Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout85-204BOARD QF_ SUPERV [SOBS COUNJTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Resolufion No. 85-204 RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONCOW AREA LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the Thermalito Irrigation District has petitioned the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to amend the Concow Area Land Use Element for a change from Public to Foothill Area Residential for that property identified on Exhibit A, attached hereto;-and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held hearings on these proposed amendments at which all interested persons were heard; and WHEREAS, the Board has read and considered the initial studies for a Negative Declaration regarding environmental impact as shown on Exhibits Al. WHEREAS, the Board finds that the proposed amendment to the Concow Area Land Use Plan is consistent with the elements of the Butte Gounty General Plan. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the land use designation changes from Public to Foothill Area Residential, for that areas identified on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference, are hereby adopted and approved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte as an amendment to the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, said amendment to be the land use policy for the County of Butte in the affected area for all findings pursuant to law. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors finds that the initial study and Negative Declaration prepared for the General Plan Amendment, identified as Exhibit Al is adequate for this project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Government Code Section 65357 that the General Plan be endorsed to show that the above amendment has been approved by this Board. BE IT FUTRTHER RESOLVED, pux'suant to Government Code Section 65357, a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Councils of the Cities of Butte County. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, this 17th day of December 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Dolan,. Mc3nturf, McL;aughlzn,_,Wheeler and Chairman Fulton NOES: None,.... , _ _ ABSENT: None NOT VOTING: None County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: Martin J. Nichols, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board By ~ ~m / ~C~t°Cl~~ L. . ~ ~ i~P P-Q NE SEROO'IR \`~ T~ 5 ,U I CONCOW 1 RESE iq ~ / . ,~ ~ ~ - c ~ ~,. APPENDIK F COUNTY OF BUTTE ~:1`_~ T~•~i. "ice. ~j ~~ t ~'` .~ A I. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM {to a complete y Lead Agency) File ~~ 85-29A&B L o g # g4-12-27-02,03 BACKGROUND AP # 84-12-26-02 Thermalito Irri anon D~is8rict04, 5$--17-01 1. Name of proponent g 2. Address of proponent and representative {if applicable) 410 Grand Avenue Rolls, Anderson & Rolls Oraville, CA 95965 965 Fir Street Chico, CA 95926 _.._ 3. Project description Rezone, General Plan Amendment 'Tentative Parcel Map II. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNiFIGANCE YES MAYBE NO 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 ox ,animal community, reduce the number or restr~tt the range of a rare or endangered plant ar animal ar eliminate important examples of the major periods x of California history or prehistory? ~ T c. Does the project have impacts which are individu- ally limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A. project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.} d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term benefits to the detriment of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts will endure into the future . } .,.~ .~,., IiI. DETERA9INATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency] On the basis of this initial evaluation: I/WE find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I/WF, find that although the proposed projett could have a signifi- -~ cant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant - effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described on the attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ' _ I/WE find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. DA'1'Ii : February 7 , 1985 By: Reviewed by: COU OF BUTTE, PLANNING DEPARTMENT /' -" David R. Hiron mus Asso ate Plann r IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS xp anatzons o a "yes" on attached sheet(s)) and "maybe" answers are required 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in significant: a: instable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction ar overcovering of the sail? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical, features? e. Increase in wind ar water erosion of soils, either an or off-site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition ox erosion which may modify the channel of a river ar stream or the bed of the ocean ar any bay, inlet yr lake? g. Lass of prime agriculturally productive soils .outside designated urban areas? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- ~Iides, ground failure or similar hazards? YE5 MAYBE NO X ~~ JCL ~ G ~G.~_ ~~ ~C c 2, AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ,~ b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke ar fumes ? ,,;~„ c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change, in climate, 'locally or regionally? ~. WATER, Will the proposal result in substantial:. a: C~.anges in currents, or the course or . direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? ~ b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ?<.c_ c. Need for off-site surface drainage improve- ments, including vegetation removal, channel- izatian or culvert installation? ?~c-.-~ d. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters ? - ~ '~ e. Change in the amount of surface water in any ~ water body? . f. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including " but not limited to temperature, dissolved X ~ ozygen or turbidity? - g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow x ground waters? of h. , Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, ar through interception of an ~ .aquifer by cuts or excavations? i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? XG j. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ;~ YES MAYBE NO 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement? ~ c.~ b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or . demand for new parking? ~ c. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems? X c_ d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goads? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail ar air traffic? ~ f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ~ c. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Wi11 the proposal have an effect upon, or resu t in a need for new or altexed governmental services: a. Fire protection? ~c_ b. Police protection? X c c. Schools? JC ~ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X ~. e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ~,~ f. Other governmental. services? .X ~ 15. ENERGY. Wi11 the proposal result in: a; use of substantial amounts of fuel .or energy? X ~ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, ox require the development of new sources of energy? ~C 16. UTILITIES. Will the propsal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following: a. Power or natural gas? k b. Communications systems? }<' • c. Water availability: ,L ~~ d. Sewer or septic tank? ~ e. Storm water drainage? _ ~ f. Solid waste and disposal? >C 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Wi11 the propo•sa1 result in: a. re at~.on of any health hazard or potential health hazard {excluding mental health)? ~C- b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ~ 18. AESTHETICS. Wi11 the proposal result in the o structlon of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or wi11 the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site-open to public view? ~ DISCU55Ial~~~F_ENVIFc©lrIMENTAL_EVALUATI©~ AP .58-1b-04 _ .[ptn) 58-17-01 [ptn) ib,c,e,f,3ts,c,f: Some disruption, displacement, compaction, and csvercvvering of the soil wi11 take place during development of two additional home sites c.'sn the pr©perties 1©cated south of Concow Read. These changes could lead to an increase in runoff and erosion of soils on~site and lead tv deposition of silts into Lake Concow to the north. Due tv the size of the properties and standard health department requirements for water quality coupled with the fact that water supplies in Concow Reservoir are not directly utilized by public water agencies, any impact should not be significant. 1g: The subject property is highly suitable far commercial timber production. The development of two additional hvmesites should not reduce this capability significantly. ih: All of butte County is within a moderate earthquake intensity zone VIII. The subject property is located appro~;imately 3 miles north of the ai g Hend Fau1 t which i s of un~:nown activity and approximately 5 miles south of fault traces associated with the Came], Peak Fault, also of unknown activity. Construction of homes to uniform building cc-de standards for seismically active areas should provide adequate protection to residents in case of seismic activity. ai: Water in Concow Reservoir, even if deteriorated somewhat as a result of this project, is first routed to Lake ©roville and then to various water users. As such, this project should not result in a reduction of water available for public use. 4d: See item ig. 5d: The subject property is located within critical winter deer herd Brea of the E~ucks Mountain Deer Herd. because of the location of the hamesites near the road and because cif steeper slopes elsewhere on the property, the Department of Fish and Game has indicated that this project will nc-t have a significant impact on deer herd winter range. 8: While this project will represent a change in planned use of the area, it is nc-t considered significant since the proposed uses are similar to other. uses in the area. 11: See item 8. i.~a,c,f: bevelopment of homesites on the property will resin.t in an incremental increase in traffic and related hazards vn Concow Road, Since only two homesites are being developed this impact is not considered to be significant. Applicant: Therm. irr. District DATA SHEET A. Pr-g,~ect_De~cr i Et i vn Assessor's Parcel # ~8-~16-D~ {ptn} 58-17-C.~l {ptn} Lag # 84-12-gib-D~ 84-1'~-27-tat 84-1 ~--~27-°~}•:r ~.. Type of Prv,ject: Tentative Parcel Map, General Plan Amendment, and ~tec.one ~. E~rief Description: General Plan Amendment from Public tv Foothill Area F~esidential: Ftecvne from F'-Q tv Ff~-2~'~; and Tentative Parcel Map dividing 2C~C~~ acres i nto ~ parcel s of ~~.~ acres each, 1 of .~.w acres and l of 1•:~D acres. ~. Location: ©n the south side of Cancvw Paad, apprar,imately miles north of ~ardan Hill Ftvad at the south end of Cvncow ~{eservvir in the Cancow area. 4. Proposed Density of Development: 2D acres per dwelling unit. ~. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Minimal 6. Access and dearest Public i~r~ad(s}: Property fronts an Concow Road . 7. Method of Sewage Disposal: Tndividual septic systems. S. Source of Water Supply; Tndividual wells. 9. P'rvximity of Power Lines: Ta property. lU. Potential far further land divisions and development; None under prop©sed caning. D. Envirvnm~nta~.-Sitting Physic~I_Environ~nen~~ i. Terrain a. General Topographic Character: Mountainous terrain surrounding Lake Cvncvw b. 5lapes: 1~ to b~ percent; mostly ~.{~ to 2f~ percent. c . E1 coat i on ; 2~'~G4 feet to 234 feet A. S. L, d. Limiting Factors: Steeper slopes, particularly on parcel 1. 2. Soil s a. Types and Characteristics: Englebright; Hotaw; and Chaix soil series. All generally well drained with moderate perrneabi l i ty, e~ctept the Chair; series which, i s of rapi d permeability. Snits are ~t7 tv 4D inches in depth. b. Limiting Factors; High erasion potential in places. ~. Natural Hacards of the Land a. Earthquake Zane: Moderate earthquake intensity cone VITI. b. Erosion P©tential; Very high. c. Landslide Potential: High. d. Fire Ha~.ard; Extreme. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Low. i5. Character of Site and Area: Commercial timber area overlooking Lade Cvncow, somewhat removed from existing rural residential uses further to the northeast. ib. Nearest Urban Area: NIA 17. relevant Spheres of Influence: ThermalitQ Errigation District. 18. Improvements Standards Urban Area: No. 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County (State} Fire Station: butte County Fire Department Stations ~b and .:,~, approximately ~ miles away. b. Water Availability: Fire tanL~er, wells, and C©ncow Peservvir. 24. Schools in Area. Golden Feather Union Elementary School District and Groville Union High Schnnl District.