Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-012WHEREAS, a public entity, the Depatrt~l~ent of Development Services has petitioned the Butte County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to amend the Chico Area Land Use Map From Low Density Residential to Commercial, from Industrial to Commercial, from Commercial to Low Density Residential, from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential, from Low Density Residential to Public, and from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential for that property identified on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto; and a text a~~~endment to the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element "Polices Applicable to SpeciCc Areas" section, adding a new section entitled "ChapmaniMulberry Neighborhood" (Exhibit A-2}. WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment has been studied and reviewed by the Butte County Planning Commission and a public hearing held pursuant to law, at which time all interested persons were heard; and WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has reviewed and considered the contents of the Initial Study (Exhibit A-3} prepared on the amendment purs~.~ant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and RESOLU'T'ION OF "THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A TEXT AMENDMENT TO TI IF. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMF,NT AND A MODIFICATION TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE. CHAPMAN~MULBERRY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has held hearings on the General Play Amendments at whicl~l all interested parties were heard; and WHEREAS, the Butte Comity Board of Supervisors finds the proposed amendment. complies with all elements of the Butte County General Plan and comprises an overall internally consistent whole, specifically: 1. "The amendment complies with the policies of the Butte County General Plan. 2. The amendlT~ents provide for compatible development with existil~g land uses. NOW, 'i'1lEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. "hhe General }'tan Amendment to amend the Chico Area Land Use Map Isom Low Density Residential to Commercial, fi-am IndusU-ial to Commercial, from Commercial to Low Density Residential, from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential, fi-om Low Density Residential to Public, and [i~om Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential as shown on tl~lc attached Exhibit A-1; and a text amendment to the "Policies Applicable to Specific Areas" sectiol~ of the Land Use Element of the General Plan adding a new section entitled "Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood" {Exhibit A-2) are hereby incorporated by reference, 2. The General Plan Amendment is hereby adopted and by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte as amendlnenis to the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, said Amendments to be the land use policy for the County of Butte in the affected area for all lindings pursuant to law. BE IT FUR"T'HER RESOLVED, that pursica~7t to Govenunent Code Section 65359 that the General Plan be endorsed to show that the above amendments have been approved by this Board. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte Colu~ty Board of Supervisors on this 25th day of ,Tanuary _ , 200, by the following vote: r1YES: Supervisors Beeler, Houx, ,Josiassen and Chair Dolan. NOES: None ABSENT: None NOT VOTINCJ: None __. ~ _ ~ __ ,TAN DOI_,A ,CHAIR ButtclCounty Board of Supervisors . ~ ATTEST: .fohn S. Blacklock, Chief Administrative Off iccr and C~erl< of tic Boa ~ ,, ~ ;~ , f f ~~ ,~ b~ ~ ,.- - - Deputy ~ Chapman\Mulberry Neighborhood Plan General Plan ~a~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ •, ~~ _ .. ~' ~ ~„~' ~'~ s. w+'"~ ~. ,- ~" ~.~ .r ~ ~~ gw s.• w w w w rs s r r- i ,` ~'OA , ~ r ',d~, .q~ , '~D `. ~. ~' ~~ ~~ aUTTO CWNTY '~ Dt!'ARTMlNT Oi OMIOrMlIiT ElItVICl3 ~~ .~ ors sawices ~ ~,- "' LU-5 C =COMMERCIAL LDR = LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MDR ^ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1 =INDUSTRIAL P =PUBLIC .~ Chapman\Mulberry NNphborfiood Pian Area " 500 O 500 1000 Fset DATE PRINTiDx JANUARY 10r 2000 eslprojsctsld+spman.apt Exhibit A-1 EXHIBIT A-2 DRAFT GENERAL PLAN TEXT CHAPMANIMULBERRY NEIGHBORHOOD 'The following section is added to the "Policies Applicable to Specific Planning Areas" in the Land Use Element of the Butte County General Plan ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of the policies and implementation measures included in this section are to preserve and enhance the single family residential character of the neighborhood core and promote the revitalization of the ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood. This section includes a summary description of the existing characteristics to be preserved while including policies and implementation measures that are intended to help revitalize and stabilize these two neighborhoods. Community Character The 338-acre Chapman/Mulberry area is predarninantly an unincorporated county island surrounded by the City of Chico. Bath are older, well-established neighborhoods in a mature urban forest environment. According to 1998 County records, the area is comprised of approximately 800 dwellings and a population of roughly 2,100 people, Portions of the area have been annexed to the city in recent years as a prerequisite to obtaining sanitary sewer service from the City. Like most of the Chico Urban Area, the Chapman/Mulberry area is subject to the Nitrate Compliance Plan, which prohibits creation of new residential parcels smaller than one acre in size. The majority of the homes are detached single family dwellings, and there are relatively few multi-family dwellings. CJroupings of dwellings are relatively common in the area. In the Mulberry area, roughly 17 percent of the dwellings occur as groups of one or more structures. In the Chapman area, approximately 10 percent of the dwellings occur in such groupings. Mobile homes comprise roughly three percent of the housing stock in the ChapmanlMulberry area. The area has a significant number of structures in need of repair and rehabilitation. According to the County records only 13.6 percent of the dwellings were rated as meeting current minimum building code requirements in the Chapman area. By contrast, over 28 percent of the dwellings in the Mulberry area were classified as meeting the building code. Housing condition is also related to the age of construction. 4 Over 73 percent of the dwellings were built prior to 1950 in the Chapman/Mulberry area. The County has and will continue to invest CDBG funds to rehabilitate substandard homes. As of 1998, nearly all of the parcels in the Chapman/Mulberry area have been built upon. Roughly 6.8 percent of the parcels are undeveloped. While many of the existing parcels could be further divided under County zoning, few are sufficiently lame to meet the minimum one-acre lot size requirement of the Nitrate Compliance Plan. According to 1998 County records, a large percentage (41 percent in Chapman and 45 percent in Mulberry} of the dwellings are renter-occupied. This statistic also reflects a larger majority of home ownership in both neighborhoods, thereby providing considerable social stability. Infrastructure is lacking in much of the ChapmanlMulberry area. For example, street pavement width varies, and sidewalks, curbs, and gutters are rare. However, the absence of sidewalks and the rural streetscape is viewed by the community as a valuable amenity that should be retained. The major infrastructure deficiency is primarily due to the lack of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage system. This area is within the Nitrate Compliance Plan. The County is actively taking the lead in bringing sewer service to the area. Due to an inadequate storm drainage system and other factors, portions of the area are subject to seasonal ponding of runoff during peak storms. With regard to non-residential uses, there are limited commercial and industrial uses concentrated on the southern and northern edges of the area. Scattered commercial and light industrial uses occur within the residential area, resulting in land use incompatibilities. Many of these commercial and industrial uses preceded the zoning in the area and are inconsistent and incompatible with the residential neighborhood character because these uses generate vehicle traffic in an area that contains narrow streets, create noise that disturbs residents of the area, generate hazardous materials that may be harmful to the residents of the area, and cause aesthetic impacts. In spite of problems with the area's housing stock and infrastructure, residents enjoy a variety of natural amenities, including the mature urban forest, neighborhood and regional parks, and the riparian environment afforded by Little Chico Creek. The area is also served. by several community service centers, several churches, and the Chapman Elementary School. Also, the Neighborhood is in close proximity to a wide range of commercial uses located on the perimeter of the area. Land Use Policies The County General Plan Land Use Diagram shall be amended to incorporate the land use designations shown in Figure LU-5. The map shall include the following land use designations, as specified; 5 - Industrial and Commercial (neighborhood-serving retail} -Along 20th Street in recognition of existing long-term uses and where compatible with the residential character. - Commercial -Along Humboldt Avenue in recognition of existing, long-term uses and where compatible with the residential character, and between 16th and 20th Streets, west of Chapman Elementary School. - Low Density Residential (LDR} -Mulberry area. - Low Density Residential (LDR), with limited commercial, industrial, and public uses, where specified -Chapman area. - Medium Density Residential - In combination with the neighborhood commercial center between 16th and 20th Streets. 2. The County Zoning Ordinance shall be revised to include a new overlay district entitled "CIM" {Chapman/Mulberry) specifically applicable to the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood. The new overlay district shall address the following issues: - Amortization of Nonconforming uses. This section shall include provisions for an active pragram to amortize existing commercial and industrial nonconforming uses. The primary focus of the amortization pragram shall be incompatible industrial & commercial uses within the residential portions of the Neighborhood area. - Permitted Uses. All uses allowed in the base zoning district shall be permitted within the C/M Combining district. - Yard Area Requirements. Variable yard setbacks shall be adopted to accommodate existing dwellings constructed in required yard areas before current requirements were adopted and to foster a pedestrian orientation. 3. The County Zoning Map shall be amended to apply appropriate zoning districts to the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan area consistent with Figure LU-5 and include the C/M Combining district. 4. The County shall continue to promote and facilitate the rehabilitation of the existing housing stock using a variety of applicable, viable programs. 5. Pre-1976 mobile homes shall be phased out and may not be replaced unless the new unit meets HUD housing standards. 6 6. The City and County shall f-acilitate the relocation of the Chico Scrap Metal Yard to an industrial zoned location that does not have conflicts with residentially zoned and used lands. 7. The County and the City of Chico shall both adopt and implement this plan along with the appropriate ordinances for all portions of the ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood. Neighborhood Design and Buffer Policies 1. All new projects and building permits within the Neighborhood shall adhere to the applicable Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Design Standards contained in the C1M (Chapman/Mulberry Combining) Toning. 2. A landscaped solid wall shall be established between the industrial land uses along 20th Street and the Chapman Elementary School. 3. The urban forest of the neighborhood shall be preserved and expanded. 4. The City of Chico and the County shall work to achieve community open space along the north bank of Little Chico Creek between the Bruce Street and the Boucher Street bridges. 5. The main entrances to the business located in the Community Commercial Center on East 16th Street shall be oriented to face East 16th Street. Circulation Policies 1. The special street sections contained in the Chapmantown-Mulberry Irraprovement Report shall be incorporated into the County Improvement Stanrlarcls and shall be specifically applied to the Neighborhood. 2. High speed vehicle traffic occurs on some streets creating a serious safety hazard. Develop and implement appropriate methods of reducing vehicle speed on the following streets: Virginia Street, Bruce Street, Cleveland Street, Boucher Street, and Guiil Street. Particular consideration should be given to ensuring that the design of any speed-reducing devices used on E. 16th Street are not in conflict with school bus operations. 3. The ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan incorporates by reference the redesign of the connecting street between E. 16th Street and Cleveland Avenue in front of Chapman School, identified as "Scheme 1 -McKinney Acquisition Redevelopment Plan" in the Chapman-Mulberry Intproverrtent ReRc~r7, dated April 1994. 4. A consistent streetscape design shall be created for the entire Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood that specifies street trees and street lighting fixtures. In keeping with the residents' stated desire 7 to adhere to less urban standards, lighting shall be the minimum necessary for safety. As such, new fixtures shall be placed at street intersections and at acceptable locations in the center of long blocks. 5. A pedestrian/bicycle circulation plan shall be implemented that provides for the construction of sidewalks and off-road bicycle/pedestrian pathways within the Neighborhood, where possible. Particular attention shall be given to ensuring access to the regional park. The pedestrian/bicycle circulation plan shall be developed within the community park and shall provide for both internal and external linkages. 6. County Transit and Chico Area Transit shall cooperate to ensure that public transit routes and stops are available to and within the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood. Where possible, stops shall be designed with tw-n-outs that minimize disruption of traffic flow. 7. Vehicle access to the Community Commercial Center located between East 16th Street and East 20th Street shall be from East 16th Street only. Public Facility and Services Policies Public investment in infrastructure upgrades shall occur to the maximum extent possible as a means of stimulating private investment in the ChapmanlMuiberry Neighborhood. 2. Septic leachfield systems shall be phased out in compliance with the Nitrate Compliance Plan. 3. The County shall continue to support public service organizations operating within and serving the Neighborhood. 4. 'The Sheriff's Department shall continue to maintain its presence within the Neighborhood with appropriate staffing levels. 5. The Sheriff's Department shall encourage creation and operation of an active Neighborhood Watch program. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM Zoning and Land Use Consistency Consistency with County General Pian. The County shall initiate re-zoning of the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood in accordance with the C/M (Chapman/Mulberry) Combining District described in this section. 8 Time Frame: FY 2000-2001 Amortization of Nonconforming Uses. Legal commercial and industrial nonconforming land uses in the residential neighborhood core areas shall be amortized and phased out within ten years of the adoption of this Plan. The owners of the legal nonconforming uses shall be notified of their status and amortization period. The City and County shall work together to facilitate the relocation in the least disruptive manor. Time Frame: FY 2000-2010 Neighborhood Rehabilitation Neighborhood Clean-Up. The County shall assist community based organizations in their efforts to organize a neighborhood clean-up program. Time Frame: On-Going Relocate Chico Scrap Metal Yard. The City and County shall cooperatively take the necessary steps to relocate the Chico Scrap Metal Yard to a more appropriate location. Time Frame: Five nears Community Design Neighborhood Design Guidelines. The County Development Services Department, Planning Division and the Building Division shall institute procedures that will ensure that ail development proposals and building permits approved in the ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood are consistent with the Chapman/Mulberry Design Standards contained in the CiM (Chapman/Mulberry Combining} Zoning, Time Frame: On-Going Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Streets. The County Development Services Department, Planning Division and the Public Works Department shall ensure that all new discretionary development proposals include street designs that are consistent with the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Road Improvements contained in Appendix II of the Butte County Improvement Standards. Time Frame: On-Going 4 Chapman Elementary School Buffer. A landscaped solid masonry wall shall be installed on the industrial land along the common boundary of the Chapman Elementary School and the industrial uses to the south along 20th Street. Time Frame: Two years Preserve and Enhance the Urban Forest. The design guidelines shall require the planting of new trees in front yard areas for ail new building permits. Grants shall also be pursued to plant new trees to replace those previously removed. Time Frame; On-Going Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. The County Development Services Department, Planning Division and the Public Works Department shall ensure that all discretionary development proposals include bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the locations shown in Figure LU-5 ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. Time Frame: On-Going Capital Improvement Program Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Streets/Storm Drain~e. The County shall include the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Road Improvements contained in Appendix II of the Butte County Improvement Standards in its Capital Improvement Program. Priority attention shall be given to street reconstruction projects that will provide maximum storm drainage improvements in areas mast affected by seasonal flooding. Time Frame: FY 2000-2001 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. The County shall facilities shown in Figure LU-5 ChapmanlMulberry Circulation in its Capital hmprovement Program. include construction of bicycle and pedestrian Neighborhood Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Time Frame: FY 2000-2001 10 Sewer Facilities. Individual septic systems shall be phased out and a sanitary sewer system shall be installed to the ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood in accordance with the Nitrate Compliance Plan. Time Frame: As specified in the Nitrate Compliance Plan, yet to be adopted. Vehicle Speed Controls. The County shall evaluate and include in the design appropriate vehicle speed control measures on the following streets: Virginia Street, Bruce Street, Cleveland Street, Boucher Street, and Guill Street. Time Frame: FY 2000-2001 Coordination with City of Chico. Portions of the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood are within the Chico city limits. Achieving consistency between City and County general plan, zoning, design guidelines, and improvement standards is critical to the success of the revitalization programs envisioned in this section. The County shall initiate communication with the City of Chico relative to achieving consistency between the city and county in all of the above areas. Both agencies shall adopt the Plan along with appropriate implementing ordinances. Time Frame: FY 2000-2001 Community Open Space. The City and County shall seek funding to acquire and provide community open space along the north bank of Little Chico Creek between Bruce Street and Boucher Street bridges. Time Frame: Five years K: \PROJECTS\CPA\CHAPMAN. GPA\REV ISE - 1 \GPRESO. RF,V 11 Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry i~~ighborhood Plan COUNTY OF BUTTE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND: 1. Name of Proponent: County of Butte 2. Address: 7 County Center Drive. Oroville, CA 95965 Phone: (530) 538-7601 3. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan, July 1999 Page 1 4. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment, Zoning Revision, and Revision to County Improvement Standards 5. Project Description and Location of Parcel(s): The proposed General Plan Amendment includes text_and graphic descriptions of existing community character, proposed land use policies and an implementation program. The proposed Zoning revision creates a new C1M (ChapmanlMulberry Combining) Zone with specific zone requirements and design standards applicable to the C1M Combining District zone. Accompanying the General Plan and Zoning amendments is a revision to the County Improvement Standards, which provides for specific street standards within the Plan area. The Project area consists of the ±338-acre generally bordered by the following streets: Highway 99, Fair Street, Ninth Street 6. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: Refer to Attachment "A" far a listing of affected Assessor's Parcels. 7. Date Checklist Submitted: September 2, 1999 II. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there will NOT be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION with mitigations) will be prepared. I find that the proposed project GOULD 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 adequately addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry ivCighborhood Plan Page 2 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 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 at are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. t Prep ed by' Date Re ewed by Date Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry (veighborhaod Plan III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Page 3 The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics __ Hazards and Hazardous _ Population and Housing _ Agricultural Resources Materials _ Public Services _ Air Quality _ Hydrology and Water Quality _ Recreation _ Biological Resources _ Land Use and Planning __ TransportationlTraffic Cultural Resources _ Mineral Resource _ Utilities and Service _ Geology and Soils _ Noise Systems __ Mandatory Findings or Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required far all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cifes in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone}. A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific screening analysis}. 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant if there are one or mare "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4} "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level {mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in a earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063{c){3}(D}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Aesthetics Would the project: Page 4 Environmental issue Potentially. Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Itrpact With Mitigation impact Incor orated _ a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ' X i ~, scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X 'including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? _ ___ _.____ _ _ j c) Substantially degrade the existing visual X character or quality of the site and its j surroundings? ___ ~ _____ ~I d) Create a new source of substantial light or i X ' glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? _ __ _ ~ Discussion: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The Project area does not constitute a scenic vista: it is characterized predominantly by single family dwellings within a mature urban forest. As such, views of and through the site are limited by structural improvements and vegetation. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, frees, rack outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Refer to discussion in items "a" and "c". c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? A key component of the proposed Project includes amortization of incompatible uses and implementation of design standards. When fully implemented, these Project components are intended to result in an improvement in the visual character of the Project area. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The residents of the Project area have expressed a desire to maintain asemi-rural character, including limiting sources of outdoor illumination such as street lights. The design standards included in the Project limit glare-causing outdoor lighting fixtures. The standards also specifically limit the use and placement of street lights. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan Agricultural Resources Page 5 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 (1990 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Environmental issue Potentially Less Than Less Thane No Impact Significant. Significant Significant impact With Mitigation Impact. ' Incor orated _ ', a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, X or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources r Agent, to non-agricultural use? __ _ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use, or a Williamson Act contract? i c} Involve other changes in the existing X 1 ', environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, , ~, to non-agricultural use? j Discussion: 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? There are no agricultural operations in the Project area; however, some residents currently keep a variety of small farm animals on their properties. In response to the expressed desire of a majority of the residents, the proposed Zoning ©rdinance revision allows for continued keeping of poultry and rabbits, subject to limitations. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The Project area is not subject to Williamson Act contracts. The existing limited agricultural uses occurring on some properties, particularly the keeping of farm animals, is not consistent with current zoning. The proposed Zoning ordinance will permit the keeping-of limited types and numbers of farm animals. c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? No effects an agricultural operations are anticipated. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry R,eighborhood Plan Air Quality Page 6 Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: - -- - Environmental issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Impact i lncor orated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ; X !, the applicable air quality Ian? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? ____ __ __ __ - ble net I r id l ti l R lt i X y cons e a ve c} esu n a cumu a increase of any criteria for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable ~ federal or state ambient air quality standard ', (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? __ ', --... -- d} Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X ~, pollutant concentrations? _._ _ __ -- i -- t- _._. e} Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? ( j Discussion: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Project area is located in the central portion of the Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin and is under the jurisdiction of the Butte County Air Pollution Control District. The County has been classified as being either non-attainment or transitional non-attainment for ozone (state and federal), carbon monoxide (federal}, and PM~p (state). However, air quality has improved over the last three years, and the Butte Gounty Air Quality Management District (BCAOMD) and Butte County Association of Governments recently submitted a redesignation request to the Environmental Protection Agency to certify Butte County as being in attainment of air quality standards. The Project proposes changes in land use designation that will not affect air quality. For example, residential density will not change. In fact, proposed circulation-related policies could facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel within the Project area, thereby reducing air emissions associated with vehicle use. Amortization provisions of the proposed zoning could result in the displacement of certain industrial uses that are sources of air emissions. However, these would simply be relocated within the county. The Butte County Air Pollution Control District recommends incorporating alt feasible mitigation measures to reduce the emissions to less-than-significant levels, which for this project would include controlling fugitive dust and enforcing existing requirements for burning. Inasmuch as any construction activity encouraged by the Project, such as street improvements to improve stormwater drainage, would be part of a County public works project, these measures would be incorporated as part of the construction specifications Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Iveighborhoad Plan Page 7 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Refer to item "a", above. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria for which the project region is non- attainmentunder an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? No increase is anticipated. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Chapman School, located within the Project area, contains sensitive receptors. As noted above, the Project is not expected to result in increased air emissions. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No objectionable odors will be created as a result of this project. Biological Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant impact .With Mitigation Impact Incor orated __ a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X 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? ~ i I b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X 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? ,__ ----- _- r _ _~ I c} Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by , Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, I etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of X 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? __ __ i___ Initial Study - ChapmantMulberry Neighborhood Plan Page 8 ---_ - e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X _ I protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy ar ordinance? - ---- - --- - - _ _ ----- - - -- f} Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ~ X ;Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion: 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? The Project area consists of along-established residential community within a mature urban forest. No special-status species are known to live within or depend upon the area due to the density of residential development and on-going human activity. The Project area is transected on its northern edge by Little Chico Creek, which serves as habitat for certain species. The Project proposes no changes to this area and is not expected to affect wildlife. 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? While the Project site is transected on the northern edge by Little Chico Creek, the Project proposes no work in that area. In fact, a policy in the proposed General Plan text calls for preservation and maintenance of the creek corridor. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not /invited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? There are no wetlands within the Project area. 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? As noted, the Project area is predominantly developed with single family dwellings. The principal opportunity for unimpeded wildlife travel occurs within the Little Chico Creek corridor. As noted below (item "e"), the Project includes provisions for enhancing this valuable habitat. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy ar ordinance? The Project includes policies that will expand the existing tree cover and preserve open space along the north bank of Little Chico Creek, between the Bruce Street and the Boucher Street bridges. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry I~cighborhood Plan Page 9 The dominant tree present throughout the Project is the blue oak {Quercus douglasii). Since blue oaks are accustomed to a dry season, frequent watering associated with residential domestic irrigation could hasten their death. Native valley oaks {Quercus lobata) prefer more water at their roots. While no tree impacts are anticipated, street improvements, including storm drainage construction, could affect trees within the public right-of-way. Inasmuch as any construction activity encouraged by the Project, such as street improvements to improve stormwater drainage, would be part of a County public works project, tree preservation measures would be incorporated as part of the construction specifications 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? There are no plans with which to conflict. Cultural Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant impact With Mitigation Impact '_ _ _ In_cor orated a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the X significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5? _ . _ _ _ _...- -I ----- _ ___ ~ ~ __ _ } --- g b Gause a substantial adverse chap e in the I ~ _ _ __ X __ significance of an archaeological resource ' _pursuant to Section 15064.5? - - _ ~ ~ i -- 1 i c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ~ X I paleontological resource or site or unique eolo is features .~ _ g ~ _ __-- -- - _ d) Disturb any human remains, including those X interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion: a) Cause a substantia( adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 75064.5? The Project area is almost completely developed. Aside from a small amount of in-fill residential development, no site development -which could unearth ar otherwise disturb cultural artifacts and sites - is likely to occur in the near future. The Project does not cause or promote any activity that would affect cultural resources. In the event of street reconstruction or storm drainage improvements, ground surface may be disturbed. In such an instance, there is a potential for encountering heretofore unknown cultural resources. Inasmuch as any construction activity encouraged by the Project, such as street improvements to improve stormwater drainage, would be part of a County public works project, cultural resource protection measures would be incorporated as part of the construction specifications Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry tveighborhoad Plan Page 10 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 Refer to item "a", above c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? There are no noteworthy paleontological or geologic features within the Project area. As noted above, while there is no aspect of the Project that would provide for disturbance of any heretofore undiscovered site features, the potential exists in the event of road or storm drainage construction. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Refer to comments above. Human remains are not expected to be encountered within the Project area. Geology and Soils Would the project: ~ Environmental issue Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incor orated a) Expose people or structures to potential " i substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injur rte, or death involving: -_ I - _ .._ 1 -_ ~I i} Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo __ _ X I 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 I Publications - - _ -- -- .-- --- -- - ~ i~Strong seismic ground shaking? __ _ - - - -- _~ _ .. - _ }{ ___. __._ - iii} Seismic-related ground failure, including X liquefaction? r -. - _ --- - --- -- - iv) Landslides -- _ - - X I - i b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? , x ~ - - ~ c} Be located in a geological unit or soil that is' unstable, or that would become unstable as a ~ ~ x -1 result of the project, and potentially result in on-' I or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, I subsidence, liquefaction or coll~se? __._ - I,- ___ - _ - _.. - -- --- ~ - - d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in _ _-- X Table 18-1-8 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. __.-. _ ~ ~ - i Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Naighborhood Plan Page 11 e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative ', waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Discussion: a.i) Rupture of a known earthquake faulf, 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.) Like all of Butte County, the Project site is subject to ground shaking to Modified Mercalli VII levels, as observed during the 1975 earthquake. However, the area has not seen a high incidence of groundshaking. There are two known faults in the vicinity, approximately 6,000 feet and 1,000 feet to the east. A third possible fault may exist in the vicinity to the south of the Project area. The most significant mapped fault is the Cleveland Hills Fault which is located 20 miles to the southeast. No impacts are anticipated as a result of fault rupture, and no seismic-related requirements are necessary. While the northern-most edge of Butte County is approximately 50 miles northeast of Mt. Lassen, a site of historic volcanic activity, there is no record of any portion of Butte County being directly affected by a volcano in historic time. Accordingly, the probability of volcanic activity impacting the Project area is very low. a.ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Refer to item "a.i", above. a.iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? The area is considered to have low to moderate liquefaction potential. a.iv) Landslides? The Project area is virtually level; therefore, landslide potential is non-existent. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Project soils have moderate erosion potential. However, as previously noted, very little undeveloped land exists within the Project area. The Project will not result in significant activity that would disturb the ground surface. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry (vCighborhood Plan Page 12 c) Be located in a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The valley portion of the county may be subject to varying degrees of subsidence as a result of lowering of the groundwater table through domestic and agricultural well use. In past years the groundwater level has been lowered as a result of prolonged drought conditions. d) Be located on expansive sail, as defined in Table i8- t -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Project area soils are considered moderately expansive. This condition is typically mitigated through conventional grading and construction techniques. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? As described in the Nitrate Compliance Plan, large portions of the Chico Urban Area, including the Project area, have soil conditions that have permitted nitrates to contaminate the groundwater table. As a result, the Nitrate Plan proposes connection of all dwellings within the Project area currently using septic systems to sanitary sewer systems. New septic systems are prohibited in the Project area for any lot smaller than one acre in size. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: Environmental Issue Potentially Significant Less Than Significant less Than Significant No Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incor orated _ a} Create a significant hazard to the public or i X ~ the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? j -- ' __ -- - -. -- _ b} Create a significant hazard to the public or ~i X the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials ~~ into the environment? c} Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? -~ I f __ - --- ! d} Be located on a site which is included on a ^ ~ X 1 list of hazardous materials sites compiled ~i pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant ' hazard to the public or the environment? - -- --- __ Initial Study - ChapmanlMulbe~,y fveighborhood Plan Page 13 c~ rUi a protect located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or ~ - i- ~- r ------- I X public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ..the Project area? I f) Far a project within the vi i it f - -_ c n y o a private airstrip, would the project result i f - x 1 n a sa ety hazard for peo le residin in the ro~ect area? ,~ - l- _ -- -- g) Impair implementation of or physically i t f ____ X ~ _._ _. n er ere with an adopted emergency response rplan or emer ency evacuation plan? - --j - I J h) Expose people ar structures to a significant I -- risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are I I x 1 intermixed with wildlands? -- -~ - Discussion: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The County has a Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan, but has no program for regulating hazardous materials. Problems are addressed in response to complaints received. Certain non-conforming uses within the Project area may use hazardous materials. One component of the Project is to amortize these non-conforming uses out of existence within the Project area. Specifically, one policy in the Plan calls for coordination between the City of Chico and the County to facilitate relocation of the Chico Scrap Metal Yard to an industrially-zoned area. 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? Nothing proposed in the Plan would lead to a reasonably foreseeable risk of upset or release of hazardous materials. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Refer to items "a" and "b", above. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Refer to discussion in item "a". Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry ,neighborhood Plan Page 14 e) For a project located within an airporf land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The Project site is not located near an airport. The closest airport -the Chico Airport - is located approximately four miles to the northeast. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing in the project area? Refer to comments in Item "e", above. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Streets in the Project area, while built to rural standards in some instances, have been deemed acceptable by the County relative to emergency response. The existing street designs have been incorporated into the County Improvement Standards for specific applicability to the Project area. 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? Risk of wildfire is negligible given the suburban setting and lack of grasslands in the vicinity. Hydrology and Water duality Would the project: nvironmental Issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact ! Significant Significant Significant I Impact With Mitigation Impact incor orated ', a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X dischar ere uirements? ---~--q--- ___. _._ I ~_._ ~ I _. - _ _. -- _~ _ ,__ _ b} Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater _.. _ _ X recharge such that there would be a net deficit i in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local I groundwater table level (e g the production - . ., rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to j a level which would not su ort i ti l d i pp ex s ng an , 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 it ~- -- X alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial r ~ I e osion or siltation on- or off-site. - - -f _ ---~ _ --- Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry NCighborhood Plan Page 15 d) Substantially alter the existing drai g X ' pattern of the site or area, including through the ~ alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ' j ' substantially increase the rate or amount of i 'surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? -- e) Create or contribute runoff water which X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or I provide substantial additional sources of polluted water? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water X ualit ? I I g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard X area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?__ --- ----- ---~ ~ _ h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area , structures which would impede or redirect flood ', j ' flows? _ I ~ i) Expose people or structures to a significant ; X I risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, 'including flooding as a result of the failure of a ' Levee or dam? `j)_Inundation b seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? _ __~_________ X Discussion: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? As noted in the Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan, portions of the Chico urban area, including the Project area, currently are in violation of State groundwater standards for nitrate. Nitrate is a by- product of septic leachfields. The Nitrate Compliance Plan, prepared in response to Prohibition Order No. 9~-126 adopted by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, calls for abandonment of septic leachfield systems and connection to sanitary sewers. The proposed Project includes a policy in support of septic system abandonment. 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)? While some properties within the Project area may utilize wells far irrigation, domestic water service is available to the area. Thus, the Project does not contribute to groundwater depletion. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry fvt~ghborhood Plan Page 16 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? No alteration in drainage patterns is proposed. However, certain portions of the Project area are subject to periodic, seasonal flooding caused by an inadequate storm drainage system. Correction of flooding problems caused by street design is included among Plan policies; however, specific remedies are not addressed. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? A substantial alteration of the local drainage pattern is not proposed. Minor adjustments in street storm drainage is encouraged in an effort to reduce or eliminate seasonal flooding. 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 water? Nothing in the proposed Project will result in an increase in run-off water. As noted above, improved street surface drainage proposed as part of the Project is intended to reduce or eliminate seasonal flooding during peak storm events. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Policies in support of the Nitrate Compliance Plan will serve to improve groundwater quality. Amortization of non-conforming industrial uses, as required by the proposed Zoning text, will reduce possible sources of surface water quality degradation. 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? Portions of the Project area are subject to periodic, seasonal flooding during peak storm events. This occurs as a result of an ineffective stormwater drainage system, not as a result of being within a flood zone. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Refer to discussion in item "g", above. i) Expase people or structures to a significant risk of lass, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Refer to discussion in item "g", above. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Refer to discussion in item "g" above. The Project area is not in close proximity to a large body of water which could inundate the area. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan Land Use and Planning Would the project: Page 17 ', Environmental Issue Potentially ~.ess Than Less Than No impact Significant Significant Significant impact With Mitigation Impact Incor orated a) Physically divide an established communit ? X - i - ---- -1 i -- -- - -- -__ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ~ X ~ policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local I coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted ' for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X '~ conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? _ i Discussion: a) Physically divide an established community? The General Plan and Zoning designations proposed for the Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood are intended to strengthen the community by reinforcing the positive attributes and by outlining a program for the elimination of negative aspects. These are expected to ultimately help to unify, rather than divide, the community. Qisruption of the physical community is unlikely. On the contrary, it is an objective of the Project that disruptions currently occurring as a result of incompatible uses be eliminated through full implementation of the Project. 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 Project provides for amendments to the Butte County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. As such, it is by definition in conflict with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations currently applicable to the Project area. The proposed General Plan and Zoning designations are intended to provide land use policy and ordinance direction specifically tailored to the needs of the Chapman/Mulberry area. The Project conflicts with certain existing land uses in the Project area. In fact, changes in certain existing land use, including amortization, is a key component of the Project. With full implementation of the Plan, certain existing inconsistent and incompatible land uses will be removed from the Project area, resulting in an improved environment. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? There are no habitat or natural community conservation plans in effect in the Project area. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan Mineral Resources Would the project: Page 18 Environmentai Issue Potentially Less Than Less Than Na Impact Significant Significant' Significant Impact With Litigation impact Incor orated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known X 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- - - - - ~-_ X important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? _ ~__ Discussion: 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? The Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood contains no known mineral resources. Accessibility to mineral resources would be limited by the fact that the area is almost completed developed. b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Refer to discussion in item "a". Noise Would the project result in: Environmental Issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Impact incor orated a} Exposure of persons to or generation of X II noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or standards of other agencies? applicable _ ~ X b} Exposure of persons to or generation of ;excessive groundborne vibration or ~~ groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient fi X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? _. - ' ~ _ . _ ---- --- - _ -- ' d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase _ - ~ ~----- __ ~ X ~ in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity I above levels existing without the project? 1 _ _ _~ .___ Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan Page 19 -- _ _ _ ---- _ e) For a project located within an airport land X I, use plan or, where such a plan has not been !~ adopted, within two miles of a public airport or !public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to I I 'excessive noise levels? , _. x __ -- - ----- - -- -- __ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ~ X ', airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to ~, I excessive noise levels? Discussion: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Aside from recommended street and storm drainage improvements, the proposed General Plan and Zoning designations will do nothing to create additional noise sources in the area. On the contrary, the amortization provisions in the proposed Zoning text, by eliminating incompatible industrial uses, may result in a reduction in noise sources. One proposed Neighborhood Design Standard contained in the Zoning text calls for noise buffering of commercial and industrial uses that abut residential areas, using eight-foot high masonry (or equivalent) walls. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Refer to item "a". c} A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Refer to item "a". d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Refer to item "a". e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Project area is approximately four miles from the Chico Airport, and is not significantly affected by airport noise. Initial Study - Chapman(Mulberry tvC~ghborhood Plan Page 20 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? Refer to discussion in item "e". Population and Housing Would the project: Environmental Issue Potentially t.ess Than Less Than Na Impact Sigrificant Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Impact Incor orated a) Induce substantial population growth in an X area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure ? --- --~ - - b D si place substantial numbers of existing - - - II - X I housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? i - - c) Displace substantial numbers of people, X necessitating the construction of replacement ', housing elsewhere? , __~ ~ __._.___ Discussion: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? As of 1998, nearly all of the parcels in the Chapman/Mulberry area have been built upon. Roughly 6.8 percent of the parcels are undeveloped. While many of the existing parcels could be further divided under County zoning, none are sufficiently large to meet the minimum one-acre lat size requirement of the Nitrate Compliance Plan. Therefore, while proposed General Plan and Zoning provisions may improve the area, these will not induce population growth. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? As noted in the proposed General Plan text, the area has a significant number of structures in need of repair and rehabilitation. According to the County records, only 13.6 percent of the dwellings in the Chapman area were rated as meeting current minimum building code requirements, and over 28 percent of the dwellings in the Mulberry area were classified as meeting the building code. Housing condition is related to the age of construction. Over 73 percent of the dwellings were built prior to 1950 in the Chapman/Mulberry area as a whole. The proposed General Plan text includes policies that are intended to improve the housing in the neighborhood, including continued rehabilitation of the existing housing stock and the phasing out of pre- 1976 mobile homes. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry NG~ghborhood Plan Page 21 c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Refer to discussion in item "b", above. No aspect of the proposed General Plan and Zoning texts are intended to result in the displacement of people. 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: Environmental Issue Potentially Significant ' Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigatign Incor orated .Less Than Significant Impact No impact a) Fire protection? --- __ _ X - b) Policeprotection? _ -- c) Schools? X ' _ _ __~ X d) Parks? - -- e) Other public facilities? _ - _ L X X Discussion: a) Fire protection? Fire protection services are provided by the Butte County Fire Department, assisted by California Department of Forestry through an annual contract with the County. Twenty-one stations are staffed around the clock during summer and 17 stations are fully staffed during winter. The city of Chico has its own fire department. An existing mutual aid agreement with the City requires specific requests for assistance on an incident-by-incident basis. No changes in fire protection are proposed as part of this Project. Policies contained in the Project, including amortization of non-conforming uses and rehabilitation of dilapidated housing, will serve to reduce fire hazards and the frequency of fire department calls to the area. b) Police protection? Law enforcement is provided by the Butte County Sheriff's Department. Traffic enforcement is provided by the California Highway Patrol in unincorporated areas. In 1995, the Sheriff's Department had 214 sworn and unsworn deputies. It's adopted service ratio goal is one (1 } officer per 1000 population. (The statewide average is 1.6 officers per 1000.} As of 1995, the Department achieved a service ratio of 0.96 officers per 1000 population. The primary Sheriff's Department office is in Oroville, with branch offices in Chico and Paradise Pines. The Sheriff has a mutual aid agreement with the City of Chico. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan Page 22 No changes in police protection are proposed. One policy in the proposed General Plan text calls for the Sheriff's Department to maintain its presence within the neighborhood with appropriate staffing levels. Certain proposed neighborhood design standards contained in the proposed Zoning Ordinance text are intended to improve safety. For example, the requirements for front porches and limitations on the height of front yard fences are intended to improve visual surveillance. Improvements resulting from the proposed General Plan and Zoning text may have an incremental effect on the Sheriff's Department by reducing the need for visit to the area in response to reports of criminal activity. c) Schools? Chico Unified School District, serves 322 square miles and operates 22 schools in grades K-12. Chapman Elementary School, located at the end of 16th Street in the Project area, is an important cultural focus of the neighborhood that is recognized in the proposed General Plan and Zoning texts. Proposed land use policies are intended to reinforce the relationship of the school to the surrounding community. The Project will not add housing or potential students in the neighborhood. Thus, no direct impact on the school system is anticipated. d) Parks? Two City-owned parks are located within the Project area. Proposed land use policies are intended to reinforce the relationship of the parks to the surrounding community. No additional parks are proposed. e) ©ther public facilities? Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity and gas service to the area. Telephone service is provided by Pacific Bell Company. Chambers Cable Company provides cable television services to the area. The proposed project will not impact the provision of these services. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry NC~ghborhood Plan Recreation Page 23 --- Environmental Issue Potentially Less Phan Less Than No Impact ~ Significant Significant Significant ~ Impact With Mitigation Impact ~ _ incar orated _ ', a} Would the project increase the use of ~ X existing neighborhood and regional parks or ' other recreational facilities such that physical ~ ~ ~ deterioration of the facility would occur or be ' accelerated? __._ - I__ t' -----_- -- -- _. ~ ___ _. _._ ' b} Does the project include recreational _ X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the ~ environment? Discussion: a) Would the projecf increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Refer to discussion in Public Services, item "d". b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on fhe environment? Refer to discussion in Public Services, item "d". TransportationlTraffic Would the project: Environmental issue Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Impact Incor orated a} Cause an increase in traffic which is X substantial in relation to the existing traffic load I 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 i X i level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? c} Result in a change in air traffic patterns, _____ _ __ I I I X including either an increase in traffic levels or a 'change in location that results in substantial '. safety risks? _- }- I __ _ __ ~_._ Initial Study - ChapmantMulberry Neighborhood Plan Page 24 --__ d) Substantially increase hazards due to a I X design features {e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections} or incompatible uses _ ~e.g., farm equipment)?__ __ _ _e) Result in inadequate emergency access? _ I i X --- - - - - - f} Result m inadequate parking capacity? _ ~ - - - - -- _- - -- X ' r g} Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation (e.q., bus turnouts, bicycle racks}? Discussion: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to- capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? The Project area is served by a network of City- and County-maintained public streets. State Route 99 abuts the Project area to east. Highway 99 is a two-lane rural highway through most of Butte County which becomes afour-lane freeway from Highway 149 to just north of Chico. The street system in the Project area is arranged in a functional grid pattern, which adequately serves the community. Aside from the addition of mechanisms to help reduce vehicle speed and minor street improvements {particularly to improve storm drainage), no changes in the overall street system are proposed. In recognition of the expressed desire of area residents to maintain asemi-rural character to the streetscape, the Project includes special road standards for the area. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? An increase in traffic will not occur as a result of the Project c) Result in a change in air traffic pafterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locafion that results in substantial safety risks? Air traffic will not be affected. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e. g., farm equipment)? Refer to the discussion in item "a", above. Proposed General Plan policy calling for implementation of a pedestrian/bicycle circulation plan will reduce hazards associated with pedestrian and bicyclists sharing roadways with vehicles. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Emergency access to the area is considered adequate and will not be affected by the proposed Project. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry fveighborhood Plan f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? Page 25 Parking capacity will not be affected by the proposed Project. On-site parking is required by the proposed Zoning text. g) Conflict with adapted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The Project encourages alternative forms of transportation in several ways, including provision of a pedestriantbicycle pathway system and continued access to County and Chico Area transit service. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: Page 26 Environmental Issue potentially less Than t.ess Than Na Impact ', Significant Significant Significant ' Impact. With Mitigation Impact ' Inco gyrated a} Exceed wastewater treatment requirements i X of the applicable Regional Water Quality i Control Board? ' ' ___ _._-- I b) Require or result in the construction of new X ~, water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental ~ ~ effects? ' ', c) Require or result in the construction of new i X ' storm water drainage facilities or expansion of ! , existing facilities, the construction of which ~ ', ~ 'could cause si nificant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ! serve the project from existing entitlements and ~ . I I X ,resources, or are new or expanded I entitlements needed? ~ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ~ X treatment provider which serves the project that I it has adequate capacity to serve the project's I ,projected demand in addition of the provider's existing commitments? i ' f} Be served by a landfill with sufficient ~ X I permitted capacity to accommodate the ', project's solid waste. disposal needs? f g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes I X and regulations related to solid. waste? i_ 1 Discussion: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No additional development, which would put demands on the wastewater treatment system, is proposed. The Nitrate Compliance Plan, which would provide for connection of the existing dwellings in the neighborhood currently on septic systems to sewer, will be addressed in the environmental document prepared specifically for that plan. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No additional development, which would put demands on water supplies or water treatment and delivery systems, is proposed. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Ivaighborhood Plan Page 27 c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No additional development, which would put demands on the stormwater drainage system, is proposed. However, as previously noted, portions of the Project are subject to seasonal flooding during peak storms as a result of an inadequate storm drainage system. The Project encourages the mitigation of that problem, but does not specifically provide for it. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the praject from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Refer to discussion in item "b", above, e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition of the provider's existing commitments? Refer to discussion in item "a", above. f) Be served by a Jandfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Refuse is transported by private hauler to the County-owned Neal Road Landfill. The landfill is operated by a private company, under contract with the County. In 1992, it was estimated that the 101-acre site could continue to accept refuse for an additional 15 years. No changes in solid waste generation, pick-up, or disposal are anticipated. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Refer to discussion in item "f", above. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry tve~ghborhood Plan Mandatory Findings of Significance Page 28 Environmental Issue Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact ', Significant Significant- Significant ' Unless Mitt ated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade ~ X I 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 j community, reduce the number or restrict the range I of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate ~, important examples of the major periods of I California history or prehistory? ____ ____ b} Does the project have impacts which are X ' 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}. ~ _ +. _ - - -- t--- __ c) Does the project have environmental effects -- -__ ___ __ X which will cause substantial adverse effects on ~~~ human beings, either directly or indirectly? _~ _ Discussion: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the qualify of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare ar endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The Project does not provide for new development. In particular, the area with the highest wildlife habitat value within the Project area, Little Chico Creek, will be preserved by policies contained in the proposed General Plan text. No degradation of the environment is anticipated. b) Does the project have impacts which 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). The Project is expected to have a beneficial effect on the community. No cumulative impacts have been identified. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantia( adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No negative impacts on humans have been identified. Initial Study - ChapmaniMulberry Neighborhood Plan V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: Page 29 No mitigation measures are proposed. Initial Study - ChapmanlMulberry Neighborhood Plan DATA SHEET A. Project Description 1. Type of Project: 2. Proposed Density of Development: 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: 4. Access and Nearest Public Roads}: 5. Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual septic systems. 6. Source of Water Supply: 7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property. 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: None under existing zoning. B. Environmental Setting 1. Terrain a General Topographic Character: b. Slopes: c. Elevation: d. Limiting Factors: 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: b. Limiting Factors: 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. b. Erosion Potential: c. Landslide Potential: d. Fire Hazard: e. Expansive Soil Potential: 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: b. Ground Water: c. Drainage Characteristics: d. Annual Rainfall (normal): inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: 5. VisuaUScenic Quality: 6. Acoustic Quality: 7. Air Quality: 8. Vegetation: . 9. Wildlife Habitat: 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: 11. Butte County General Plan designation: 12. Existing Zoning: 13. Existing Land Use on-site: 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: b. Zoning: c. Gen. Plan Designation: d. Parcel Sizes: 15. Character of Site and Area: 16. Nearest Urban Area: 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: Page 30 Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL Page 32 1. Butte County Planning Department. Earthquake and Fault Activity Map 11-1, Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 2. Butte County Planning Department. Liquefaction Potential Map 11-2. Seismic Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 3. Butte County Planning Department. Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map 111-1, Safety Element. Oroville, CA CH2M Hill, 1977. 4. Butte County Planning Department. Erosion Potential Map 111-2, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 5. Butte County Planning Department. Expansive Soils Map 111-3, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 6. Butte County Planning Department. Noise Element Map IV-1, Scenic Highway Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 7. Butte County Planning Department. Scenic Highways Map V-1. Scenic Highway Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 8. Butte County Planning Department. Natural Fire Hazard Classes Map 111-4, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity Map. Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983. 10. Butte County Planning Department. School District Map. Oroville, CA. 11. Northwestern District Department of Water Resources. Chico Nitrate Study Map. Nitrate Concentration in Shallow Wells. The Resources Agency, State of California, 1983. 12. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agricultural Preserves Map, established by Resolution No. 67- 178. Oroville, CA: Butte County Planning Department, 1987. 13. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1989. 14. USGS Quad Maps. 15. Soil Map, Chico {1925)/Oroville {1926 Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 16. Soil Survey of Chico {1925~Oroville (1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Map. Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989. Initial Study -Chapman/Mulberry Neighborhood Plan 18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County (State} Fire Station: b. Water Availability: 20. Schools: Page 31