
Enclosed is a copy of the Agenda Report concerning your application for a a consistence review for a
proposed subdivision in the Oroville Municipal Airport compatibility zones C- & D. on p-operty zoned AR -5
(Agricultural -Residential, 5 -acre parcels) and located . Should you have any concerns with the report or
conditions of approval, please contact us in advance of the meeting so that we may work together to resolve
your concerns.
A public hearing has been set for November 15, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. This meeting will be .'zeld in the Board of
Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California.
The Airport Land Use 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 Steve Troester at 538-"153, between 7:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Sincerely,
Lynn Richardson
Commission Clerk
Enc.
cc: NorthStar
City of Oroville
K:\letters\merge letters\SCHEDULE.dot
BUTTE �
COUNTY
Punic NOTICE MAR 3 L 136
DEdELOPFVANT
Notice of Public Scoping Meeting for Preparation SERVICES
of an Environmental Impact Report for the
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Project
The City of. Oroville will conduct a public meeting to obtain comments about what
environmental issues should be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report to be
prepared for the Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Project. The Project consists of a
Specific Plan for 421 acres and an annexation of 779, acres of land to the City. of Oroville.
(Annexation will include amendment of the City's General Plan and Pre-Zoning land use
designations for the northerly 76 acres of the Par Four Way subdivision and northern 73
acres of the proposed Linkside Place Phase III subdivision to a designation of Single
Family Residential.) The boundaries of the project site are SR 162 to the north, Wilbur
Road to the west, the Thermalito Afterbay to the south, and the Table Mountain Golf
Course & Oroville Municipal Airport to the east.
The public meeting. will be held on April 13, 2006 at 1:00 p.m. at the City of Oroville
Council Chambers at 1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville California. For more information,.
please contact Jo Sherman, Planning Manager, at (530) 538-2430, or visit the City of
Oroville's website at www.cityoforoville.ora.
Type Land
Lu" Use
Proposed City
Oroville
Zoning
Approx. Acres
Total Dwelling
Units
Density
(dwelling
units/acre
6- '4—
-69
A 0
�'
5-8 88-141
5-8 98-157
5-8- ..... 76A21,
t
�`` Figure 3-1:
Land Use Diagram
Land Use &mmary
LEGEND
1
Planning Area
Residential
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Lov Density
Community Park
-
Activity Spine
O+
PScket Park
StarroTAL
Linear Parka
QFitvirottmental
Conservation
Neighborhood Park
Letention Area Overlay
Activity Spine
EESIDENTIAL
Pocket Park
Neighborhood Low Density
QNeighborhood
Medium Density
SUBTOTAL
Neighborhood High Density
Environmental Come ation
PUBLIC FACILITY
SUBTOTAL
P7tential School
Public Facility -
Joint Use Park (Approx. Location)
Land Use &mmary
Land Use - Approximate
Acreage
Residential
-
Lov Density
109.0
Medium Density
147.0
High Density
25.5
StarroTAL
281.5
Parks and Open S. -ace -
Neighborhood Park
13.2
Activity Spine
2.p
Pocket Park
1.3
Linear Park
6.0
SUBTOTAL
22.5
Environmental Come ation
60.0
SUBTOTAL
82.5
Public Facility -
joint -use Park Park
7.5
Potential School
10.0
SUBTOTAL
17.5
Roads
Main Entry
1.3
Wilbur Road
6.4
Secondary Entry
1.0
Primary Community Glkaor
30.8
SUBTOTAL39.5
- GRAND TOTAL 421.0 -
"
r
i
Junei7;1'2006 24
.+ �'� , r"'� _ R ...moi _ •• - „ _ r �,.— -- ' ^ .`. _- _ - ^ e .". , `t _ _ .... .._. -- q � 4)���.�—�•—�— •—'-
1hp.,
Z � i ��('y.{S - �.' Gam` F .FiFy2 �tA J VJ:.A� ; ]• Yj� �
v
30-26
23
T.19N.
R. 3E.
M.D.B. &M.
48
47
STATE
HIGHWAY
162
ORONLLE
J
�
20
57
57
60
19
LDAWE PLACE SL6
TABLE YF. GOLF COARSE
S.SAc
14.81AC
47
12ORS67
pS
— 133
134
350
1
61 64
1
16
O
is
26
16
15
33
15
1 66
JMW X46 c
21
53
3
18.67Ac
21
22
107.23Ac
5.23ACt I
22
2 6.00nc
497oAo 67
1T
106RS43
143RS30
4Ac
S.OSAct
162.36Ac
4
10� �
a
43
30
16
45
25
1-4
5
1.39 C -2
151
150
1'=Boo'
.1s
38.79Ac
MR
46
51
0
14 1-
97.51Ac
OR IL
AIRP T
,-- T
— _
O��
366AC
4. 1Ac
19
50
34
31
13�
8
18.08Ac
1667.58
16. AC
*1�151
155
1
CANTER
DR
oc
12
37 25Ac
44
2.37Act
15a
10.74 Ac Lease Pd.
114,
9
_
27
54
Air
Filtration Co. Inc.
1676.0.5
oPo
y
58.24Ac
51
9.78Ac
258.84Ac
18
33Act
O
30Ac
24
38
5.2Act
176 41
175
STATE OF CA
1T
10
100.00Ac "
36.50A
52
40Ac
O
O
96RS78
2S
D.W.R -
10Ac
.�
1577.22.
.
1357.98
RIM1E
SUR
IIS/ //��
/ 1 p
29
/
53
Butte County Assessor's Map
RUNGE SUBDIVISION
142 M.O.R. 11/13 2-27-97
Book 30, Page 26
SOUTH THERMALITO
M.O.R. BK.2 PC. 176
NOTE These polls oe for assessmentonly
CREATED BY DB CREATED ON
and may not constitute legd pmcds
REVISED BY SL REVISEDEFFEC77VE
R
2006—Cam
Yed B The Butte Count Assessors
-
•,
:
-
,
A.
"hili !�'cJ' - -/ . . , , F : , > . t t: :F .. S ..• .. �, . i. °�k43�'3#°t3,�W. 'iJ?.',J'e`5l'-•.`ai���,�•'F; _ � o'
.- - d "'t : ,e. y,»*re�°r.,,vea`v.":-,-e rr. .: ,t�lr#6Li:v-_•+t�^'.'r'"7i ...f..` 4 ?'i 1
•}v . - :. � - -
<, .t ,-�A-n tFv .._, .�.v:-- .,..- ..-2_•._.. -. .. r,T -'i` ./ '•r.Y. t � mow•/ 4
ES1
€.
'D E
F
:r a
W Y �
t
1 '•
.. r < ti° } „>,:•~<•,:,,..>�:'k--'= ., - 40. s a"#� • .. !. i `�. :,k
a� Y
G <,
r'
°1
'• F i all' , li '
1` v`
r >�
.�. rat;•- :�., v ':9• -u. �,`.
r ,.
., a
. , r .« ,rye., ,� ,• ,4 � r ., d'Or
'�"-:... -
l.
J'
• n
I.
i -
�- - ATI N
"•LOC
,
Hy.
rr
N
C S'
rk• a 1� ~e f
':r sJrm
2
1 '
z'� t
v
•
,
ry �'
:.. _- : ry �? ? yy .. d.. 3• a sr. ry' 1. -• fro,
B
S.
. s.
x y a r w a _ s.•
mag
L�.,Q
i rJ�.i
Y M -
.K
r
x t
4t A-
- 4
M A
' r
y ,x
t v -
YS . S � . •S—tee' �.
9 v 3
•. a
a•
9 1, :L3 .. - fi ,.. $ a. t ,.§ P n .,. .k m• ... .r i' a ..9 l:' 9 .c^n,-"
k. ... ... .. . ,. c : f .. .r .. .d' .t .<. .. < r :. ,. ,.. .; .: •: r ' !tip �`
', .. .. .. .- 1.. f ,. V .. 1, .d+'r ,• -> r•F rr /, 1. d 4'-.,- � .�'� 1
f
�v a�
:4L
r•' Y
trd. '•
x'
"A
-
Sr �
:
YY
a 7 .4' a1' 1•
� w S s'Y -✓ -
_
:
,
.� • a£ :i •. i C
5rc2,
k,r .
am
d• 7t ^, .fes,
7 $
,
d �y
8 ✓i •c ..
f~
,,..pp W
y� f
:Jt Y vti
r` r - _
�
- •7i•J ,c s� dy y{q�
%r
,.•� s
x 4' � • � • ry"
tit r-�_.. i.$YI' .r• ,•-•-t
+at •.+� 7 f'' i.. r
ti
LO
IECT �FRO;, `ATI
C ON
i y
E J' gg 1
t�
g k
- 1
,
a 3• �`
z .2
J' .4
,4� C
r .ri' '- � • e' 5
r J'
,
r
,
•
Nz
ay Io
Y � `
16 Mo
ye A
RUNWAY PROTECTION -ZONE4.
r
,
t '`r
8 APPROACH AND DEPARTURE ZONE AND SIDELINE, ZONE s
B EXTENDED APPROACH• AND DEPARTURE_ ZONE
TRAFFIC- PATTERN ti
.. s
Y OTHER AIRPORT ENVIRONS
D.—
Y,
a
{
A
BUTTEM COUNTY AIRPORT LAND 'USE•:
4
COMMISSION EXHI T
l
-ORO, ]PAY
PJM', NOUN:
n =cAUF ORI�IIA
.r
;.
N07F.S � ' •
� :: , .. , •
ORO BAY
_—ASSOgATESr
'
s {
.
_
,LLC
V, EXISTING' LAND -USE: VACANT PASTURE LAND
"
2: PROPOSED LAND USE: MIXED' USE RESIDENTIAL' SUBDIVISION `,
- eCI0rQ1ion Dfive
.
ChiDco: California 95973'
dors`
3r.fADJACENT US_ES::RANCHETTE RESIDENTIAL -W/'LESS THAN:1 OWELLING
PER S. ACRES'
'Y+`:; "-,•= ''
CIV�� FlICJ1rICfYSSUN Phone: (530)'893-1600:=Fax: (530( 893 2113
UNIT'
rr
v. ort stardng com
Qdoo," Collt6mlo Web Site: www.n h
_
'AFJ1, 03o-2B0—O¢3 & OSS' FEBRUARY 2006 JOB N0.:89/7
._+ .xy,. .7�.._+s�,�,i'::,nxr- ,•.. ._�. .� �: _,+c,'c*/,: v ._ .Slt-�. "i.....'f'yd'n'v...
.. _ -a..:,_ , __,.,_ _ - _ _ _ _ ''.f{� _
_ rti'---.r:. .. r - �
,,..
r -i�: -4i,
T" a� '^y
TAT H -
AM
�a�`;vsrts.��t'.L�S""t ."��„`�.� • ...�. � %w';�-��. �3.di'.�'��:4:�`1;'�.� s�*�.�.xk�+:.-%•�, � Yz,QWt`�'�Pe..'..��
Ym+,
q ,
ES Y
RA
4'
e Y.
3
ti
l.hy% «.' ;yxr A iT5 � 2�+�„�r��Y ris�t'. s�.Y*';t2�n ifl—� _ . • ..:.u_ - _ —_ ��✓J'',a.C� / ..�� ��'1�.��
a
i
— a
r`p r
`v
_ , ' �'.�' .• /L
SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT # `T
5 � \y ,4.PyT400' may.
EXISTING I ZONING: �� S/i = -0
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
�� G uL� c%
_4ezi Ale "i�_" '
4 "DRAFT" LEAD IN SHEET '
ASSIGNED PLANNER: �f1;(,�•w�l�U
w PLANNER'S INITIALS ` I ,
FILE NO: AP#
Date Application Received
APPLICANT.I �`YD/7iU.4- ifSr O(
`
IDR Date.
OWNER:
30 Day Complete .�
I
REPRESENTATIVE
' Date
f
Tentative Hearing ITC1
PFpPOSED REQUEST: -(to be filled out by person taking in application)
` r NG lLo1 tf (/'a UG
,
fivi
KAP1anning\Forms\L,ead In Sheei doc;
FINAL REQUEST: (to be filled out by project planner)
wN 'i/7'`�i.
;"
9 c.' L! C9V is
•
i
— a
r`p r
`v
_ , ' �'.�' .• /L
SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT # `T
5 � \y ,4.PyT400' may.
EXISTING I ZONING: �� S/i = -0
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
�� G uL� c%
_4ezi Ale "i�_" '
ASSIGNED PLANNER: �f1;(,�•w�l�U
w PLANNER'S INITIALS ` I ,
Date Application Received
Date Pro'ect Assigned
`
IDR Date.
30 Day Complete .�
I
' Date
f
Tentative Hearing ITC1
..2-
KAP1anning\Forms\L,ead In Sheei doc;
COMMENT DISTRIBUTT/ION LIST -
APPLICANT: ro 13a t2' A -5;519C
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1L � G CG�s %SJ rH c y FILE NO.:�
DATE: A0 AP N0: Z D O
County Offices and Cities:
Planning Division' X Assessor's Office -Mapping BCAG
X Environmental Health City of Biggs AILUC
Building Manager: _ City of Chico APCD
X LAFCo City of Gridley Butte Co. Farm Bureau
X Agricultural Commission City of Oroville Chico Airport Commission
X Public Works/Land Dev _ Town of Paradise Chief Administrative Officer
Fire Protection:'
X California Department of. Forestry _ EI Medio Fire Protection District
Domestic Water:
S.F.W & P. Agency (OWID) _ Butte Water District _ Gel Oro Water Co. .
California Water Service Co. Thermalito Irrigation District _ tither
Utilities: '
PG&E North - Chico _ Pacific Bell _ Chambers Cable TV
_ PG&E South - Oroville Viacom Cable TV '
Irrigation District:
Biggs / West Gridley Water, Durham Irrigation Dist. _ Paradise Irrigation Dist.
Richvale Irrigation Dist. _ Table Mountain Irrigation Dist.
Sewer:
L.O.A.P..U.D._ — Sterling City Sewer Main.
Drainage Districts:
Sacramento & San Joaquin Drainage Dist.
Drainage District 200
Reclamation District No. 2056
State Agencies:
Skansen Subdivision (CSA 21)
Reclamation District No. 333
Reclamation District No. 2054
CalTrans _ Dept. of Water Resources
Federal Agencies:
U.S. Forest Service
Other Districts, Agencies, Committees, etc.:
.K:\Planning\FORMS\APPLICATIONS\Lead-in Sheet Distribution List.doc
Dept. of Fish and Game
U.S. Bureau of Land Management
r �
" Figvre 4-1.•
G'onceptual Girailation Playa
STATE ROUTE 1621 ORO DAM BOULEVARD �4-EST
1s 1 2
LEGEND
3
amt M*Way(Sute RnlOIQ/Oio Dam Bookvaed)
000 •■a V W W -• a a-x.aae CoHeCioe( Main Caninma4 Emy)
�� P4y1i,� /� ' � '� b.f.am lhd':�ided Colletiur(WilhtvRoad).
t 7 *' / , �' �' A ,•,• w 2-LweUudicided Cdle�(S9�nrdu7 �!9�
fj `i - � � � ws � r 2: i.mx Divided Cdleanr(RimaT Gma�f4 Cdkaa)
J p Rcmdaenm
1
! 9 10 4'
! 12
! 15 /
14 13
16 17 18
19
19
1
1 4 �
F?�inrnx� aut XM 34
r y
PROJECT SUMMARY SHL+'
FILE #: A 06-16 d
AP #'�'�--�-----030:260=053, 054 +
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS: Oro Bay Associates
5000 Hopyard Road, Suite 170
Pleasanton, CA 94588
OWNER: same
REPRESENTATIVE: NorthStar Engineering
ADDRESS: 111 Mission Ranch Blvd., Suite 100, Chico, CA 95926
PROJECT DESCRIPTION /
LOCATION: Oro Bay Associates, Consistency review for a proposed subdivision in
the Oroville Municipal Airport Compatibility Zones C & D located on
the southeast corner of the intersection of Oro Dam Blvd. West and
Wilbur Road, 2.3 miles east of Highway 99, 3.4 miles west of Highway
70, Oroville.
DESIGNATION: AR-5/AR-10
1. Application submitted: April 13, 2006 Amount: $1,531.00 Receipt # 450008
X Photocopy of deposit check received
2. Comments (sent to / received from):
3. Staff Report (date / prepared by):
Staff Report in file
4. Published: (date / specify where)
❑ Hearing Notice, if published
5. ALUC Commission Hearing(s):
❑ Agenda
Action taken: E-1 Found to be Consistent ❑ Found to be Inconsistent
Notes/Special Conditions: `
6. Minutes '
CLOSED FILES:
❑ Billed out $
date
❑ Received Check Amount: $ Receipt #
F-1 Sent them Refund or ❑ Check box if County-initiated—"Exempt from, fees"
Pagel of 2
Troester, Steve ,
From: Troester, Steve
Sent: Friday,�Octotier 13; 2006 1:41 PM
To: 'Jim Stevens'
Subject: RE: Oro Bay - ALUC
Jim .
I now have everything I need to take this to ALUC on November 15. It is already conformed that there will be an
ALUC meeting on that day.
Thanks for sending on the information.
Steve
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:08 PM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject: RE: Oro Bay - ALUC
Thanks for the response Steve:
I found the materials I was supposed to fax over to you. I thought I did but apparently did
not. Sorry for any heartburn caused. This time I have scanned the images and included'
them as attachments (my technology meter is definitely in the red zone). These breakdowns
are out of the specific plan fro the project. They are not in the format you proposed, but very
similar. If you need the format you sent me let me know and I will fill it out in time for the
Nov 15 meeting.
-Jim Stevens'PLS
NorthStar Engineering
(530) 893-1600
istevens@northstareng.com
From: Troester, Steve [mailto:Stroester@buttecounty.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 10:00 AM
To: Jim Stevens
Subject: RE: Oro Bay - ALUC
Hi Jim,
On 8-7-06 (11:23 am),I e-mailed Chris Winkle (copy here attached) a blank table (copy here attached) to
be filled in to give us the information needed regarding land uses breakdown on your project so that we
can make the determination of compatibility.
On 8-7-06 (3:00 pm) you called to confirm what was needed to proceed to ALUC. I advised you that
the ALUC Committee may not choose to meet in August due to an inadequate agenda iand indeed that
is what happened). I said that once I had the information requested from Chris Winkle that I could .
proceed.
On 8-15-06 I called Chris Winkle and left a voice message to say that there would be no August ALUC
10/13/2006
Page 2.of 2
meeting. I also -reminded.her to return the completed information table to me so that I could complete
my staff report_ min advance of the September 20 ALUC meeting.
-Once again there was no ALUC meeting this month due to lack of agenda items. The next scheduled
ALUC meeting will be November I5..
I have yet to receive a response from'Chris regarding my August 07 e-mail to her. Given our work loads
on MANY other projects and issues, I am not able to follow up with reminders on these ALUC
applications.
Steve Troester
(538-7153).
From: Jim Stevens[mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Monday, October.,09, 2006 3:57 PM
To: Troester, Steve:
Subject: Oro Bay - ALUC
Good Afternoon Steve:
Has there been any progress on the Oro Bay ALUC hearing. I know that when we last spoke, it was no beg deal,
but the meeting was cancelled due to lack.of other items for hearing. Has a hearing occurred?
Is there one scheduled?
I am meeting my client this week and I know he will be asking.
Thanks,
Jim Stevens PLS "
NorthStar Engineering
(530) 893-1600
jstevens@northstareng.corn -
10/13/2006
Page 1 of 2
Troester, Steve .
From: Jim Stevens Ostevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:08 PM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject: RE: Oro Bay'-.ALUC
Attachments: orobay-summary.tif; orobay-layout.tif
Thanks for the response Steve:
I found the materials I was supposed to fax over to you. I thought I did but apparently did.
not. Sorry for any heartburn caused. This time I have scanned the images and included
them as attachments (my technology meter is definitely in, the red zone).,These, breakdowns
are out of the. specific plan fro the project. They are not in the format you proposed, but. very
similar. If you need the format you sent me let me know and I will fill it out in time for the
Nov 15 meeting:
Jim Stevens:PLS
NorthStar Engineering
(530) 893-1600
jstevens@northstareng. com
From: Troester, Steve[mailto:Stroester@buttecounty.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 10:00 AM
To: Jim Stevens
Subject: RE: Oro Bay - ALUC
Hi Jim,
On 8-7-06 (11:23 am) I e-mailed Chris Winkle (copy here attached) a blank table (copy here attached) .to
be filled in to give us the information needed regarding land uses breakdown on your project so that we .
can make the determination of compatibility.
On 8-7-06 (3:00 pm) you called to confirm what was needed to proceed to ALUC. I advised you that
the ALUC Committee may not choose to meet in August due to an inadequate agenda (and indeed that
is what happened). I said that once I had the information requested from Chris Winkle that I could
proceed.
On 8-15-06 I called Chris Winkle and left a voice message to say that there would be no.August ALUC..
meeting.. I also reminded her to return the completed information table to me so that I could complete
my staff report min advance of the September 20 ALUC meeting.
Once again there was no ALUC meeting this month due to lack of agenda items. The next scheduled
ALUC meeting will be November 15. .
I have yet to receive a response from Chris regarding my August 07 e-mail to her. Given our work loads
on MANY other projects and issues, I am not able to follow up with reminders on these ALUC
applications...
Steve Troester
10/10/2006
Page 2 -of 2
(538-7153)
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Monday; October 09, 2006 3:57 PM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject: Oro Bay - ALUG
Good Afternoon Steve:
Has where been any progress on the Oro Bay ALUC hearing. I know that when we last spoke, it was no beg deal,
but the meeting was cancelled due to lack of other items for hearing. Has a hearing occurred?
Is there one scheduled?
I am meeting my client this' week and I know he will be asking.
Thanks, .
Jim. Stevens PLS'
NorthStar Engineering '
(530) 893-1600
jstevens@northstareng.com
Page 1.0.f 2
Troester, Steve
From:. Troester, Steve
Sent: Tuesday, 'October 10, 2006 10,00 AM
To: 'Jim Stevens` ---
Subject: RE: Oro Bay - ALUC
Attachments: SCN_20061010095747 001.pdf
Hi Jim,
On 8-7-06 (11:23 am)" I e-mailed Chris Winkle (copy here attached) a blank table (copy here attached) to
be filled in to give us the information needed regarding land uses breakdown on your project so that we
cari make the determination of compatibility.
On 8-7-06 (3:00 pm) you called to confirm what was needed to proceed to ALUC. I advised you that
the ALUC Committee may not choose to meet in August due to an inadequate agenda (and indeed that
is what happened). I said that once I had the information requested from Chris Winkle that I could
proceed.
On 8-15-06 I called.Chris Winkle and left a voice message to say that there would be no August ALUC
meeting. I also reminded her to return the completed information table to me so that l could complete
my staff report min advance of the September 20 ALUC meeting.
Once again there was no ALUC meeting this month due to lack of agenda items. The: next scheduled
ALUC meeting will be November 15.
I have yet to receive a response from Chris regarding my August 07 e-mail to her. Given our workloads
on MANY other projects and issues; I am not able to follow up with reminders on these ALUC
applications
Steve Troester
(538-7153)
From: ]i Stevens[mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com] .
Sent: Monday, October 09; 2006' 3:57 PM
To: Troester, Steve ' �-
Subject: Oro Bay - ALUC
Good Afternoon Steve:
Has there been any progress on the Oro Bay ALUC hearing. I know that when we last spoke, 11 was no beg deal,
but the meeting was cancelled due to lack of other items for hearing. Hasa hearing occurred?
Is there one scheduled?
I am meeting my client this week and' I know he will be asking.
Thanks,.
Jim Stevens PLS
10/10/2006
t
Oro Bay Associates Specific Plan (APN: 030-260-053 and 054)
Mixed Land Use Summary:
r
Type Land
Use
Proposed City Approx. Acres Total Dwelling Density
Oroville Units (dwelling
Zoning units/acre
• ti
Land Use Examples:
Parks
Open Space Reserve
Habitat Conservation
Roads
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential,
Schools
Public Facilities\etc.
Examples of Zoning:
PD Planned Unit Development
OS Open Space
R-1 Single Family Residential
Etc.
9
a
n
�•
,
+ � ;' ti Ct' � ,`;. t^ C - �'
i
. .t -
e' � Wit" r
�`
'!�i
77
•
1
HOMES.014 THE RUBE
David Noel (at left) stands before the 421-
„ •
X
r
acre site inhere a Pleasanton developer
,r � . �
j. -
wants to build 2,400 new
lining units. As the
map below shows, the
site is four miles from
downtorrfo Oroville, separated
space the
from it largely
Orouille
by open and
airport
• i
i C.., 4 � IX� �S:u
k ��
o•
a r _
, � x� iy NalSGntAvantia� S+ .. {
� � ,:... r £
� .. •
N � Y
Ar7 k�' x. j, �' Iof �.. 5 'C'- ' k'¢•
•"`
4.
�; `T
��." "ti. �flfWi'BC,�'J��G41dre� c+ �� R = t
,a "'
,F
.,
i ,�c..ril'kyi- ,. -
�
f.
- tel;
� . �
�
� •' �
�. �
!,; � ' •
�
f
rb
Or "11
®
.n til
f,..4 t k
Devel®per pr®poses large urbg I n®tyle zmbdMs1®n' {=
fles from®
9 'C
j 4 i
gust,& ht mdred yaa ds fast the s!t®where
acre "ranchettes," and houses are
case. Interviewed by phone, he said"
David Noel and his wife, Patricia, are,;-
sprinkled sparsely about the rolling
the area is within the city's official
0 4 � ,
> planning to build their.dream home on
countryside, where hawks, snakes and
sphere of influence, waich designates,
,
by a'16 -acre parcel, overlooking the Ther- '
field mice far outnumber people.
land that is expected a ,entually to be_`
.
Robert malito Afterbay; Noel stopped his car ,
- . • The developer is Mission Valley
annexed, so technica119 the land is
:.Speer_.,-. at the end of the gravel road. Ahead of ..
Properties, which is based in Pleasan-,
reserved for urban dev,Iopment
7
roberts� him a hawk circled over an empty
ton. Its plan is to "cluster" the housing
"Today it looks like leapfrog deveN.'
newsrevimcom" " field _several hundred acres in size .' ,;
on approximately 324 acres and reserve
opment," he went on, `.but there's a
f ` .'-"Ihat's where they want to, put
d 9'7 acres for tecreational and public
sewer connection to the Linkside
' photo by 40o houses," he said to his passen-,
uses, including a school site and s park
development a half mire away. The'
Robert , ger. "It's hard to imagine, isn't it?"
'
site. About,5o acres of the open space
area is going to fill in" over the next 15Spee,The
?
Noels.areamong the approxi-,
'mately
.' would be used to conserve wetlands .
to 20 years, he said.
p
4o residents of this rural area
features and for stormwater detention
Linkside is a'small;'yet-to be burl[
four niiles.west of Oroville who are ponds. No land is designated for com-
subdivision adjacent to'the Table # ',
r i
sounding alarms these days about a' -
mercial use. The overall average densi-
Mountain Golf Course, which lies
big urban -style residential develop-..
r woiild be seven homes per acre:
between the project area and the air-
•; .
j men[ that has been proposed for their-
.
port Streets are in, but hrtherdevel-
' neighborhood. It's a classic case of .
It's hardl to argue vwlth the •
opment has halted. The: airport is with
What ions leapfrog development, they insist, and ,
. "leapfrog" charge, if by the term is ,
in city limits, but the. arca surrounding
is this? is entirely inappropriate for the area
meant development that skips over
it remains in the county
Owners of 14 large, The proposal would put up to 2,400
open space. There's.plenty of open ..
The sewer line was rutin primarily
,lots in the Par Fbur residential units,'with a build -out popu-
space between this project and the
to serve the airport. Teielman said he
subdivision would .la6on of about 7,000 people, on 42t .
0
nearest urban area than two
doesn't know whether in.'s large'
+�
see their zoning acres gently undulating land
changed to R-1
miles' worth. In Chico, it would be
enough to serve thousands of new resi
+ i
«
(medium between the Oroville airport and the
like proposing a California Park -style
dents. A study is being cone, he said,
`
AJ , t ,
f
m
residential) under Afterbay. It is part of a larger plan for.
!:subdivision for 7,000 people on 421 . ,
and if the line needs to be upgraded,
the Oro Bay the area known as the Om Bay Specif-
` acres along Keefer Road.
the developer will have .o pay' for it
-
annexation plan; is Plan and Annexation Area Project;.
'Yes, it looks like leapfrog develop-
That goes for Highway 162 as well
'
allowing a potential thatwould•add 7'79 acres, including the
men_ t, said Eric Teitelman, who directs
The nearest stores, not to mention
total of 306 units
on thei_i' combined Noels' parcel, .to the city of Oroville.
� the city of Oroville's Community,..
jobs, are four miles awa+down the
highway,
j
76 acres. Currently. the area is unincorporat- -
Development/Public Works Depart- -
so the two-lane road will
4 t
ed county. land zoned for five= to IS-.
ment, but that's not necessarily" the
•
have to absorb a great deal of traffic in
, �. 1 � ,
..
«
J. f Ohl "
coming years. "We'll be looking at dune t, coos -C T&IR 10
how to' generate a wider highway,"
Teitelman said, adding that the ,
developer will be at least partially
responsible -for the expense.
UBut does It tea® s®ns8, sPhOre
of influence notwithstanding, to
build such a project that far from
town? No, answered Chico Planning
Commissioner Jon Luvaas, who's
studied local planning and develop
ment for three decades. "It's non-
sense," he said. Whether a project is
a leapfrog development "has nothing
to do with jurisdiction. It's about
leaping over open space, rather than
developing incrementally."
The project also potentially has "
significant environmental impacts,
said Barbara Vlamis, director of the
Butte Environmental Council, who
is familiar with the site. "There are
quite a few special -status species in
the area;' she said; noting specifi-
cally the presence of burrowing -
owls, fairy shrimp in vernal pools
and giant garter snakes.
Then there are the drainage prob-
lems. The project proposes to create
three drainage ponds to catch the .
runoff from streets and driveways
and to treat the water before it goes
into the Afterbay, but neighbors are
skeptical. The developers of Link -
side created such a pond—without
permits, incidentally—and it over-
flowed this winter, they point out
The annexation must go before
the Local Agency Formation Com-
mission for approval before it is
considered by the city. On a parallel
track, the city has commissioned an,
environmental -impact report for the
City Council to consider.
Residents of the area, who
bought their lots believing the coun-
ty's rural -density zoning would con-
tinue to.apply, are gearing up to
contest it in every venue. "We all
built to a set of rules according -to
the county," said Jim Murray, who
lives on Par Four Road, next to the
proposed site. "Now it's as if riles
don't matter."
Page 1.6f 2
Troester; Steve
From:. Troester, Steve
Sent: Wednesday July 26, 2006 1:17 PM
To: 'Chris Winkle'
Subject: RE: RE: Eldorado Mobile Estates
Chris,
I intend to agendize this project.for ALLIC determination at their August 16 meeting. If you call me on Tuesday .
August 8.1 should have a staff report ready that I can pass -on to you.
Steve Troester (538-7153)
From: Chris Winkle[mailto:cwinkle@northstareng.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 11:46 AM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject: FW: RE: Eldorado Mobile Estates
Hi Steve, just curious -if you've had a chance to review this and give me an update. You may have
responded.but my computer wasn't saving emails at that time, It could have been lost in space:. thanks
for any input you "might have....
Chris
Chris Winkle
jr. Technician
Northstar Engineering
PH: 530-893-1600 ext 237
Fax:.5 30-893-21 13
From: Chris Winkle
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 2:35 PM
To: 'stroester@buttecounty.net'
Subject: RE: "Eldorado Mobile Estates -
HI Steve,
Not sure if you remember me I talked to you a bit when you were over in Orland regarding the South
Street Project for Dr. Ross Tye, I.worked.for Land's End Real Estate„ well it looks like_we've both.moved
on hope yours was as. good of a move as mine... any way,,, Nicole Ledford asked if I you.-.
regarding the Eldorado Mobile Estates project she has been working on,, apparently one of HCD's
requirements is to have the county departments associated with the project sign off on their
Mobilehome or Recreational Park Government Agency Approval Sheet, before they can grant their.
blessing. Nicole explained that you were the first one that needs to sign off and that you are aware of .
07/26/2006
Page Lof 1
Troester; Steve
From: Troester, Steve
Sent: Friday; — 23, 2006 8:56 AM
To: 'Jim Stevens' .
Subject: RE: ALUG
Jim,
Unfortunately, overall work loads prevented Mark & I from bringing any "project" determinations to ALUC in June.
We hope to get these done at the July meeting.
Steve
From: Michelena, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:27 PM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject; FW: ALUC.
Steve,
I believe this is one of your ALUC files. Hopefully it can make the July 19th meeting
ITIFTO
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 1:46 PM
To: Michelena, Mark
Subject:. ALUC
Mark:
I saw the agenda for yesterday's ALUC'meeting and noticed that the Oro Bay consistency hearing did not make,
the agenda. Is there something else needed? I had remembered you told me that it would be on for the June 21st
meeting, We submitted it in March. Can you give me a call or email?
Thanks,
Jim Stevens PLS
NorthStar Engineering
: (530) 893-1600
istevens@no'rthstaren.e.com
06/23/2006
r Page l .of l
Troester, Steve
From: Troester, Steve
Sent: Friday, July 07; 2006 1:27 PM
To: 'Jim Stevens' .
Cc: Thistlethwaite, Charles.
Subject: Oro -Bay ALUC Determination
Dear Mr. Stevens,
I had targeted to take your Oro Bay project in Thermalito to the ALUC for a consistency determination at the July
19 meeting. Unfortunately,�my work load does not permit me to meet the deadline for distribution of that project to
the.ALUC committee for the July 19 meeting. I apologize for this delay.
I did call and verify with Jake at the City of Oroville Planning Department that this ALUC determination is not
holding up their processing of the Specific Plan and Annexation applications, nor the accompanying
environmental review process. We will work to have this project ready for ALUC review at the August 16
meeting.
I will be on leave form July 10-18: Should you have any questions or require additional information during that.
time, please contact Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager (538-6572).
Steve Troester, Associate Planner
07/07/2006
------------
7
-i`
�5
v
1
7-77
+� r r • t • ►
- t .➢� Page 1 of 2 ; a.
�'
�
•� .. 3 kit°� .. . f '� •
Troester; Steve
. , .. � ,
;
` From: Troester,,Steve^
;Sent: ':Tuesday; May 09, 2006 2:30; PM
To: 'Jim Stevens'
'..
Subject-1Oro Bay ALUC -
. .:Hi ' tz: - ..
-
.•
Jim, • ,
_ .
.
_ As I reponded tro you on April 24:
.. "this application was submitted April 13, but was not assigned until April 19. Given our Department
workloads and backlogs I will not be able to get this before ALUC until
June 21. Good news is that we'
have two new associate planner starting very soon. This will help to reduce our backlogs and spread the; l
workload.
Please call should you have any questions or need additional info."
f
,
Steve (538-7153)
, _+
As I responded to you on
From: Jim Stevens[mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
a .
Sent: Tuesday, May 0.9, 2006`1:13 PM
-"
k
To: Michelena, Mark.
a
Subject: ALUC
.,,+
jt
a
I.
•. .'�.$*
Mark: .. , ��,� , ,,
Has anything been scheduled for the Oro Bay ALUC hearing?
Thanks,
Jim Stevens PLS
NorthStar Engineering
t
,
(530)'893-1600
_7st.evens@no'rthstare.ng.com
Good morning Jim,
This application was submitted April 13, but was not assigned until April 19.
Given our Department workloads
and backlogs I will not be able to get this before ALUC until June 21. Good news is that we have two new ;
associate planner starting very soon. This will help to reduce our backlogs and spread the workload. '
+
Please call should you�°.have•any.questions or need additional info.
`. •;.
05/09/2006.
Page l .of 1
Troester, Steve
From: Troester, Steve
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 8:06 AM
To: 'Jim Stevens'
Subject: RE: Oro Bay ALUC Request
Good morning Jim,
This application was submitted April 13, but was not assigned until April 19. Given our Department workloads
and backlogs I will not be able to get this before ALUC until June 21. Good news is that we have two new
associate planner starting very soon. This will help to reduce our backlogs and spread the workload.
Please call should you have any questions or need additional info.
Steve (538-7153)
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 10:51 AM
To: Troester, Steve
Subject: Oro Bay ALUC Request
Good Morning Steve;
I see you have drawn the short straw on the ALUC request for Oro Bay. Do you have any feeling for timing for
the ALUC hearing?
Jim Stevens PLS
NorthStar Engineering
(530) 893-1600
istevens@northstareng.com.
05/09/2006
Page 1,10 3
Troester, Steve
From: Michelena, Mark
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006'10:20 AM
To: -'Jim Stevens' ''
Cc: Troester, Steve
Subject: RE: Project Status,
Jim,
The ALUC application for the Oro Bay project�was received and has.been assigned to Steve Troester. You can
reach him by email at stroester(a-buttecounty.net.
Thanks.
Mark Michelena, Senior Planner
Butte County Department of Development Services
Planning Division
7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965
530-538-7376, FAX: 530-538-7785
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 10:10 AM
To: Michelena, Mark
Subject: RE: Project Status
Thanks Mark:-
On
ark:On another project, did you receive the ALUC application for the Oro Bay p-oject and was it
sufficient?
Jim Ste.vens'PLS
NorthStar Engineering.
(530) 893-1600
istevens@northstareng.com
From: Michelena, Mark [mailto:MMichelena@buttecounty.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 11:55 AM
To: Jim Stevens
Subject: RE: Project Status
Jim;
Thank you for the reminder. At the time I emailed my "Top 10" list to John about three wee<s ago, I have had
items that have come up that have delayed that list. I have been able to complete the repot, but I'm working on
the resolution and conditions (which should be completed by Friday 4/21/06). Once the dreft is completed it will
go to the Planning Manager for review (3 to 5 days). Revisions are made, if necessary, and it is then sent to
County Counsel for review. I will be sending it to you for review of the .conditions to make sure everything is okay
before'scheduling. My anticipated date will be May 25, 2006.
Thanks
04/20/2006
From: Jim Stevens [mailto:jstevens@northstareng.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 11:14 AM
To: Michelena, Mark
Subject: Project Status
t
Mark: .
John forwarded this to me about three weeks ago. I was wondering the status of the Brown
TSM 05-13. Mn Brown is coming in this afternoon and I was wondering if you could update
me as to the,status of the project.
Thanks,
Jim Stevens PLS
NorthStar Engineering
(530) 893-1600 '
istevens@northstareng.com
John,
I have been out a couple days the past week. Here is the order of the top ten projects I'm working on: as you can
see, the Brown's TSM is second on my list. I should be completing the draft report next week.
1. Handi-Riders UP 05-06 - Initial Study
2. Brown TSM 05-13 - Staff Report
3. 3 Airport Land Use Projects - Staff Reports
4. Smith TPM 05-22 - Initial Study
5. Bennett TPM 06-01 - Initial Study
6. Hayes TSM 03-02 - Initial Study
7. Plummer UP 06-02 -.Initial Study
• 8. NVBS - Rezone 05-01 - Initial Study
9. Taggart TSM 04-04 - Staff Report
10. Nelson TPM 06-05 - Initial Study
... with an additonal 29 projects after that. Also, due to a shortage of staff, project planners have been assisting
with phone calls, counter help and building and septic reviews.'
I understand that they are anxious and have been waiting for several months. I'm working as best as. I can to
move projects through the process. I will give updates as things change.
If you can contact the Browns it would be helpful. Thank you.
Sincerely;
Mark Mich elena, Senior Planner
Butte County Department of Development Services
Planning Division
7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965
530-538-7376, FAX: 530-538-7785
From: John Hanley[mailto:jhanley@northstareng.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30; 2006 7:29 AM'
04/20/2006
t
NORTHS TAR ENGINEERING
ENGINEERS — PLANNERS - SURVEYORS
TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO: FROM
Mark Mlchelena Jim Stevens
COMPANY: DATE:
COUNTY OF BI-= 403-06
ADDRESS: JOB NUMBER -
7 County Center Drive
TRANSMITTING THE FOLLOWING:
Oroville, CA 95965 Application package
PROJECT:
Oro Bay- ALUC
❑ FORAPPROVAL ❑ FOR INFO. ❑ FORCHECKING X FORPROCRSSING ❑ FORYOUR-FM
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Mark-
�.
Here is the application and fee for the review. Please let me know when it can be
scheduled.
Thanks,
20 DECLARATION DRIVE
CHICO, CALIFORNIA
TELEPHONE (530) 893-1600'FAX (530) 893-2113
. a
Jan 31 06 11z34a ev Svcs 6 Env Health 8-7705
P.2-
Bu
.2 .
BYJTTF3 COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE C;OIVZMIS S Z = _-- _ _
ON ALUC ..
7•CUUN'cY XM RDRI:V) OROVIGL�,.(;q.95965..
95965 Indc-ntific.ttion No.
APPLICATION FOR - Q. Fi�lIjlNs
•..�.,x,�. i mmmvj- (TO BE COMPLETED i3Y APPLI(:ANT1
77
Date of Application
Property Owner:Vk? Fes- Phone
Number;
Muiling Addrem 6600 50►Tr: (7D -'
PL -giro ; CA
Agent(ifany): NorthStar Engineering PhancNurnl>� ...
(530) •393-1600
Mailing Address:. .� { . � 1
Ranch Blvd. Suite 100 Chico, CA 95926
---
—`
PItUJECI' IX)CATI.ON - (TQ BE COMPLETED L3Y'APPL1(.AiVT)
curatel c l� ma x .ihowln .the rclatzonshi o this o cct site [babe
i'x�ctr.�ury curd runwa
Address. W (L-P-A)g . facp RT
ts-r�T_ HSI
I (OZ
AS,c;.S�r"s-parcel No. 030 — Z(pO Or.�3 w.J 2c --.
Pam i Size
Subdivision Name:�O(
Zoning:.��
�� �� ���f✓ 7Ttx7
Jan 31 06. 11 t 34a
Sev Svcs & Env Health 538-778=5 `
i'ROACT ll�:SCRI p1'ION (too Sp: cotvt� - _
ETED BY AP.PI,ICANT) —
w upplic:ablc at[«ch a �le�tcrilod silex plan showing ground c:l��►utivrrs, the lckvrtio» ofstrrechcres o 'n e
i,�atur hcadicr�; and thr. he'!9 - ufslruC urc�s and tree; inhale adrlitional rojcre:[ �1�reri rtiun crrr[v !n .paces, and
_��
Iixisting l.arxi Use _____,i< rrs rrc�edcd
(describe) '_Vacant'1
Proposed laud IJsc - -- - -
(describe) FpgEplt%t--�
For Residential Uses: Number of Parcels of UniLs on Site -(inc-`ludin
g secondary units) _.. .
Fur Other Land Use.,;: hours cf Use:
Maximum number of people on site:
Indicate the method used to determine this nttnt Church mentbh; ,number
P of )arkME spaces, etc.)
1 icit;ht Data: }leighl above Ground of Tallest Object (including antennas & trc .) 50 ft
— ft•
Hig1h� Elevation (above sea level) ofAny Object or Terrain on Site
Might hazards: Do.ilte project involve any caracteristics which could create E -
interfetenec, confusin lights, lectricat
$ ghts,.glart smoke or other Electrical or visual hazares
to aircraft flight?
'Yes U No
Dow the project have the potential for attracting birds?
If yes to either, czplain below: A -Yes U No
vt r� u�` v�VEc.p�ME�'T
OF,WILL fj&: I
a�J
I
Jan 31 06 11334a ev Svcs !. Env Health
56-7785 P.4
R1 F!<IRRIN( AGENCY (To ` j; ,fEri BxnC:
ENCY STAFF) ..
Date Received b(p _
/agency Name U
L I General Plan A Mcndment
U Zoning Amend.Varianco,Rczone
Staff Contact Subdivision Approval.
F1 Use Permit
Pl��ne Number ��'—� 3 2l,0 1.1 Public Facility
. n Othcr.
Agency's. Project No.
l}�i"4..,Z��''°' ,..''°!est: "��-'y'� '� �'%.L '� � j � � �$ � + �i `•c ^'�., � .,� �'.
_
� �^�t'��i�'�y. ��
.T1""'^'.
� �Y'.�l\ � r.6, i',r .rG` 2 f �y � (!L ♦
�W' .� l � � ♦�� t � KAT' ,
-,"N.
• ,4.
..
'�� i
Y�d',��
v` �;:�. � ��M',n.
,. •
� rj�'w 7 !'"`'ice` }' r . "� of
r ?n5'�e�-�.i�.d<..�P�'•,.-s:•_,v,� J�"�,' �.�: rL 'lt �: �• t " '�` j Y
.-- -c.ac_� i
• 0
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TO: RESPONSIBLE, REVIEWING AND INTERESTED AGENCIES
FROM: CITY OF OROVILLE
I. PROJECT TITLE
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
II. PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Oroville will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for the proposed Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project, which i3 located west of
the current boundary of the City of Oroville .in Butte County. The project site is south of Oro Dam
Boulevard West (State Route (SR) 162), east: of Wilbur Road, and west of Table Mountain Golf
Course & Oroville Municipal Airport.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project includes:
1. Annexation to the City of Oroville of the Oro Bay Specific Plan site and adjoining properties east
and south of that site, for total annexation area of approximately 779 acres.
2. General Plan Amendment, Pre -zoning, Specific Plan, and Development Ag-eement for 421
acres.
3. General Plan Amendment and Pre -zoning for the northern 76.6 acres of the Par Four Way
subdivision and northern 73 acres of the proposed Linkside Place Phase III subdivision.
4. Amend the City of Oroville Zoning Code to create a new zone designation called "Oro Bay
Specific Plan".
This Notice of Preparation (NOP) has been prepared to solicit comments from interested agencies
as to the scope and content of the environmental. information that is germane to your agency's
statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. The agency will meed to use the
EIR prepared by the City when considering permits or other approvals for the project.
The project description, location- map and discussion of probable environmental effects are
provided in the attached Initial Study ® is / ❑ is not attached. The Initial Stud- is available for
review at the City of Oroville Planning Department at the address listed below.
Because of the time limits mandated by State law, responses to this NOP must be seat at the earliest
possible date, but no later than 30 days from the date of this notice, April 27, 2006. Please send
written responses to Jo Sherman, Planning Manager for the City of Oroville, 17-35 Montgomery
Street, Oroville California, 95965. The City of Oroville will conduct a public meeting to obtain
comments about the environmental issues to be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report to
be prepared for the Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Project. The scoping meeting will be
held on April 13, 2006 at 1:b0 p.m. at the City of Oroville Council Chambers at 1735 Montgomery,
Street, Oroville California, 95965. For more information, please contact Jo Sherman, Planning
Manager -at (530) 538-2430, or visit the City of'Oroville's website at www.cityoforovill'a.org.
V. PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Based upon the findings and conclusions of the Initial Study, the following subject areas have been
identified as having the potential for Potentially. Significant' Impacts as a result of the
implementation of the proposed project. A detailed discussion of each of the potential impacts
identified within the Initial Study has been provided for each subject area.
■ Aesthetics - changes in scenic views, loss of wetlands and other scenic resources,
introduction of new light and glare sources.
■ Agriculture Resources - the change in zoning from an agricultural designation to an urban
use would not permit future agricultural pursuits.
■ _ Air Quality - increased emissions of pollutants from traffic, temporary increase in dust
emissions from construction activities.
■ Biological Resources - impacts on wetlands and wildlife, including impacts to habitat of
listed species and species of concern.
■ Cultural Resources - impacts on existing historic structures and potential archaeological
sites.
■ Geology and Soils - impacts on geology and soils related to alternative wastewater.systems
in the annexation areas.
■ Hazards and Hazardous Materials - potential use of hazardous materials by past agricultural
activities; within close proximity of Oroville Municipal Airport.
■ Hydrology and Water Quality - erosion from construction activities, drainage. collection,
contaminated runoff, and within dam inundation area.
• Land Use Planning - 'the change in development type and intensity from an
agricultural/rural residential to a mixed use.
■ Noise - noise. from land use activities and traffic.
• Population and Housing - population growth in currently vacant area.
■ Public Services - impacts on fire, police, and school services.
Recreation - increased use of existing recreational facilities and the need for additional
facilities.
Transportation/Traffic - increase in traffic on existing roadways; potential decline in level of
service on roadways and intersections, lack of capacity of existing roads.
■ Utilities and Service Systems - impacts on water, wastewater and drainage systems.
■ Cumulative impacts on environment.
The project was determined to have little or no impact on the following subject areas:
• Mineral Resources - there are no known significant deposits of mineral resources within the
project site.
Date March 27 2006 Signature
Title 'planning Manager
Telephone (530) 538-2430
INITIAL STUDY- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
I. BACKGROUND
1. Project Title:
2. Name and Address of Project
Applicant:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
3. Lead Agency and Contact Person:
4. Type of Project:
5. General Plan Designation:
6. Zoning:
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
Mission Valley Properties
5000 Hopyard Road, Suite, 170
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Chris Hawk (925) 467-9900
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Jo Sherman, Planning Manager
(530) 538-2430
1. Annexation to the City of Oroville G- the Oro Bay
Specific Plan site and adjoining properties east
and south of that site, for total annexation area
of approximately 779 acres
2. General Plan Amendment, Pre -zoning, Specific,
Plan, and Development Agreemen -for 421 acres
3. General Plan Amendment and Pre -zoning for the
northern 76.6 acres of the Par Four. Way
subdivision and northern 73 acres o -v the
proposed Linkside Place Phase III subdivision
4. Amend City of Oroville's Zoning Coale to create a
new zone designation called "Oro Eay Specific
Plan"
Butte County General Plan designation is Agricultural
Residential. City of Oroville's General Pian Diagram
designation is Resource Management. [he project
includes a request to amend the City's General Plan
Diagram designation to Medium and High Density
Residential, with some Public and Open Space.
Butte County Zoning designation and City. of Oroville
Pre -zoning designation are both Agricultural
Residential 5 and 10 -acre minimum (AR-5/AR-10).
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March 2006 Page I
City of Oroville.
Initial Study .
N
' The project includes a request to amend the City's
?,
•
Pre -zoning to Medium Density Residential, and
•
Specific Plan for Mixed Density Residential,' Open
i Space, and Public Uses.
}
•
7.. -Project Location: Properties located south of Oro Dam Boulevard West
•
(State Route (SR) 162), east of Wilbur Road, and west.
';
•
• , of Table Mountain Golf Course & Oroville Municipal
•
' Airport (see Figure 1). r'
•
• -8.: Assessor's" Parcel Numbers: 1.. Oro Bay Specific Plan 030-260-053 and •054 , (421
1:
I, acres) _
f 2. Par Four Way_ subdivision, 030-51'0-020; 019;018,
017, 016, 015, 014, 013, 012; 011, 010, 009; 008, 007,
' 006, 005, 004, 003, 002, and 0001 acres)
' 3. Linkside Place Phase Ill proposed subdivision 030-
,
ti 260-025, 019, and 018 (1 15 acres) _
•
4.' •030-290-0432 042; 041,064, 044, 045,.0�El ,land 0.7-
(91 acres)
•
9. Surrounding,Land'Use_s and. Settings•. , North - SR 162 and Rural Residential beyond
•
South - the Thermalito Afterbay, owned by the
California Department of Water Resources
r
` East -Table Mountain Golf Course & Oroville
Municipal Airport
y
•
. West - Wilbur Road and rural residential
".
10. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
-' The environmental factors 'checked below could be potentially affected by this project,
"Less
•
•involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or Than Significant
With Mitigation Incorporated". as indicated by the environmental checklist in this document.
® Aesthetics ® Hazards/Hazardous Materials ® Public Services
® Agricultural Resources ; ® Hyarology/Water Quality ® Recreation
® Air Quality ® Land Use/Planning ® Transportation/Circulation
® Biological Resources-, ❑ Mineral Resources ® Utilities/Service Systems
�'
•
® Cultural Resources _f ® -Noise ® Mandatory Findings of Significance
".,
•
® Geology and Soils ® Population and Housing
•
11. Other Interested Public Agencies and Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required:
•
Responsible Agencies:
4
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project #, _ City of Oroville
'
March 2006 Page.2 Initial Study
}
•
Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo): Review and approval of
annexation of the area to the City of Oroville, and possible annexation of portions of the area to
the Thermalito Irrigation District and Feather River Recreation and Park District.
Permitting Agencies: `
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG): Streambed Alteration Agreement will outline
conditions for construction and operations of the proposed project (Sections 16-01 and 1603 of
the Fish and Game Code). Additionally, CDFG will review the environmental document for
matters pertaining to fish and wildlife resources.
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB): Waste Discharge Permit, Nadional Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP),
and Water Quality Certification or Waiver, under Sections 401 and 402 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA):
U.S Army Corps of Engineers: Review and approval of any improvements involving fill of
wetlands, through a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): Section 7 and Section 10 Endangered Species
Act Consultation for any federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species were observed
on the project site.
Advisory Agencies:
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC): Review and approval of the proposed
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for consistency with the 2000 Butte County Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (as amended).
Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD): Compliance with indirect Source
Review Guidelines.
Butte County: Review of the implications of the proposed project on County infpastructure and
services.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans): Review and approval of any improvements "
involving State highways.
California Department of Water Resources (DWR): Per California Code 664551, the City of
Oroville Planning Department notified DWR of the proposed Oro Bay Specific Plan and
Annexation Project as it is located. within one mile of State Water Project facilities. The project
will require review from the Department of Water Resources in order to ensure that. the
Thermalito Afterbay, a State Water Project facility, is adequately protected during) construction.
Service Provider Approval:
Sewerage Commission Orovijle Region (SC -OR): SC -OR is governed by a thr=e party Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA) to which the City of Oroville, Thermalito Irrigation District and the Lake
Oroville Area Public Utility District are the sole parties. The three sewer service providers collect
wastewater and convey it to the wastewater treatment facility, owned and operated by the
Sewerage Commission-Oroville Region. Consent is required to annex to the Commission.
Thermolito Irrigation District: Consent to provide water service to the Project
Feather River Recreation and Parks District. Consent to annex to the District.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of.Oroville
March 2006 Page 3 Initial Study
II. . PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed Oro Bay Specific Plan area is located west of the current boundary of the City of
Oroville in Butte County. Located in the southeastern portion of Butte County, the City of
Oroville is the County seat. Oroville is approximately 25 miles southeast of the City of Chico, 15
miles south of the Town of Paradise and 70 miles north .of Sacramento. The proposed Specific
Plan project area occupies the southeast corner of the intersection of Oro Dam Boulevard West
(SR 162, having approximately 3,200 lineal feet of frontage) and Wilbur Road (having
approximately 4,930 lineal feet of frontage, see Figure 1).
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Existing development on-site consists of fencing .and cross -fencing and an abandoned farm
compound located approximately 1000 feet from SR 162. The developed area includes a
vacant single -story farmhouse, an agricultural well, an irrigation piping system, a detention pond,
a chicken coop, and an empty out -building. Figure 3 shows an aerial view of the Oro Bay
project and surrounding land uses.
The 152 -acre, 20 -lot Par Four Way subdivision, previously approved by Butte County, abuts the
eastern boundary of the Specific Plan site. The 14 lots closest to SR 162 are less than 10 acres in.
area, while the 6 lots at the southern end (which extends over a mile south of SR 162) are
between 10 and 20 acres in area. As of December 2005, seven of the 20 lots have been
improved with single-family homes. The Linkside Place Phase 1 and 2 subdivisions abut the
northeastern boundary of the Par Four Way subdivision. The City of Oroville approved the
Linkside subdivisions to create 124 new lots for single-family homes from 38 acres located in the
City. There are 115 acres of land south of the Linkside Place subdivisions and abutting the
southeastern boundary of the Par Four Way subdivision. The 115 acres is not currently within City
Limits.
Much of the 160 -acre block of land located on the southwest corner of the intersection of SR 162
and Wilbur Road was previously subdivided into fourteen 10 -acre lots (more or less). This
subdivision has approximately 3,100 lineal feet of frontage on Wilbur Road. As of December
2005, seven of these lots in the High Sierra Estates subdivision have been improved with single-
family homes, but the lot on the corner itself remains undeveloped. Two additional residential
lots abut the western boundary of this subdivision, and 4 more abut the southwestern boundary.
An additional 6 residential lots ranging from 10 to 15 acres in size surround a 95 -acre parcel, the
northerly half of which abuts Wilbur Road immediately south of the High Sierra Estates subdivision.
Almost all of the properties on the north side of SR 162 and west of the Linkside Place subdivision
are larger than 60 acres in size, except that there is one lot of approximately 10 acres on both
the east and the west side of Wilbur Road. A single-family home occupies the lot on. the
northwest corner of the intersection of SR 162 and Wilbur Road. No development has occurred
on the lots on the other three corners of the intersection (the Specific Plan area occupies the
southeast corner, and the High Sierra Estates subdivision occupies the northwest corner). North
of the Linkside Place subdivision, the unincorporated area has been divided into a mixture of
small (2.5 -acres) and large (60 acres or more) lots.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project has two necessary components; the first is an application for the Oro Bay Specific
Plan, which includes a request for an amendment to the City's General Plan Diagram, and Pre -
zoning to allow a mix of various residential densities and housing types combined with various
public uses on the 421 -acre Specific Plan area. Since the Specific Plan area is not within or
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 4 Initial Study
contiguous to .the City limits, 'the second component of this. project is annexation of the Specific
Plan area and thirty-one parcels east and southeast of the Specific Plan arec (see Figure 2). -
Currently, all of these properties, including the Specific Plan area, are located within the City of
• Oroville's Sphere of Influence. The additional parcels proposed for annexation cre not included
• in the Oro Bay Specific Plan boundaries. However, an .amendment to the City's General Plan
Diagram and Pre -zoning designation is also proposed for some of these parcels, in the manner. -
described below.,.'
The City of Oroville's current .General Plan Diagram designation for the entire area west of City
• Limits is Resource,Management,.and the current Pre -zoning designation is AgricuPtural Residential
• 5 acre and 10 acre minimums. Additionally, a portion of the annexation project area is locate ,
wrthiri the Airport Influence Area (AIA)"61-""62 "C" and "D" Zones: -'The densit} designation for
the -'B-1 "=zor e—is-a-maximum of 2•homes per acre' and the •"B-2" zone allows for a maximum.of 4 ,,
• homes per acre.;, Properties within the "C',vzone muO,,either be'developed4o a' iinimurr-density'�'r'`'
• of 4'ho s,per�acre,,(urban density) or,1. home per five acres (rugal density): The=`D'�kzorie is less `
restrictive, h the "C"Tzone and:does not have density requirements:
-
• The following is ci summary of the components of this proposed Oro Bay Sp�)cific Plan and
Annexation Area Project `and are subject to City of Oroville Discretionary Action. -These elements'
are described below in further detail: '
d
Oro Bay Specific Plan: Y
• 1: Annexation of the 421 acre Specific Plan area to the City of Oroville..,
• 2. +General Plan• Diagram Amendment to change land use designations from Resource
. Management (1 residential .unit with density range of 5 to 40 acre mirimums) to High
Density Residential (6 to 20 dwelling units per acre), on 33 acres.
3. -General Plan Diagram Amendment to change land use designations from Resource
j Management to Medium Density Residential (2 to 6 dwellings per acre) on 291 acres.
• * 4. General Plan Diagram designation of Resource Management on 97 acre!.
5.. n Prezone from Agricultural Residential .5 or 10 acre minimum to Specific Plan, for Mixed
• Density Residential; Open Space, and Public Uses on 421 acres.
4 ,
6. Conceptual Specific Plan approval to develop 421 acres into Residenti-:11, Recreational f ,
and Public uses, and Roads. r >'
• 7. .Development Agreement related to the Specific Plan area. ;
• Interim Land Annexation: - '
•
8.' Annexation of 358 acres of land, adjacent to the Oro Bay Specific Plan to the east and"
• west of the current City limits, to the City of Oroville.
9. General Plan Diagram Amendment to change land use designations from Resource r
Management to Medium Density Residential on 76.6 acres of the Par Four subdivision, 1
• and 73 acres of the proposed Linkside Place Phase III subdivision. t
10. General Plan Diagram designation of Resource Management on 208.4 acres.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
• March 2006. Page 5 Initial Study, `
•
11. Prezone from Agricultural Residential 5 acre minimum to Single Family Residential (R-1) on
76.6 acres of the Par Four subdivision and 73 acres on the proposed Linkside Place Phase
III subdivision.
12. Prezone 208.4 acres to Agricultural Residential 5 and 10 acre minimums.
Oro Bay Specific Plan:
The Oro Bay project proposes three primary types of land uses over a total of 421 acres:
Residential, Parks and Open Space, and Public (for a School). These three main designations
have been further divided into subcategories to design a community that combines mixed -
density residential, recreational, and educational uses. One access to the Specific Plan area will
be provided from SR 162, and two additional accesses will be provided from Wilbur Road.
If the entire Oro Bay project site were designated for single-family homes at a density of 6 homes
per acre, 2,526 homes could be constructed in the 421 -acre area. However, the Specific Plan
for the Oro Bay project site proposes to "cluster" development of up to 2,400 homes on
approximately 324 acres, with 97 acres being reserved and designated for recreational and
public uses. The southerly 50 acres of .the site would be designated as Open Space for
conservation of wetland features and development of stormwater detention facilities. Another
10 acres would be similarly designated to protect an existing seasonal stream that bisects the
project site from east to west, as would two vernal pools located adjacent to Oro Dam
Boulevard. Additionally, approximately 20 acres of the site would be designated as Park for
development of a Neighborhood Park, Pocket Park, Linear Parks, and an Activity Spine. From 10
to 20 acres of land would be designated Public for 'future development of a school.
Development of the site would occur as 19 "pods," with one of the pods being reserved for a
school site and the southerly pod of 60 acres being designated Open Space. Housing densities
within each of the remaining 17 pods would be relatively uniform, ranging from a minimum of 3
homes per acre to a maximum of 22 homes per acre. Higher density development could be
reduced or moved from one proposed pod to another depending upon market demand, as
long as the total number of homes within the site does not exceed 2,400 homes and the entire
site is developed to at least 3 homes per acre. The average density within the AIA "C" zone
would be at least 4 homes per acre, and the average overall density for the entire project site
would be 7 homes per acre. Figure 4 illustrates the proposed organization of land. uses.
To achieve the density and mix of development proposed for the Specific Plan, Oroville's
General Plan Diagram designation of 33 acres of the project site would be amended to High
Density Residential (maximum density 20 homes per acre) and 291 acres would be designated
Medium Density Residential (maximum density 6 homes per acre), with the remaining 97 acres of
the project site to be designated as Resource Management for Open Space, Park, and Public
uses as described above. The Pre -zoning of the entire Specific Plan area would be amended to
Specific Plan for Mixed Density Residential, Open Space, and Public Uses.
At the current land use designations; the maximum project build -out would be approximately 70
dwelling units. The -Specific Plan proposes land use changes that would allow for a maximum
project build -out of 2,400 dwelling units, which is an increase of 2,330 dwelling units.
Interim Land Annexation:
Between the existing City,Limits and the Oro Bay Specific Plan area, are 31 additional properties
that will need to be annexed in order to not create an island of County land within City
boundaries. These 31 properties include all lands located south of SR 162 and east of the Oro
Bay Specific Plan area, except properties owned by the Department of Water Resources. These
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 6 Initial Study
properties include the previously approved 152 -acre; 20 -lot Par Four subdivision adjacent to and
east of the Oro Bay Specific Plan area. East of the Par Four subdivision is the Linkside Place
Phase III proposed subdivision, which consists of 3 parcels totaling 115 -acres. There are
approximately eight additional properties totaling 91 acres that will be part of the annexation
project, these properties are located southeast of the Specific Plan area and adjacent to the
Thermalito Afterbay.
The City of Oroville proposes to amend the General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning designations
for the northern 76.6 acres of the Par Four subdivision and the northern 73 acres of the proposed
Linkside Place Phase III subdivision, in order to reflect potential urbanization of the area between
the previously approved Linkside Place Phase I and II subdivision and the proposed Oro Bay
project as infrastructure is extended westward. The General Plan Diagram designation of the
northern -most fourteen lots of the Par Four subdivision, 76.6 acres, and the northern 73 acres of
the proposed Linkside Place III subdivision would be amended from Resource Management to
Medium Density Residential (which allows a maximum density of 6 homes per acre), and the Pre -
zoning would be amended from Agricultural Residential 5 acre minimums to Residential Single
Family (R-1., also allows a maximum density of 6 dwelling units per acre).
The proposed amendments to current land use designations would increase the current
potential development of the Par Four subdivision from 22 homes (2 of the existing lots could be
subdivided to create 1 additional lot each) to 314 homes, if full build -out were to occur. In
accordance with Table 3.10-A of Oroville's General Plan, a maximum estimated build -out
density of 4 homes per acre has been used for calculating potential density for this previously
subdivided and partially developed area.
If the proposed Linkside Place Phase III subdivision, proposed for a land use designation that
would allow a maximum density of 6 homes per acre on 73 acres of the 115 -acre site, a total of
438 homes could potentially be constructed. However, the preliminary project application
proposes to develop a maximum of 341 homes on approximately 78 acres, 5 acres of which
being reserved and designated for recreational uses. The remaining 37 acres of the site to be
designated as Resource Management and zoned as Open Space, which would not allow any
development.
The remaining 208.4 acres that are included within the annexation area will have a General Plan
Diagram designation of Resource Management and a Pre -zoning designation of Agricultural
Residential 5 and 10 acre (AR -5 and AR -10).
Public Facilities and Services
The following are the public utilities and public services required to serve the Oro Bay Specific
Plan area including sewer, water, storm drain, gas, electricity and solid waste. Public services
include police and fire protection.
• Domestic Water will be provided to the project site by the Thermalito Irrigation District
(TID), which will require the developer to apply to expand the TID boundary and annex
into the District. Water service for the Specific Plan area may require the construction of
an on-site well, and/or extension or upgrade of existing District -owned water lines.
• Sanitary Sewer will also be served to the project site by the TID upon annexation of the
area to the District. Construction of a lift -station and pressure sewer may be required for
portions of the site, and construction of off-site infrastructure will be required to connect
to existing District infrastructure. Upgrades to SC -OR's two lift stations on Oro Dam
Boulevard West may also be required.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 7 Initial Study
Storm
Water will be detained 'in three separate :drainage systems :fior purposes of::
4 maintairnng;tte`pre=development'peak rate of discharge during ;all storm events to and
f
F including; a :100-year ti,'Oh, the northerly, boundary the site slopes in a northerly
direction" and runoff will :be discharged into the existing culverts under Oro Dam
# ` Boulevard West. The'centraf.porfign,of the site 'will drain into an'existJng drainage swale,. •
1 which flows northeasterly_ to southwesterly across the site and will be treated and
` detainedloff-stream prior to discharge tothe channel: In the southem portion'of the site,
..
a detention pond fdcility will be constructed within th. e praposed60=acr.'e environmental
conservationarea.
1
Gas and".Electnc�tV will by�provlded by Paafic Gas and Electric (PG&E),, through gas and
>z electricity transmission hnes'construcfed underground within public right;of-ways or public;
.. utilityleasemerfs These facilrities dre available,at the:boundaries of the protect site. .....
I Solid [Waste . collection services wills be provided by :Norcal Waste Systems to provide.
residential garbage.<and rec'yclmg "collection, debris box.service ;and compactor service::::
once theareafias'been annexed into the City.;
I. jy ' P !p. p p
The Ci ofi3Oroville Pol�ce.De artment Will:'!provide rovide; , olice rotection' services to the: <.
Specific Plan area once the:area has been annexed into the City : •.
k
• The Ci of Oroville.:Fire :D�e #artment " HI rovide fireprotection services'to the' Specific ..
' tY , , P P P
i,
Plan areaonce the area lids been"annexed Into the City. .
Figure 1 -.Oro Bay Specific-Plan Area Location Map
i ;..: •ZI
{4
:... r, P.} 3':♦ w".: p w r; r,'t' wd,. t r .s E"a - S"' Y�:•n. A-t�.J+,N� ..
i # � . -F 4�t\�ti•. �k.�.is a. ,:7�+ � t^,. Lr: L i "�ay � �'yr '�F' � �),! r f.�'` s`� 1 .� yS?{ S � 3 -�` �� '� ra .�' }
�Y •
� to v' 1 �� t"yy� d r^, • u r y. p,�� +si�{ } � k{�4k tG. �� ' ' ...
,
Lt s tPi, • C+n �{�+ W 3h�� d nf�
i tF t�y� or� 4t' "' �Y 4y t)r A � ' ,. �i T � ,gra +'rer •'3„ . �y� Lq < f� �
't. • �.y r E rDOvllle'� 'i ...
1
T f'
� �' ...� " r f r Rai. � 6,1 ?4',' < � i 'G.J�d�L� �1t�7 } �S:`+'""�� �'i .. • `
v' ?sOI�DertliBMd i r� u .
... �` • t`r'S y,,, r +nJY.}�.ii L1 °yYs\'4t. ;+ar ' . '}} t � !Y •' 'r r ... ..
k P 77'
j � x ' ' '� � •sib f : Jf � t.,is'Si q '} Sp, ra f F .� �){j.
f t Y';�N L S.. S t f' f t= n?1�, F �j.� , �' `i+ � , :. '�q ,� t, • �id"kt '.�fti`fi�. f •.'
t t i
..``w min ,' .. Rtt :�.+� ito '- -ii ._ - 'f4 •,. g,,, r^, ' y p.. ft .. .. .. .. .'.
4.,. p`�We
n Y<t 7 ij r
r 3u A
77ttuu R aSt_t �fldltOJ1 K=
WN
),
I� ., v1. �`�`L';. �'s P"�.�'x.. rr�°if '':Sx' �•2k,t`f�' . r r a't ., X44. ^'V" Jr.... sc,' „_ �..'
r,. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ..
Oro Bay Specificjplan:and Annexation Area Pro�ecf City of Orowile
.:. Mardi 2006. t Pdge:8: Irnfial'Study
i j. �.
�R
1
4
•
•
•
..
Figure 2 - Annexation Exhibit
_..
•
ORO BAY;ANNOWION AREA
•
ORO BAY
PAR
-EXISTING,
•
°�
SPECIFIC
FOUR
CIV. -LIMIT I
PLAN
AREA::
•
is
...
... `.
ADDITIONAL ...
::
a. — NNEXATION
A
TERRITOR
,.
..• ANNEXATION
:.:
ARE s, u
fr
BG R
T
•
�� its . i° �+ - �
•.
T, c � ,f � tt, '6. c s? �
�
...
;�; it
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 9
Initial Study
This page intentionally left blank
.Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March 2006 Page 10
City of Oroville •
Initial Study
vQ;SjT
�,►+�. � �. �'"�1+:' "?y'�"" �, ^�'. ^- �% � rte «
• �. srac nc rt-u
AREA
WUAo
l r..` r �-'a°!�°� ���' }� M �. ,mss 11.� yr. �•�,
t'� ►�.}1 1 'ter (,. "e a,r k . y•".',t" •
�`' yf �j..f�1.r �'+:.:., Gt v''�a-w„' k. S:t • i' �,rt' Mj{�'yy.'`; ��.r,��-'}�`~�`
• � � ter
�? ;��,pd �k i''S�x, 1\��,~ ,� :i,�,1'�r,�.`�+' ���� �� l•jr ��� 1 u 'tai
”, i.x
This page.intentionally left blank
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 12 Initial Study
• Figure 4 Land Use Diagram for Oro Bay Specific:Plan
2 I�r�td trsP Dta uln ,
• I,
Y l
Vs.i1. �5, l
• }
14 l3
ii i
'
i; i6 17 ,g i.
... .0 ...
1�
x
f•
pit{
fry '
1
19
41
.. N
tr}
,n 1 Si 7✓
.. .. 4
�:�'m ,RU�`iG't �4 ct.'��'ai.. 3�``'�t'�' r� ,. 'fl`,'` �' . + �'� a• i 3F '1 I i1E
w" N�;�r l�. �}' �,.c,:.J„da+e.'u•�. ��} �...r.�` `� .
MISSION �ATai;$1f PROP$IYTI$S-----� 4 C'H 1 t C Cf 3
Oro Bay Specific Plan.and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
Mardi 2006. Page' 13 Initial Study
.::.: r
.....
This page intentionally left blank
..Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March 2006 Page 14
City of Oroville
Initial Study
'
w.
Figure S-Land:Use 'Changes proposed for Annexation Areas
LEGEND ,
s
GENERAL PLAN/ZONrNGL7.ES/GNAT/ON q.
. ... .. O EMMt"DEWS77YRESA9HAllZ4L
.. .. I I ' .... .. ONE RRfSOURCEMANAGEAIENr ..
ZON RE fOURGEAMNAGEA/ENT
E.•
- .. .. . .
• I I` , ®.. ONE '�L
. .. , I1. ... .. .. APPRC)JYMA TELOCA mm OF PARK .
11
..PAR F UMMAR
Ir�..
OURS- Y'
.. ... I,I .. '. ZOAWG .. .'-ACRES UNITS ....:.'.
.. .. II.. ... .. .. .... ...
. _ ... � .. R:> .. ....... 76.Bt .. .... .. 306 .. ...
• .:: 1 1 - AR5 • .::. 20. Si .. 4
11 TOTAL 751. TS 374
` x11 LINKS MMAR
LINKS/DE zoarNG /D U ACRES Y: UNITS
• ES
P R
A/41 , OU
R-f :.73.Ot 34! hRAX
PARK :'Sx O
• . .. � OPEN SP 3% OS O . .
,TOTAL' : A ...J15.G2. � 349 AfAX.
CE
ADD/ AREA SUMMARY
' - TONAL
70MING .. .. ACRES UYTS
..
p.
• .. .:'
' 11 . r
To . .
.. .. ?5 F + ,�
TAL' ' 91.9%f 9
Y
Tv
0
_y 1'SA 1?J.1 ON r. �UItiC)USCWAtItS rCAf.MTl.'P�fb'2.. .. .. ...
• ,�y��jy •i 1�e,("..( sYa�PARE�P Ltd l.•... : •..
QI'+f-h 9 1 ti A4 L GV.1L p5C.9p]p t'ra'FYff1 [N.G0.G49Y
�kll •,.�.y °h�r.-�" � vrwn va-+�
'.,
f'�fiffa6f" i.
t �;A
.. ,}9t , IFr�t '1€.:Itiy �'a...r•,tiy' .. .. .. • . .: - . .
# i4
h°'Pfar?(�rls�:1-51'.,,fl'
ffyJ t �w .. .. .. ... .. .. ..
Gm
• `1j �ADD/RT/ONAZk;A?RE,14}.
•} 9
i
X31 e:r1Sf .. .. .. .. ..
. ORO BAY ANNEXATION...:w OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA
'. ....FEBR UARrz
... ... ...
::Oro Bay.Speci fic Plan: and Annexation: Area Project : City of Oroville :.
i
March.2006.. Pao& 15 `' Irntidl Study
• . _.
This page intentionally left blank
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March 2006 Page 16
City of Oroville
Initial Study
III. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,.
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project
have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED 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.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact. on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal. standards, and 2)
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on.
attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only
the effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
Signatur Date
Signature Date
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation. Area Project
March 2006 Page 17
City of Oroville
Initial Study
IV. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is given for all answers except' "No Impact" answers as they. are
adequately supported by the information sources. cited in the parentheses following
each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved. A "No Impact" answer is explained where it is based on project -specific factors
as well as general standards.
2) All answers take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as- well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once it is determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers
indicate. whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation,
or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more
"Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of a mitigation measure has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact". The mitigation measures are
described, and a brief explanation follows on how the mitigation measures reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses are cross-
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses are used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a" brief discussion will identify the
following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where analyses are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Effects from the environmental checklist are
identified, within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards. Effects are addressed by mitigation
measures=based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Measures Incorporated", the response will describe the mitigation measures, which
were incorporated or refined from the earlier document, and the extent to which
they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) The checklist responses will incorporate references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans,. zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to -the page or pages
where the statement is substantiated.
7) . Supporting Information Sources: A source list is attached in Section VII, References.
Sources used, individuals contacted, and other outside supporting sources of information
are cited throughout the discussion.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 . Page 18 Initial Study
Cm
IV. ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With .
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a)
Have a •substantial adverse effect on a scenic
®
❑
❑
❑
vista? ;
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
❑
❑
❑
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
histo6c.buildings within.a state scenic highway?
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character
®
❑
❑
❑
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare
®
❑
❑
❑
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) c) and d) The project applicant is proposing construction of up to 2,400 housing units, parks,
trails, and a potential school with hardscape, impervious surfaces, and conventional
landscaping throughout the Specific Plan area. Additionally, as many as 655 housing units
may be constructed as a result of proposed land use changes to 149.6 acres: of land within
the Interim Land Annexation described above. This proposed and potential] development
will alter the existing character of the area from agricultural residential consisting of large lot
development to that of a more urban setting.
Several scenic features are within view from areas surrounding and within We project site,
including vernal pool complexes, Table Mountain, the Thermalito Afterbay. and Oroville
Dam. The project could have a potential impact to aesthetic resources because it may
alter the view, as well as the general character of the area, and may have the potential to
produce additional light and glare. Oroville City Code Section 2-105, Public
Improvements, specifies that subdivisions include the installation of a street-I-ghting system
along all interior and boundary streets, in accordance with the standards set forth by. the
City of Oroville. According to the Oro Bay Specific Plan, a landscape and lighting district
would be created for the maintenance of median strips and neighborhood lighting as well
as a landscaping buffer along SR 162. Glare and new light sources can be. hazardous to
motorists and pilots, and annoying to surrounding uses.
There is a potentially significant impact to aesthetic resources to the are.due to the
existing scenic resources, the general change in character to amore urban setting, and the
creation of additional sources of light and glare. These impacts will be further evaluated in
the EIR. .
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but rot limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
There are currently no State designated scenic highways in the Oroville Planning Area.
Therefore, there is no impact associated with these features.
Oro. Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 19 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps .prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ® ❑ ❑ ❑
Williamson Act contract?
c) . Involve other changes in the existing environment, ® ❑ ❑ ❑
which, due to their location or nature, could result_
in conversion of Farmland to non-ag(cultural use?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project convert" Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown -on. the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use.?
The project site is in an area designated as agricultural residential and this project
application is proposing residential, park and open space, and school uses. Although this
will be a conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, this project will not be
converting Prime' Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide importance.
Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant..
b) and c) The project site and surrounding properties are zoned as agricultural residential and
recreational associated with the Thermalito Afterbay. According to the Butte County
Interim Farmland Map of 2002, the land is designated as suitable for the grazing of livestock.
The soils profile collected during the wetlands delineation study- found that the soils are
suitable for both livestock grazing and wetland habitat. The zoning on these properties
allows for agricultural uses, but none of the properties are currently subject to a Williamson
Act contract. . The requested change in zoning from an agricultural designation of
Agricultural Residential (AR -5 and AR -10) to an urban use . would not permit future
agricultural pursuits. The impacts are considered potentially significant and will be further
evaluated in the EIR.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 20 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the.fofiowing
determinations: Would the r)roiect:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air.quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
®
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑'
®
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
-a
a) b) c) and d) The project site is located within the Sacramento Valley Air Quality Basin, which
is a federal and state non -attainment area for ozone and particulate matter (PM10).
Current General Plan development assumptions provide the basis for the regional air quality
models upon which the adopted air quality attainment plans are based. the change in
land use -proposed for the annexation and General Plan Amendment actions may result in
an intensification of land use not factored in to the air quality attainment. plan.
Development of the project site may contribute to air pollutant emission from motor
vehicles and construction activities.
These impacts to air quality are a potentially significant impact and will be further
evaluated in the EIR.
e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
The project would result in development of a residential subdivision, which is not a land use
associated with generation of objectionable odors. Any objectionable odo,-s that may be
created in the project area would fall under the control of local nuisance orcinances. There
is no impact associated with objectionable odors as a result of the project.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 21 Initial Study
•
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
❑
❑
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate; sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b)
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c)
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of
.the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), through .
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or
other means?
d) ,
Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native.wildlife
nursery sites?
e)
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Impact
A—R
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
u
FN—
IN IN
a) b) c) d) e) and .f) This project site contains swales and vernal pools potentially associated with
endangered species including tadpole shrimp, fairy shrimp, California linderiella, and
western spadefoot toad. There may be additional impacts on other endangered,
threatened or special status.species, such as loss of nesting and foraging habitat for raptors.
This project will have a potentially significant impact to endangered and threatened
species, and sensitive riparian habitat, vernal pool habitat, and the potential for
interference with native wildlife species.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City, of Oroville
March 2006 Page 22 Initial Study
•
•
Less Than
Significant
•
Potentially
Significant
With
Mitigation
iLess than
.iignifcant
No
•
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
®
❑
❑
❑
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse•change in the
®
❑
❑
0
•
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
•
to Section 15064.5?
•
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
®
❑
❑
❑
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
®
❑
❑
❑
,.
outside of formal cemeteries?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) c) "and d) There is potential for this project to
contain cultural
resources
that may be
located on the property. Additionally, there is also
a potential.
for farm
tuildings to
be'
histo(c. These potentially significant impacts to cultural resources will be furiiner evaluated
•
in the EIR.
•
_
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No.
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
•
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, .including the risk of loss, injury or
•
death, involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
❑
❑
®
❑
delineated on the most. recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the. State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
'
❑
❑
0
❑ '
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
®
❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
❑
0
®
❑
-topsoil?
•
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March
City of Oroville
2006 Page 23
Initial Study.
,y, .
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact ' Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is . ❑ El® T]unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or
offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
Iiquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ❑ ❑ ® ❑
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the ® ❑ ❑ ❑
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where,sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) and c):
Rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Prialo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist. for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
The project site is not in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no active faults
traverse the site. The closest active fault is considered to have ruptured the ground
surface is the Cleveland Hills Fault of the Foothills fault system, located approximately 11
miles to the southeast. Therefore, there is less than significant impact from rupture of a
known earthquake fault.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
According to the Oroville General Plan, the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Seismic Hazard
Map classifies the Oroville area in Seismic Zone 3 on a scale of 0 to 4. The UBC Seismic
Hazard Map is correlated to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) probabilistic
hazard map predictions for ground shaking. Butte County is considered to be within an
area that is predicted to have a 10% probability that a seismic event would produce
horizontal ground shaking of 10-20%G within a 50 -year period.
Due to the fact that the project site is within a region impacted by ground shaking,
structures are required to be designed in accordance with applicable seismic provisions
of the California Building Code (CBC), including lateral force requirements per Section
1630A of the CBC. Buildings constructed according to the CBC Seismic Design Standards
are expected to survive the predicted levels of ground shaking without suffering
catastrophic collapse. As the City of Oroville requires all new construction to adhere to
the California Building Code Seismic Design Standards, impacts from ground shaking are
considered to be less than significant.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 24 Initial Study.
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
The primary factors influencing liquefaction potential of a soil deposit in-lude: (1) the
level and duration of seismic ground motions; (2) the type and consistency of the soils;
sand (3) the depth to groundwater. In the Oroville Planning Area there have been no
detailed liquefaction studies; however, areas in the historic floodplain of the Fedther River
have been. identified as having geologic conditions susceptible to liquefaction (Butte
County MEA 1993). This project area is not located in a historic floodplain Df the Feather
River and the soils are not of a type associated with liquefaction (recently deposited
sands and silts). Therefore, the impacts from seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction, are considered to be less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
Physical and geologic conditions, including slope, soil type, and geologic .strata, create
the potential for landslides and are compounded by earthquakes or strong ground
shaking. According to the Oroville General Plan Figure 8.10-A, Geologic Hazards, areas
with geologic conditions favorable to landslides are located outside of the project area.
The landslide prone areas are generally found in the northern and northeastern portions
of the Planning Area, which is well away from the proposed Oro Bay Specific Plan
.project, which is located in the western portion of the General Plan Area.
The Specific Plan project is located in a gently sloped area, with elevationsranging from
140 to 180 feet over 421 acres. There is very little likelihood that any landslides would
occur in this area due to the underlying hardpan soils and the gentle slope; therefore,
the potential impact for landslides is less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Expansive soils generally consist of a high. clay content and are known to have the potential
for shrinking and swelling with changes in moisture content, which can cause extensive
damage to overlaying structures. In addition, perched groundwater development can
adversely impact the performance of foundations, concrete slabs -on -grade, and
pavement systems if not mitigated.
A geotechnical design study is required in order to prepare design and construction level
recommendations suitable for the proposed project. According to Oroville Gty Ordinance
No. 1305, a Civil Engineer' registered by the State of California shall peepare a soil
investigation of each ' lot in the subdivision. The soil investigation shall recommend
corrective actions that are likely to prevent structural damage to each dwelong proposed
to be constructed if expansive soils are discovered. The report is required to be filed with
the Oroville Department of Public Works. Subsequent building permits are conditioned
upon the incorporation of the approved recommended corrective ac"ions for the
construction of each dwelling.
In addition to City Code, the City of Oroville has adopted the Uniform Buildings Code (UBC),
which includes standards for the design and construction of foundations, slabs, driveways,
and other pavement systems in expansive soil conditions. Adherence to recommendations
in a final geotechnical study and all UBC requirements for subdivisions built on expansive
soils are considered sufficient to reduce expansive soil impacts to a less than significant
level.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 25 Initial Study
•. •
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of�
wastewater?
The, Oro Bay Specific Plan would not require the use of septic tanks nor alternative
wastewater disposal systems as the applicant proposes connection to a regional sewer
system. However, the wastewater disposal services in the annexation areas vary and may
have a potentially significant impact and will be further evaluated in the EIR.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially . With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
❑ ❑ ® ❑
environment through the routine transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
❑ ❑ ® ❑
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
® ❑ ❑ ❑
acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
® ❑ ❑ ❑
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use
❑ ❑ ® ❑
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a
public use airport, would the project result in a'
safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
`
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
❑ ❑ ❑
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g)
Impair implementation of, or physically interfere
❑ ❑ ® ❑
with, an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 26.. Initial Study
7
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
U
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport use, ,or disposal of hazardous materials?
The project would ultimately result in development of a residential subdivision and
associated parks and schools; these are uses that are not associated with transport or use of
large quantities of hazardous materials: Further, use and. disposal of hazardous materials is
strictly regulated by State and Federal agencies, impacts regarding the routine transport of
hazardous materials is considered less than significant. Adherence to applicable State laws
would ensure that impacts due to the use. and disposal of hazardous mate6ols throughout
the development would remain at a level that is considered less than significcnt.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the envirorxnent through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
The City of Oroville maintains a Multi -Hazard Functional Disaster Plan with hstructions for
responding to a hazardous materials crisis, including accidental spills by trucks transporting
such materials. Additionally,. the California Accidental Release PreverYtion Program
(CaIARPP), which unifies State and Federal regulations designed to prevent the accidental
releases of regulated substances, generally applies to the use, storage, and handling of
larger quantities of hazardous materials, or acutely hazardous materials, which triggers a
greater level. of - analysis; disclosure, planning, and review. Projects that exceed the
thresholds for regulated substances contained in the California Code of Regulations (CCR),.
Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5, Section 2770.5, are considered to have - a potentially
significant impact and this project does not qualify.
As the Oro Bay Specific Plan project is not likely to exceed the thresholds for regulated
substances as identified in the CCR, Section 2770.5, the project is not required to develop
and submit - a Risk Management Plan. Therefore, project impacts associated with the
accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment are considered less than
significant.
c) and d) There is the potential for the site to contain pesticide contamination from past farming
operations, therefore there is a potentially significant impact from hazardous materials to be
exposed to the public or to a proposed school. A Phase One Envircnmental Site
Assessment has been prepared on behalf of the developer in this section. Mitigation
measures will be identified that provide for the safe handling and disposal of any identified
residual materials.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March•2006' Page 27
City of Oroville
Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact
®
❑
❑ ❑
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport use, ,or disposal of hazardous materials?
The project would ultimately result in development of a residential subdivision and
associated parks and schools; these are uses that are not associated with transport or use of
large quantities of hazardous materials: Further, use and. disposal of hazardous materials is
strictly regulated by State and Federal agencies, impacts regarding the routine transport of
hazardous materials is considered less than significant. Adherence to applicable State laws
would ensure that impacts due to the use. and disposal of hazardous mate6ols throughout
the development would remain at a level that is considered less than significcnt.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the envirorxnent through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
The City of Oroville maintains a Multi -Hazard Functional Disaster Plan with hstructions for
responding to a hazardous materials crisis, including accidental spills by trucks transporting
such materials. Additionally,. the California Accidental Release PreverYtion Program
(CaIARPP), which unifies State and Federal regulations designed to prevent the accidental
releases of regulated substances, generally applies to the use, storage, and handling of
larger quantities of hazardous materials, or acutely hazardous materials, which triggers a
greater level. of - analysis; disclosure, planning, and review. Projects that exceed the
thresholds for regulated substances contained in the California Code of Regulations (CCR),.
Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5, Section 2770.5, are considered to have - a potentially
significant impact and this project does not qualify.
As the Oro Bay Specific Plan project is not likely to exceed the thresholds for regulated
substances as identified in the CCR, Section 2770.5, the project is not required to develop
and submit - a Risk Management Plan. Therefore, project impacts associated with the
accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment are considered less than
significant.
c) and d) There is the potential for the site to contain pesticide contamination from past farming
operations, therefore there is a potentially significant impact from hazardous materials to be
exposed to the public or to a proposed school. A Phase One Envircnmental Site
Assessment has been prepared on behalf of the developer in this section. Mitigation
measures will be identified that provide for the safe handling and disposal of any identified
residual materials.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March•2006' Page 27
City of Oroville
Initial Study
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Public use airports closest to the Oroville Planning Area include the Oroville Municipal
Airport, the Lake Oroville Landing Area, and the Paradise Skypark. The Oroville Municipal
Airport is located adjacent to the proposed project area. This airport is governed by the
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and establishes a range of land use
zones surrounding the airport to ensure that development within these zones are
compatible with airport operations.
Portions of the project area are located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) "B 1 ", "132",
"C" and "D" Zones. The density designation for the "B 1 " zone is a maximum of 2 homes per
acre and the "B-2" zone allows for a maximum of 4 homes per acre. Properties within the
"C" zone must either be developed to a minimum density of 4 homes per acre (urban
density) or 1 home per five acres (rural density). The "D" zone is less restrictive than the "C"
zone and does not have density requirements.
The Oro Bay Specific Plan falls within two Airport Land Use zones, Zone C and Zone D. Zone
C incorporates the southeast portion of the property and splits the Specific Plan area into a
diagonal shape, with Zone D incorporating the northwestern portion. Uses including
schools, day care facilities, libraries, hospital and nursing homes are prohibited within Zone
C. The remaining portion of the Specific Plan area that falls into Zone D, which is less
restrictive than Zone C, prohibits 'uses that are prohibited by the underlying City Zone.
Airspace review is required for uses over 35 feet tall and an Aviation easement dedication is
required.
The portions of the annexation areas are in the Airport Land Use Zones C, B2, and B1. The
majority of the Par Four subdivision is within the C Zone, with only a portion of the 2 southern
lots within the B2 Zone. The only areas recommended for changes in land use designations
in the Par Four subdivision are the northerly 76 acres and, under these proposed changes,
would meet the Zone C requirements. The Linkside Place Phase III proposed subdivision is,
within the Airport Land Use Zones C, B2, and B1. The recommended land use changes in
this area are compatible with the AIA Zoning. The majority of the proposed residential uses
are within the 78 acre C zone with a small portion in the B2 Zone, and the area designated
for Open Space, approximately 37 acres, within the B2 and B1 zones. The southern 91 -acre
annexation area does not have any proposed land use changes or additional
development.
As shown above in Figure 4 Land Use Diagram and Figure 5 Land Use Changes, only
residential uses are proposed within Zone C and a small portion of Zone B2. As' the
proposed density and open space minimum requirements are met, and no restricted uses
are proposed, impacts are considered less than significant.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a privateairstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the proposed project area. Therefore,
there is no impact associated with hazards from private airstrips.
g) Would the project impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 28 Initial Study
According to the Oroville General Plan Figure 8.60-A, Evacuation Routes, SR 162 West/East
has been designated as an arterial to the evacuation route to SR 70 for the City of Oroville.
The project would be accessible off of SR 162 and a secondary point of entry through Wilbur
Road will be provided for the Oro Bay Specific Plan. These access points would be
available via SR 99 or SR 70. The effectiveness of an evacuation route can be adversely
impacted if adopted Level of Service (LOS) is not maintained on the evacuation route.
Impacts to the City's adopted LOS for SR 162 between SR 99 and SR 70 will be evaluated in
the traffic section (please see Section 15. Transportation and Traffic). Impacts to
emergency evacuation are considered less than significant and LOS will be further
evaluated in the Transportation and Traffic section of the EIR.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including Where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Within Butte County, fires have been more frequent in the Central Valley than in the
mountainous areas in recent years. Most. of the Valley fires are grass fires near populated
areas, including Oroville. Wildland fires pose a potential threat to homeowners within the
proposed project site due to the project's interface with SR 162 and other surrounding
residential uses.
,At the airport, the City leases about 40 hangers and has'a growing aviation population. The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has no fire protection requirements for on-site fire
r fighting for an airport of this size. There is an unstaffed small fire -fighting unit housed at the
Fix Base Operator building which is picked up by one of the responding fire companies.
An amendment to the City of Oroville's General Plan Safety. Element was approved on April
6, 1999 as Resolution 5424. The Safety Element of the General Plan was amended to
include two addition goal statements, 8.30h. states that the. "Fire. Department travel times
should strive to place a first -due unit at scene within five minutes of travel time, for 90% of
fire and medical incidents." And goal statement 8.30i states that the "Fire Department units
should be located and staffed such that an effective response force of four units with eight
personnel minimum should be available to all areas of the city within a maximum of ten
minutes travel time, for 90% of all structure fires."
As this project will induce substantially higher population growth in an area than is currently
understaffed by Fire Department personnel, it is not known at this time whether construction
of a new fire station will be required in order to maintain the adopted timing standards. This
impact is considered potentially significant and will be further discussed in the EIR.
S. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
March 2006 Page 29
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant. No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
® ❑ ❑ ❑
City of Oroville
Initial Study
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
No
Impact
u
❑
a) through f) There is a potentially significant impact to water quality, groundwater supplies,
alteration and creation of drainage from the project. site, and degradation of overall water
quality. Issues related to water quality on the site including collection, treatment , and
discharge of wastewater and stormwater will be studied and summarized in the EIR section.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of. Oroville
March 2006 Page 30 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
® ❑ ❑
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
.table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for
Which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
® ❑ ❑
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
offsite?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
® ❑ ❑
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on- or offsite?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
® ❑ ❑
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
® ❑ ❑
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑ ❑ ❑
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map.or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑ ❑ ❑
structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
® ❑ ❑
loss,, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
❑ ❑
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
No
Impact
u
❑
a) through f) There is a potentially significant impact to water quality, groundwater supplies,
alteration and creation of drainage from the project. site, and degradation of overall water
quality. Issues related to water quality on the site including collection, treatment , and
discharge of wastewater and stormwater will be studied and summarized in the EIR section.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of. Oroville
March 2006 Page 30 Initial Study
g) and h) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
The project ,site is located outside of the 100 -year Flood Zone as mapped by the Federal .
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM), #06007C0960C dated June 8, 1998, the proposed project is located within Zone X.
Zone X is defined by FEMA as an area determined to be outside of the 100 -year and 500 -
year floodplain. Therefore, there is no impact to housing or structures being sibject to flood
hazards.
Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam'
The Oroville Levee extends approximately one mile northeast along the- banks -of the
Feather River and is considered to be structurally sound as it has never been breached,
over -topped; or suffered any major damage since its construction in 1907, according to the
City of Oroville Environmental Review Guidelines. The Oroville Dam, completed in the 1960s
to capture and store water from the Feather River, is situated at the northeaEt corner of the
Oroville Planning Area.
According to the Oroville General Plan Figure 8-A, Environmental Hazards, th= project site is
located within the Dam Inundation Area for Oroville Dam. However, engineering studies
conducted by the Department of Water Resources have indicated that the Oroville Dam.
could withstand an earthquake of can estimated magnitude of 6.5 on the Richter Scale
without significant damage.. The study also determined that a 6.5 magnitude earthquake
exceeds the maximum credible event for the region.
The California Office of Emergency Services has developed and approved a dam failure
inundation map for the area below the Oroville Dam. Based on the approved inundation
map, the City of Oroville has adopted emergency procedures for the evacuation and
control of populated areas below the dam in the unlikely event of an earthquake occurring
in excess of the maximum credible event. Impacts related to flooding due t:) failure of the
Oroville Dam or Oroville Levee are therefore considered less than significant.
j) Would the project be affected by inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
Lake, Oroville is a large body of water that could be susceptible to seiches. the project site
is not likely to be effected because seiches have not been identified as a significant
problem that would affect the Oroville area. As discussed in i) above, the likelihood of dam
failure is reduced as engineering studies have indicated that the Orovil'-e Dam could
withstand an earthquake without significant damage.
A mudflow is the movement of water -saturated earth material possessing a high degree of
fluidity. A less -saturated flowing mass is often called a debris flow. A mudflow originating on
the flank of a volcano is referred to as a lahar. As described in the Geclogy and Soils
section of this Initial Study, past history indicates that mudslides are not a problem in the
Oroville Planning Area. Further, the project is not located near any volcanoes so the
potential for volcanic mudflow is low. It is located east of the Thermalito Afterbay, a water
storage facility with strictly controlled levels and. various channels in which to irelease water.
Therefore, impacts related to hazards of seiche, .tsunami, or mudflows, are considered less
than significant.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project �ity of Oroville
March 2006 Page 31 Initial Study
C�
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? El 1:1 Elb) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy ® ❑ ❑ ❑
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑
plan or natural community conservation plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) and c) The project site is located in an area of residential development and recreational uses.
To the west and east of Jhe project site are residential uses, as well as a golf course and
airport. To the north is SR 162 and residential uses and south of the project site is open land
and recreational uses associated with the Thermalito Afterbay. The project would continue
the growth. pattern in the area. No habitat, conservation plans or natural community
conservation plans are applicable to this poject. Therefore, there are no impacts
associated with dividing an established community or. conflicting with any habitat
conservation or natural community conservation plans.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program ' or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an, environmental effect?
The Oro Bay Specific Plan includes a request for a change in the City of Oroville's General
Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning designations for the project site and for 149.6 acres of land
abutting the eastern boundary of the site. Although the Specific Plan area is within the
City's Sphere of Influence, the project would require annexation of the 421 -acre Specific
Plan site as well as annexation of thirty-one additional properties located east and south of
the site. The requested amendments to the General Plan Diagram designation from
Resource Management to Residential Medium and High Density, and the requested Pre -
zoning of the entire Specific Plan area would be amended to Specific Plan for Mixed
Density Residential, Open Space, and Public Uses. The land use analysis in the .EIR will
compare and contrast the land use assumptions contained in the General Plan with those
requested for the Oro Bay Specific Plan proposal and associated land use changes With the
Interim Land Annexation area. The General Plan's development assumptions provide the
basis for regional traffic and air quality models, as well as the basis for projections of the
type, location and amount of City services and utilities. The significance of the change in
development type and intensity as well as the generation rates identified in terms of the
need for any new or upgraded facilities that in turn, may result in an environmental impact
will be addressed. -
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 32 Initial,Study
r • •
Also included in the EIR'will"be a consistency evaluation of any conflicts with the City of
Oroville General Plan and zoning ordinance and development standards, and any other
applicable City plans, policies and regulations adopted, for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental impact. The requested change in zoning from an.agricultural
designation and use will be evaluated. These requested changes may result in a potentially
significant impact to the applicable land use plan to an urban use that wculd not permit
agricultural pursuits.
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally ❑ ❑ ❑
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general .plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS =
a) and b) There are no known significant deposits of mineral resources within the project site
and no mineral resource recovery sites delineated by the Oroville General Plan or any other
City planning document within the Oroville Planning Area. Therefore, there is no impact
relative to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
ILess Than
-0ignificant
Impact
No
Impact
11. NOISE. Would the project result in:
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
❑
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact
general plan or noise ordinance or of applicable "
10, MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
standards of other agencies?
b) •Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
❑
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
❑
❑.
❑
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally ❑ ❑ ❑
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general .plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS =
a) and b) There are no known significant deposits of mineral resources within the project site
and no mineral resource recovery sites delineated by the Oroville General Plan or any other
City planning document within the Oroville Planning Area. Therefore, there is no impact
relative to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
ILess Than
-0ignificant
Impact
No
Impact
11. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels .
®.
❑
❑
❑
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance or of applicable "
standards of other agencies?
b) •Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
❑
❑
❑
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels? `
C) A substantial permanent. increase in ambient noise
®
❑
❑
❑
levels, in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
h
.Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 33
Initial Study
•
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
® ❑ ❑ ❑
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
FE]
I
0 01
701
0
a) c) d) and e) The implementation of the project may expose people to an increase in noise
levels, from both within and surrounding the project area. Development of the project will
result in additional local circulation through an increase in vehicle trips to and from the
project site. A noise analysis will be conducted to evaluate the potential increase in noise
levels that could result from additional trips, the change in local circulation patterns and on-
going activities associated with project.. This is a potentially significant impact will be further
evaluated in the EIR.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
Ground borne vibrations are associated with heavy vehicles (i.e. railroad) and with heavy
equipment operations. Vehicle traffic generated by the project would be typical of traffic
generated by the surrounding residential and light commercial land uses, passenger cars,
trucks and small aircraft, which are not a source of significant vibration. SR 162 contributes
to some noise and groundborne vibration; however, the project site is located far enough
from SR 162 that future residents and schoolchildren (sensitive receptors) will not be able to
detect vibrations from SR 162.
During grading and construction, the operation of some heavy construction equipment
could cause some minor .vibrations noticeable to adjacent residents. However, these
effects are very temporary, typically occurring only during the period when grading or
construction is being conducted in the area immediately adjacent to, existing residencies.
Further, the construction equipment used (graders, tractors, dump trucks) will be typical of
construction equipment used in residential areas and will not involve any significant sources
of vibration. No heavy equipment that would cause major vibrations (such as pile driving
equipment) will be used for this project. There is no impact .related to generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 34 Initial Study
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS .
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure) ?
The 1995 Oroville General Plan establishes the pattern and basis for orderly growth in the
Planning Area. It also establishes the policies and guidelines that implement. the City's
growth, as. anticipated by the General Plan. According to the Environmental Review
Guidelines for the City of Oroville, projects that are consistent with the General Plan are not
considered to be growth inducing unless provision of infrastructure developed for the ,
project would allow additional development not anticipated by the General PI:3n.
As this project proposes a higher density than the current General Plan designation allows;
this project would not be consistent with the General Plan's anticipation of crowth in the
area. The project is located on a vacant parcel outside of the City of Oroville, but within
the Sphere of Influence for the City. Implementation of this project wDuld require
annexation, and amendments to the City's current General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning
designations. The current pre -zoning would allow for development of approximately 70
dwelling units within the Specific Plan area, and the Specific Plan proposes a .-naximum of
2,400 dwelling units. According to the California Department of Finance, Orovillehas an
average of 2.5 persons per household. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an
approximate increase of 6,000 persons. Additionally, proposed amendments to the
General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning designation of 149.6 acres adjoining the northeast
•boundary of the Specific Plan project .site will allow for potential additional residential
development in•the future of 655 homes. With both the Specific Plan population increase,
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oro'ville
March 2006 Page 35 Initial Study
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would
the •project expose people
residing or working in the project area --to excessive noise levels?
There are no private' airstrips located within the
vicinity of
the proposed
project area.
Therefore, there is no impact related to noise from private airst(ps.
Less Than
Significant
i.
Potentially
With
!Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
12.
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a)
Induce substantial population growth in an area,
®
❑
❑
❑
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b)
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
❑
❑
®
❑
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c)
Displace substantial numbers of people,
❑
❑
❑
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
,
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS .
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure) ?
The 1995 Oroville General Plan establishes the pattern and basis for orderly growth in the
Planning Area. It also establishes the policies and guidelines that implement. the City's
growth, as. anticipated by the General Plan. According to the Environmental Review
Guidelines for the City of Oroville, projects that are consistent with the General Plan are not
considered to be growth inducing unless provision of infrastructure developed for the ,
project would allow additional development not anticipated by the General PI:3n.
As this project proposes a higher density than the current General Plan designation allows;
this project would not be consistent with the General Plan's anticipation of crowth in the
area. The project is located on a vacant parcel outside of the City of Oroville, but within
the Sphere of Influence for the City. Implementation of this project wDuld require
annexation, and amendments to the City's current General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning
designations. The current pre -zoning would allow for development of approximately 70
dwelling units within the Specific Plan area, and the Specific Plan proposes a .-naximum of
2,400 dwelling units. According to the California Department of Finance, Orovillehas an
average of 2.5 persons per household. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an
approximate increase of 6,000 persons. Additionally, proposed amendments to the
General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning designation of 149.6 acres adjoining the northeast
•boundary of the Specific Plan project .site will allow for potential additional residential
development in•the future of 655 homes. With both the Specific Plan population increase,
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oro'ville
March 2006 Page 35 Initial Study
and the potential population increase on the adjacent 149.6 acres, there is - a potential
increased of 3,055 more homes with 7,638 more persons than are presently accounted for in
the City's current General Plan.
As this Oro Bay Specific Plan project, associated annexation project and future
development resulting from the described projects will induce substantially higher
population growth in an area than is anticipated by the City's current General Plan, this
impact is considered potentially significant. Population will be further discussed in the EIR,
as this project will exceed population assumptions.
b) Would- the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The Specific Plan site currently has one vacant house, which will be removed as a result of
the Oro Bay Specific Plan project. The City of Oroville General Plan Housing Element states
that a goal is to "preserve existing affordable housing opportunities for lower income
residents." A project that displaces or removes 5 or more affordable housing units is
considered to have a significant impact. Additionally, no other existing housing is currently
proposed to be removed on the properties within the annexation areas. Therefore, removal
of one vacant house is less than a significant impact.
c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Specific Plan site has one house, which is currently vacant.. This project will be
providing additional housing opportunities and is not expected to displace substantial
numbers of people currently residing in this area. Therefore, there is no impact related to
the displacement of an existing population.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated . Impact Impact
13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the "following public services:
a)
Fire protection?
®
❑
. ❑
1:11
b)
Police protection?
®
❑
❑
❑
c)
Schools?
®
❑
❑
❑
d)
Parks?
®
❑
❑
❑
e)
Other public facilities?
®
❑
❑
❑
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) c) d) and e) The Oro Bay Specific Plan will require the connection of City and public
, services on site which currently do not exist. The current General Plan Diagram and Pre -
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City.of Oroville
March 2006 Page 36 Initial Study
zoning designations allow for a lower intensity of development. The proposed Specific Plan
and Interim Land Annexation requests a higher density and additional public services for
the new residents are required. The General Plan development assumptions provide the.
basis for the projections of the type, location and capacity of services and utilities provided
by the City and other public agencies such as Thermalito Irrigation District.. The significance
of the change in development type and intensity to the need for public and utility services
will be addressed specifically and quantitatively in the EIR. The significance of the change
in generation rates identified in terms of the need for any new or upgraded facilities that in
turn, may result in an environmental impact will be addressed. Therefore there is a
potentially significant impact to available public services that will be further evaluated in
the EIR.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation . Significant No
Impact Incorporated 'Impact Impact
14. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing ® ❑ ❑ ❑
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities, or ® ❑ ❑ ❑
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) and b) 'The City of Oroville General Plan requires a minimum of 5 acres of parks be provided
per 1,000 residents. The General Plan estimates that the average household size for the City
of Oroville is approximately 2.5 persons per household. Based on this figure and the range
of residential units proposed, the. estimated population for the Oro Bay Specific Plan area is
approximately 6,000 at buildout. The Specific Plan currently provides approximately 20
acres of Neighborhood, Pocket and Linear Parks. This acreage will be adequate for up to
1600 homes. If the higher. densities are implemented within the Specific Plan Area,
additional park acreage in the form of pocket parks, common recreational facilities, or
adjoining park and school facilities may need to be provided as part of future development
applications. To meet the minimum park requirements between 16 and 30 acres . of
additional parkland are required.
The existing recreational facilities in the area include the Thermalito Afterbay, which has
recreational opportunities including boating, swimming, fishing, walking, and biking on the
Freeman Bicycle Trail. The impacts to recreational facilities within the Oro Bay Specific Plan
area, as well as within the annexation areas, are considered potentially significant, and will
be evaluated in the EIR.
Oro Bay Specific. Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 37 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a)
Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in
®
❑
❑
❑
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume -to -capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
b)
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
®
❑
❑
❑
of service standard established by the City General
Plan or the Butte County Association of
Governments for designated roads or highways?
c)
. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
®
❑
❑
❑
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design
®
❑
❑
❑
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
0
❑
❑
❑
f)
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
®
❑
❑
❑
g)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs
®
❑
❑
❑
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) c) d) e) f) and g) There are potentially significant impacts resulting from the changes in
transportation/traffic with implementation of this Oro Bay Specific Plan and associated land
annexation project which will be further evaluated in the EIR. Given the size of the
proposed Specific Plan at. approximately 2,400 dwelling units, plus the potential
development of another 655 homes as a result of land use changes proposed for an
additional 149.6 acres, the traffic study will quantify and disclose transportation impacts on
key facilities within the project vicinity. The. traffic study will evaluate off-site traffic impacts
on State Route 162 and other critical intersections and roadway segments located
throughout the Oroville planning area and vicinity, as well as on-site circulation issues. The
study will be multi -period (AM and PM peak hour periods), multi -scenario (short-term and
long-term, both with and without project) and multi -modal (auto, truck, transit,
bike/pedestrian impacts) in scope. The study will summarize technical analysis and results,
and will include recommendations for transportation improvements and mitigation
strategies to alleviate unacceptable levels of traffic impacts to acceptable levels.
The project traffic study will include, but may not be limited to, an evaluation of the
following study intersections:
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 38 Initial Study
Significant
Mitigation Significant
No
I .
SR 99/SR 162 (Butte City Highway)
Incorporated Impact
2.
SR 99/SR 162 (Oroville -Bam Boulevard West) '
3.
SR 162/Wilbur Road
4.
SR 162/West Barrett Lane
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
5.
SR 162/20th Street/Larkin Road
.6.
SR 162/181h Street
a
7.
SR 162/SR 70 Southbound Ramps
®
'8..
SR 162/SR 70 Northbound Ramps
9.
SR 162/Feather River Boulevard
10.
SR 1.62/5th Avenue
Require or result in the construction of new water or
11:
SR 162/Veatch Street
❑
12.
SR-I62/Lincoln Boulevard
13.
SR 162/Washington Avenue/Oroville Dam Boulevard fast
14.
Grand Avenue/SR 70 Southbound On-Ramp/4th Street
`
15.
Grand Avenue/SR 70 Northbound Off-Ramp/31d Street
cause significant environmental effects?
16.
Nelson Avenue/SR 70 Southbound Off-Ramp/4th Street
17.
Nelson Avenue/SR 70 Northbound On-Ramp/31d Street
®
18.
Wilbur Road/Project Access Driveway
19.
SR 162/Project Access Driveway(s)
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
With Less Than
Significant
Mitigation Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated Impact
Impact -
16.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a)
.Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
®
❑ ❑
❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b)
Require or result in the construction of new water or
®
❑ ❑
❑
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
t
cause significant environmental effects?
c)
Require or result in the construction of new
®
❑ ❑
❑
stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
d)
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
®
❑ ❑
❑
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e)
Result in a determination by the .wastewater
®
❑ ❑
El -
treatment
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity Jo serve the
project's projected demand, in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
®
❑ ❑
❑
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
g)
Comply with federal, state and local statutes and
❑
❑ ❑
regulations related to solid waste?
'
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project
City of Oroville
March
2006.. , Page 39
Initial Study
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) through g) The General Plan Public Facilities Element, in concert with the Land Use and
Circulation Elements, establishes provisions to assure that adequate public facilities will be
available to meef the future needs of the community. Through these elements of the
General Plan, development assumptions provide the basis. for the projections of the type,
location and capacity of City services and utilities. The Oro Bay Specific Plan will require the
extension of Thermalito Irrigation District's public water and sewer system infrastructure, and
possible upgrades to sewer lift stations owned and operated by the Sewerage Commission-
Oroville Region (SC -OR). The current General Plan Diagram and Pre -zoning designations
allow for a lower intensity of development. The proposed project requests a higher density
and additional utilities and services for the new residents are required. The significance of
the change in development type and intensity to the need for utility and other services will
be addressed specifically and quantitatively in the EIR. The significance of the change in
generation rates identified in terms of the need for any new or upgraded facilities that in
turn, may result in an environmental impact will be addressed. The proposed project will
have potentially significant impacts on the available utilities and service systems.
i
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City,of Oroville
March 2006 Page 40 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With fess Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
® ❑ ❑ ❑
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
..of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
® ❑ ❑ ❑
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable" means that . the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects?
c) Does the project have environmental effects that
® ❑ ❑ ❑
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,. substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife populction to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the
number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminarte important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
As evaluated in Section 4, Biological Resources, and in Section 5, Cultural Resources, the
project may have potentially significant impacts on these resources. This will be further
evaluated in the EIR.'
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, .but cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a ?roject are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past. projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?
The project may have cumulatively considerable impacts on resources such as those
described in Section 1 Aesthetics, Section 2 Agriculture, Section 3 Air Quality, Section 6
Geology and Soils, Section 8 Hydrology and Water Quality, Section 9 Land U!:e Planning,
Section 11 Noise, Section 13 Public Services, Section 15 Traffic, and Section 16 Utilities and
Service Systems. This is potentially significant and will be further evaluated in the IEIR.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project Cit., of Oroville
March 2006 Page 41 Jnitial Study
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects. on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
There is the potential, as identified in Section 7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, that the
site may contain pesticide contamination from past farming operations. Additionally, this
project will induce substantially higher population growth in an area than is currently
understaffed by Fire Department personnel. These impacts are considered p6tentially
significant and will be further discussed in the EIR.
0
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 42 Initial Study
V. Project Data
A. Proiect Description
1. Type of Project: Specific Plan,. including Annexation of thirty-three (including the
Specific Plan) properties into the. City of Oroville, General Plan Amendment, Pre -
zoning
2. Proposed Density of Development: Maximum of 2,400 dwelling units on 421 acres
to low, medium, and high density residential, school, and parks. and open space,
and potential development of 655 additional homes on 149.6 acres to be
redesignated for medium density residential uses.
3. Access and Nearest Public Roads: SR 162 and Wilbur Road
4. Method of Sewage Disposal: Thermalito Irrigation District
�5. Source of Water Supply-.Thermalito Irrigation District
6. Proximity of Power Lines: SR 162
7. Potential for Further Land Divisions or Development: Yes
B. Environmental Settina
1. Terrain
a. General Topographic Character: Fairly flat with gently undulating mound-
swale topography
b. Slopes: Range between 2-5%
C. Elevation: Between 140 feet to 180 feet above mean sea level
d. Limiting Factors: Jurisdictional wetlands and Other Waters
2. Natural Hazards of the Land
e. UBC Earthquake Zone: Seismic Zone 3
f. Distance to Alquist-Priolo Zone: 11 miles
g. Erosion Potential: Low
h. Landslide Potential: Low
i. Fire Hazard: Medium
j. Expansive Soil Potential: Low
k. Liquefaction Potential: Low
3. Visual/Scenic Resources: Thermalito Afterbay, Oroville Dam and Table Mountain
4. Ambient Noise: SR 162 and short term construction noise
5. Sensitive Receptors: Potential for future school on Specific Plan site
6.. Vegetation: Non-native annual grasses and fortis
7. Wildlife Habitat: Biological Assessment, Wetland Delineation, and Raptor Survey
complete
8. Archaeological and Historic Resources in the Area: Low potential.
9. General Plan Designation: County: Agricultural. Residential. City: Resource
Management with a request for a General Plan Amendment to Medium and
High Density Residential and Resource Management.
10. Existing Zoning/Pre-zoning: County and City AR-5/AR-10 (Agricultural Residential 5
and 10 acre minimums) with a request for an amendment to City pre -rezoning to
R-1 (Single -Family Residential) and Specific Plan for mixed density residential and
for public and open space land uses.
11. Existing Land Use on the Specific Plan Site:. Vacant farmhouse and agricultural
equipment
12: Surrounding Area
a. Land Uses: Vacant land, Agricultural and Rural Residential, and Public.
b. City Pre -Zoning: Agricultural Residential 5 and 10 -Acre Minimum.
c. City General Plan Designation: Resource Management.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006. Page 43 Initial Study
13. Character of Site and Area: The proposed project site is identified as .Biggs USGS
Quadrangle map, California. The 421 -acre Specific Plan site is an agricultural
residential parcel with a vacant residence; the additional project area is partially
developed to large -lot rural residential uses. The Thermalito Afterbay is south of
the• project site.
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006 Page 44 Initial Study
•
VL REFERENCES '
1. Archaeological Inventory Study For Proposed Van Zile Residential Subdivision, c. 420
acres near Thermalito Afterboy, Butte County. Sean Michael Jensen. April 7, 2005.
2. Biological Resource Assessment, Oro Bay Development. Gallaway Consulting, Inc.
August 2005.
3. Butte County Department of Development Services Parcel Lookup Information,
http://www.buttecounty.net/dds/.
4. Butte County Interim Farmland Map of 2002. California Department of Conservation,
Division of Land Resource Protection. July 20031
5. City of Oroville Environmental Review Guidelines
6. City of Oroville Fire Department Standard of Coverage Study
http://www.cityoforoville.org/coverstandards.html,
7. City of Oroville General Plan A
8. City of Oroville General Plan Diagram
9. City of, Oroville Zoning Code
10. -City of Oroville Zoning Map
11. Conceptual Sewer Layout Storm Drain Layout, and Water Layout for Oro Bay in
Oroville. NorthStar Engineers. October 18, 2005.
12. Delineation of the Waters of the United States, Van Zile Property. Gallaway Consulting,
Inc. October 2004.
13. Electronic correspondence regarding the Draft Transportation Impact Study from Ravi
Narayanan, Wood Rodgers consultants.
14. Electronic correspondence with the City of Oroville Community Development
Department. November 2005 -March 2006.
15. Environmental Constraints and Opportunities Analysis, Van Zile Property. Gallaway
Consulting, Inc. October 2004.
16. Letter from Caltrans; District 3, regarding the Memordndum of Assumption for the
traffic impact study for Oro Bay, from Bruce De Terra, Chief. October 17, 2005.
17. Oro -Bay Specific Plan; Administrative Draft, prepared by William Hezmalhalch
Architect, Inc. November 10, 2005.
18. Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, Oroville Dam Boulevard Residential
Development. Prepared by ENGEO Incorporated: December 21, 2004..
19. USGS Oroville, California 7.5' Series Quad, 1976
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation Area Project City of Oroville
March 2006. Page 45 r- Initial Study
•
CONSULTED AGENCIES
®.
Butte Co ALUC
❑
CA Dept Conservation
®
CA Dept Water Resources
®
Butte Co Air Quality
®
CA Dept'Fish and Game
❑
LOPUD
®
Butte Co Assoc of Gov
®
CA Regional Water Quality
®
Thermalito Irrigation Dist
®
Butte Co Ag Comm
®
CA Dept Transportation
®
SC-OR
®
Butte Co Assessor
®
US Army Corps
❑
SWFP,
•
®
Butte Co Env Health
®
US Fish and Wildlife
❑
Oroville Elementary
®
Butte. Co Planning Dept
®
SBC Pacific Bell
®
Oroville High School
•
®
Butte Co Public Works
®
PG&E
❑
. Palermo Union School Dist
•
®
Butte Co Farm Bureau
❑
EI Medio Fire District
®
Thermalito Union School Dist -
®
Butte LAFCo
®
Feather River Rec and Park
❑
Union Pacific Railroad
•
.
a
'
Oro Bay Specific Plan and Annexation
Area Project
City of Oroville
March 2006
Page 46
Initial Study
_
r •
N ' W, atr �° ro"i ✓...:•rccs:-w..:...:A,:r,.cara.:;.>��,.
.x 7:,rsn r .�? �', s 5Hw (v rk-K.••rm{� ...e .f . . , ,kt s i awe.
b
y S
rY_ f
S< - n
L i v 4
�' OJEC
a. 3
b
Y
5 4
f.
P
t m:� .te <•
s'
r.
ATI rN
.r
°r
Y«
a
v
ss �;
n'
F.i rt i
,r, a
a—
t 3.
r
A J
N-
,fi S i
- Y•
�
r -
„.t t °
f. .f� A . f ♦
Cs { �•� ny
• � - d. A q
,
1
-r
hl
S- '^
.r ND
:G
r4i i�
„
,
r {
k
F"
3�
1•
ir>T'
�-r
X
3 /
i
s,
'v t
r
� Y
f
s �&
r'.ar
ti ar
$` t
t
5 {
a
1 zT
,
I -
Nf
MINN
- " .' `=YFYFc - . ,. .3 3 cr -'. , .•u .. ,8. .`<'>+ .._- ;, -- : ti•S t d :I: r
'� ->w✓5 :."Y.ir' >„ J.,"'. _u "a�"�o'". �'ar L' ��' it � :2' +F.' - '" _ _� k,. ,3� '`� d: _
-fi�-rr i ,S 6' •Y' W% - t1:. � .,--'"'j, � G' .l:
4
r+
]. 4
F` R
-
f
-
-0
.�- S' • ':a -SBR
<
l .AMOM-
k >1
a
- z
_
a • ry
s.
t
, a r , - >. .,•# -: � : m . ,,. ... ru.•.. , .,. ,fir
• - of ..:r5" .' ... "' - t ... _ _ ,><• .,, y' w ..: t -
• F . t � .:,._.2.' a-, r v .r,. -Y _. ,. -_ _. ., 1.
� � f
rN I+
r,
r +!
.3 .� -:i ,• -1F' €* �. .•fir
n.
V
'� ST
/.+ _:fes .::I. .c/.• -€
y X
U/El",r S-
r
' r<.Rc r '''. ,_ , r' a, '. s { '.r .'`z .Sf /r ra :J. • •. s' r
P IY Q.
A a a♦. £ 1 is? �, s
x
} 1. 1• �`. r _ P ,v Y . ' .. 't t. r .':H_'r. .: : n '{l � ..
qq
t
>� 55 r
t c 7 r
t
�r
�C
7
d
-�r- ':� . .�' � ! -,r• � OJEC L`OCATI y N
t
S a•
rte,
i'
r
,d
S` r
J 1
{ ''x5"•. rayl' < _ .fir,- -'4: i' .q.
°
5
^� ,T> •k l •i''.'
�i
ml 1{" � •Y
. •yf , 3 :.� 9 1
tr' -
lr 4 i.
1. S �.
r�
1
v
r . -
g
S 5-
r
' ,r .:i"r s'• •' .e• . . , _: _._... m {: ice...
K
9 �
Y v
s
n
r
k
i•
C
ilil
�l+v i+ Nva
nr�k-
$
r, a
a
S
X 40
r
:�' -• T- s - •L
t a t u
.w
/ r
:
,
- - - - �• < :�% r a . � .,.��._ __ � "..: �-�a, .� _� sem• _><F
S.A -
•`¢ e , ,�.� w �.-> i=• x RUNWAY'PR - OTECTION:"i NONE
d+ ..
pI
�' r V•' F
'. de �/ •fir(
v W
Y P
a $
r.
f
r
4 S !^
-. ,&• �• 'A fir!^
,
,h
,. '.... -:, w F :. r ,rte^' s� ` ` .>>✓". ,' ` '- - ;�' - F
_
- r - u, T � , -. t w�.,Y' O a -f A'-' e F a, � ...a . _ u Yy >.., rx... •'�31 . _... Irl' .a.: -...
�,. ., a A. { .t� _Js x e , - � 3 - : , ,.. <��,u _ , � _ �, ., te •�`:- - , : � ,�„ �' ., � .-f"v ,�' -� ,s1,. f � as.s ,,-� �.:-,��< . . ; < r, - Q -,.tai APPROA8lAND DEPARTURE ^ZONEAND SIDELINE ZONE
F -g
_
r:
,tet ,�' Ai .rs.. ,f✓' . he A . ..
•
,
�.��.ai-r. .:, , 'fix': :. .. .. _.: ., •i .. �., r �_....
. •t wz ., , r .� ,. . ,. .. , zr 't. - , _ _ .., �: . , - ., r , r EXTENDED APP
9,r/ , . _^" r - „ -_>:_ ,-. • .`._ „ z ->... E TE DED . ROACH" AND..DEBARTURE ZON >
x - f
Sol
�� fi •. .A ,. r<.s 4 r rie.
fi 1♦
,
,
-J
4 �r
Zr r
r
x
x
a .ti
r: i^
i
,r
l G'
a
AF TR FlC PATTERN
r. TTE
y�
i
f
Y
a -
rtr
r.
<s
j
x.
d
y
4 . ,�firr •r3r 3P �, Y _
S
•i<
Y
x
„
A,
... .._ y , .F'.' t. -w :, .a<-:SH.r ..., `... :i :f' ,. y ,yA,•a' b ',xl `� ' } J I
.. v> ... .. . , .. �b :t%<,,:; ..W s<. Gam..: M k .9"� .. _ - - .f` 2„3�� � ,.��ii: . •�. n
IVE
OTHERAIRPORT:ENVIRONS
a 1 , , ,. .. � ,�.'< ", s.��.. ._��
:
AIRPORT LAND USE -
COMMISSION, tXHIBIT
ORO' BAY ' ,.
,
:
,
., _ TIE � C!Ol1NTY .CAU1A
NOW
.
BAY
NO
1'. EXISTING; LAND USE VACANT PASTURE LAND
`
2. PROPOSED LAND. USE: MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION 20 DeclarQliOn Drive
A NT : RANCHETTE.RESIDENTiAL' W/ 'LESS':THAN 1. DWELLING
3. ADJ CE USES .,
•
UNIT, PER ACREs"� � `: • ' . : - , . � . �:..' � yll Engineers Surveyors Phone: (530)893- a.� (530) 893
Chi 9 97
5 3
..,
c]dgo ..CAllfomlo '` • - Web. Site: www nbrf606 enq.c6 _ 2
113
' 'A,PJi 0.7lH28�083 & 064 ,'" FEBRUARY 2006 JOB N0. 8917
J
a
MR
51
�I
9.78Ac
T. 19N. R. 3E. M. D. B, &M.
STATE HIGHWAY
l t OROMLLE
. Z 9 MAN 31AL
;a
RUNGE SU6191W ►0N 142 M.O.R.11/13 2-27-97
SOUTH THERMAM M.O.R. 8K.2 PG. 176
30-26
47
162
'
18.75Ac
i.:
TABIZ Iff 001.c MRSE@7
5.sA
1 4.8'Ac
� �
" lOoRS•13
R-
61
6a
OP66
02...
At4
107.23Ac
5.23AC. ; r 22QSta0
�4.7G4c 67
38.79Ac
4.1c
5.0S4c�
4 3
30
'
18.08Ac
i
----
DFJVE
!1 '
/
'1
.1
58.24Ac
256.84Ac
97.51&
OR iL
;> ' A1RPORT'.
. Z 9 MAN 31AL
;a
RUNGE SU6191W ►0N 142 M.O.R.11/13 2-27-97
SOUTH THERMAM M.O.R. 8K.2 PG. 176
30-26
47
162
404 .
2.37Ac± 27`
T676.t];S �
►/` 1547.73'
_ 3 JOAc
41
52 � ^
96RS78 100.00Ac
YAC± 6.30Ac; i 4OAc \ 6 J ( g
NOTE , These parcels cre fort
only and may not cwsb rrie k9d P n e
10Ac
Butte County Assessor's Map
Book 30, Page 26
CMTM 'BY D8 C1�FITm ON 1-11-2001
RDW BY D6 'I&M-SED CSV 1-11—?00t
TABIZ Iff 001.c MRSE@7
5.sA
1 4.8'Ac
61
6a
OP66
02...
At4
107.23Ac
5.23AC. ; r 22QSta0
�4.7G4c 67
143PS30
4.1c
5.0S4c�
4 3
30
45
/
,
97.51&
OR iL
;> ' A1RPORT'.
34 '
J66AC
50
31
8
164AC i
404 .
2.37Ac± 27`
T676.t];S �
►/` 1547.73'
_ 3 JOAc
41
52 � ^
96RS78 100.00Ac
YAC± 6.30Ac; i 4OAc \ 6 J ( g
NOTE , These parcels cre fort
only and may not cwsb rrie k9d P n e
10Ac
Butte County Assessor's Map
Book 30, Page 26
CMTM 'BY D8 C1�FITm ON 1-11-2001
RDW BY D6 'I&M-SED CSV 1-11—?00t
J-)
COUNTY OF BUTTE
OFFICIAL RECEIPT
45000
/
OFFICE OR DEPARTMENT ISSUING RECEIPT
Received from /���'` AaloCzA-7—a
2Q&
++mac
, �/fj"
The Sum of dltt / h�/ 1AA0
For�(�C (�NC�S7'e�G y ll euj
Received:
Received By—
CASH
Title
CHECK� / By
DAVCO BU SyI IESS FORMS • (530) 743-8511 8
Form 4702
r
698111
MAP ASSOCIATES, INC. dba NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING 111 MISSION RANCH BLVD., STE. #100 CHICO, CA 95926
28921
r
County of Butte 4/13/2006 ;
Date Type Reference Original Amt. Balance Due Discount Payment ,
4/13/2006 Bill 1,531.00 1,531.00 r 1,531.00
:. Check Amount. • 1,531.00
OPERATING ACCT - Oro Bay #8917 ALUC Fee 1,531.00
AM
COUNTY OF BUTTE 450008
OFFICIAL RECEIPT
a PLANotAj('
OFFICE OR DEPARTMENT ISSUING RECEIPT
Received from
/ //G�'`S�aC� �l 2020d6li
The Sum of 6/ e 7hbtJS,4-M/J qi.16--lCIAZ�V Z& Dom' — � .
For
Received:
• - Received B -
Y'
CASH" QjVLdfL �G/9,t/
Title
CHECK f /, By
DAVCO BUQNp SS FORMS • 0301743-8511 Form 84702
`
MAP ASSOCIATES, INC. dba NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING 111 MISSION RANCH BLVD., STE. #100 CHICO, CA 95926
28921
Countyof Butte ^ " 4/13/2006
Date ' . Type Reference . Original Amt. Balance Due Discount Payment
4/13/2006 Bill i 1,531.00 1,531.00 •1,531.00
Check Amount 1,531.00
.'OPERATING ACCT Oro`Bay#8917 ALUC Fee 1,531.00
COUNTY OF BUTTE 450008
OFFICIAL RECEIPT
OFFICE OR DEPARTMENT ISSUING RECEIPT •! 20
Received from
The Sum of (�A'�yliA�M/�cvUNO/ %�j�// D/�•� — aY $ �j Uv
Por
Received: Received By
k
CASH ❑ Title
r
a
CHECKBy
DAVCO BUPyl IESS FORMS • (530) 743-8511 Form 84702
r
y
Friday, April 14; 2006 Development Services
PLANNING DIVISION
Counter
$0.00
ALUC
(Airport Land Use)
Person
'Mark
Public Works
Payment Date
04/14/2006
Receipt Number
1450008
Received From
ironmental H
MAP Associates
$0.00 1
Applicant
:same
$0.00
Application Number
',A 06-16
or In Reference To
(Recording Fee)
Parcel Numb
'030-260-053, 054
Check Numb
$1, 500 or $2,000
Total Received
$1,53 1. 00
FTotal Fees $1,531.00,
Ver. 1.0
DDS Planning$0.00
$0.00
ALUC
(Airport Land Use)
(General Fund)7]
Non Sufficient
Funds ($25.00 Fee)
Public Works
1Cell Tower
($2500.00)
$0.00
(Land Development)
ironmental H
$0.00 1
CDF (Fire D
$0.00
$0.00
NOD / NOE
(Recording Fee)
Aunt Minnie
$0.00
$1, 500 or $2,000
Planning Review
$0.00 1
Fish/Game
$0.00
ALUC
(Airport Land Use)
i $1,531.00
$0.00 i
Non Sufficient
Funds ($25.00 Fee)
1Cell Tower
($2500.00)
$0.00
Public Sales $0.00
Ag Fee:
$0.00