HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-184' BOARD OF SUPERVIS''ORS
~: =~-
''k ~ *~ COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
,~~ .N.
Resolufion No. 88-i84
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE
APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors initiated an
amendment to the Butte County General Plan Circulation Element as shown
on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment has been studied
and reviewed by the Butte County Planning Commission and public
hearings 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 environmental review study checklist
(Exhibit A-Z) prepared on the General Plan Amendment pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors finds the
proposed extension of West 8th Avenue Complies with the Circulation
Element, Land Use Element and all other elements of the Butte County
General Plan specifically:
1. Growth in the West Sacramento Avenue has necessitated
upgrading of the circulation system to accommodate existing and
proposed residential densities.
2. Extension of West 8th Avenue will improve access to the
West Sacramento Avenue neighborhood.
3. Extension of West 8th Avenue will ultimately reduce
congestion at the intersection of West Sacramento Avenue and State
Route 3Z, improving public safety.
4. Public uses have been proposed for the West Sacramento
neighborhood to serve the growing population. CUSD, CARD, CDF are all
considering locating new facilities along the West 8th Avenue
extension, to the benefit of area residents and the community as a
whole.
WHEREAS, the Butte County Planning Commission has recommended
approval of the General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS the Butte County Board of Supervisors finds the
proposed amendment comply with all elements of the Butte County General
Plan and comprises an overall consistent whole.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. The Board of Supervisors does hereby adopt and certify
the negative declaration for the General Plan Amendment pursuant to
CEQA.
2. The General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element
attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 is hereby and approved by the Board of
Supervisors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED pursuant to Government
Code Section 65359, the extension of West 8th Avenue shall be depicted
on the official Circulation Element Map for the Chico Urban Area and on
the official Land Use Map of the Chico Urban area.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of Supervisors
on the 22nd day of November ~ 1988, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fulton, McLaughlin, Vercruse and Chairman McInturf
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Dolan
NOT VOTING None /
HASICEL MCI VT CHAT
Butte County Board of ervisors
ATTEST: MARTIN J. NICHOLS Chief Administrative
Officer and C1 r of the Board
By
APPENDIX F
COL.T~`dTY OF BUTTE
ENV = RONMENTAL CHE GKL = 5 T FORM
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
IAG N0.88-D7-2O-01'
AP N0.
File No. $9-1
I. BACKGR ND~
1. Name of proponent BLTTTE_, COtTNTY BOART3 OF ~LTPF.RVT SC~R~ ~ _ _
2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable):
ent
95965 Ora Mlle, CA 9,565
3. Project description: Genera lan AineTl mPn
Ii MANDATORY F=NT723~TGS OF S=GN2F=LANCE,
YES MAYBE NO
1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce tote habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish ar
.wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a glaitt or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of majox periods
of California history or prehistory?
2. Does the project have the patesttial 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.)
3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact on two ar 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.) ~._
4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse affects on human beings, either directly or indixectly?
III. DETERMZNAT 2 OIY (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 an the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION wi11 be prepared.
I/WE 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 the attached sheet leave 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.
COUNTY OF BUTTE, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Laura M:~Tut 1 Associat~.,Planner
/~~
Reviewed by: ~
~xN~a~Y~ z
~.
f
IY. ENV2I20NMEN'Tar• 2M~'AC'TS
(Explanations of all "YES" and "i4AYBE" answers are required on attached sheet(s).
1, ~. Will the proposal result in significant:
a. i7nstable earth conditions, or changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruption, displacement, 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?
YES MAYBE NO
~_
-~_
~~
~~
e. Increase in wind or water erosion of sails, either on or off site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erasion which may modify the channel of a river or stream
or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban
areas?
h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground Failure or similar hazards?
2. AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes?
c. A1Ceration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in
climata,.locally ar regionally?
3. WA~E~. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements i.n
either marine or fresh waters?
~~
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount
•af surface runoff? '
c. Need for off-site surface drainage impxovements, including vegetation
removal, channelization or culvert installaCivn7
d. Altexations 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 oxygen or
turbidity?
g. Aitexation of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
h. Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters, either *hrough
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations?
i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
j. Exposure of people or property to water-related hazards such as flooding?
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants
{including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plantsj?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare ar endangered species of
plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to
the normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
~~
_~' _
_ ~r
~-
_~
~~
~~
~~
~._
~_
Y
i
_,.^_i
-2-
5, I i Wi11 the proposal result in substantial: YES MAXBE N4
a. Change i.n the diversity of species, or numbers o£ any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, organisms
or insects) ? ~..»
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of
animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, ox in a barrier to ~
the migration or movement of animals? f
d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? X
b. NO SE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Increases in existing noise levels? -L.:..
r,
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? i_
7. LIGHT AND GI,AdtE. Will the proposal product significant light and glare? '~-~'
8. I N S Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the ~
L
'
present or planned land use of an area? "
9. NATE]RAL RESOIIRC$5. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
~
b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resources? ~
10. RISK OF F1P5~T. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but
net limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions? ~_
b. Passible interference with an emergency response glare ar emergency
~
evacuation plan? _
11. POFULATYOH. Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or
growth rate of the human population? ~~
12.~ HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand ~
~
far additional housing?
13. TRANSPt}RTATIONICITtCULATION. Will the proposal result in:
~3
a, Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement?
b. Effects an existing parking £acilities, or demand for new parking? ~~~
c. Substantial impact an existing transportation systems?
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or r~
movement of people andlor goods? ~~--
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ;~,_
f. Fncrease in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists ar pedestrians?
14_ PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need
for new or altered government services:
a. Fire protection? !i
b. Police protection? ~~
C. SCh001$? ~
d. Parks ar other recreational facilities? '`
e. Maintenance o£ public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
-3-
15. ENERGY. will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ~-
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or
~~
require the development of new sources of energy?
16. UTILITI 5. Will the proposal result in a need for now systems, or
substantial alterations to the following:
~
a. Power or natural gas? -
b. Communications systems? -~-~-
c. Water availability? -~
~
d. Sewer or septic systems?
f7
e. Storm water drainage? -•-
f. Solid waste and disposal? r~
17. MlMANi HEAD. Will the proposal result in: ,
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental
health) ? --~-
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
X8. ~5I'HF.TICS. Will the proposal result zn the obstxuction of any. scenic
vista ar view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the
?
i
i
~
ew
c v
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to publ ,._
._.,
19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or ~
quantity of existing recreational apgortunities?
20. L"UL SOURCES.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a ,~
prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects K
to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? .
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change
? `
~
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values ~
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area?
DISCUSS = QN OF ENV = RONMEN~AL E'VAL.UAT~QN
See attached.
-k-
Applicant: Butte County Board of Supervisors .File No. 89-1
Log #88-07-20-01
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Construction of a new road from Highway 32 to west Sacramento Avenue.
The road-will be an extension of West 8th Avenue, terminating at
Valentine Court or St. Arrant Court. The exact alignment will be
determined by the Director of Public Works.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
lb; Approximately .37 mile of road will be constructed. It is
anticipated that the road standard will be similar to the RS-2A
standard found in the subdivision improvement regulations. Forty feet
of pavement with curb, gutter and sidewalk will be constructed within a
60-foot right-of-way. Construction of the road will overcover
approximately 2.14 acres with pavement and sidewalks. This level of
overcovering is not significant for the urban area.
le: During grading activities for the roadbed, there is a potential
for wind erosion of soils. Sprinking the roadbed periodically with
water will reduce the potential for .wind erosion.
2a: The construction of a road does not increase traffic, but
redistributes existing traffic in a community. Similarly, road
construction will not Increase air emissions but may cause existing
levels of vehicle emissions to be redistributed with the traffic. The
vehicles using the road may cause air quality in the immediate area to
decrease to~a slight degree. Prior to this time, most of the houses
fronted on small cul-de-sacs or neighborhood streets. The presence of
a through road will be a source of vehicle emissions. The increase in
vehicle emissions experienced by residents in the immediate area is
offset by emission improvements at already congested intersections in
the vicinity, such as Sacramento Avenue and Highway 32.
3b,c: As noted under Item lb, curb and gutter will be constructed an
both sides of the new road. Curb and gutter will channel rainfall and
runoff from adjoining properties to the lowest point of elevation. At
that point, provisions will have to be made to dispose of stormwater
runoff in an approved facility. It may be necessary to do off-site
drainage work to ensure downstream properties are not impacted. The
need for off-site drainage work will be explored by the Department of
Public works during road construction.
4a: Vegetation along the proposed roadway corridor includes grasses,
old almond orchards, and new urban ornamentals planted by residents of
the Sacramento Avenue Estates subdivision. There are no known rare or
endangered species in the vicinity.
4d: while adjoining properties have been 3n agricultural production,
and road construction may involve the removal of almond trees, this
5
impact is not significant. The properties are within the urban area,
where intensive agricultural operations are no longer feasible. Lots
adjoining the roadway extension will be developed whether or not the
road is constructed.
6a,b: vehicle noise is dependent upon traffic vohune, traffic speed,
and vehicle mix, The Noise Element of the Butte County General Plan
indicates that a typical low speed road (35 mph maximum) with traffic.
volumes of 5,000-20,000 trips daily will generate approximately 65
decibels within i00 feet of the right-of-way. Noise disperses and
drops to 60 decibels beyond 100 feet. The road will be adjacent to and
pass through lands designated for medium- and low-density residential
uses. According to the General Plan, 50-60 decibels is normally
acceptable far low-density residential uses; 55-70 decibels is
conditionally acceptable. Multi-family uses can be established in a
noise environment of 50-55 decibels; SO-70 decibels is conditionally
acceptable. It is estimated that noise levels at the building face
will be approximately 62-53 decibels. A normal single-family house or
multi-family structure will attenuate in excess of I5 decibels.
Interior noise levels should therefore be suitable for single-family or
multi-family uses.
7: The road will be a source of light and glare. It is recommended
that future home builders along the roadway alignment consider the
placement of windows and orientation an the lot as a means to reduce
light and glare from vehicles.
8: Approval of an amendment to the Circulation Element to allow road
-~ construction can be considered a modification in land use. Property
= immediately underneath the road will not be available far other uses.
With that one exception, the road will not result in land use changes.
Adjoining lands now designated Low Density Residential and Medium
. Density Residential are not proposed for redesignation.
i2: The southerly extension of the road will pass through Phase ITI or
~. IV of the Sacramento Avenue Estates subdivision. Phase I has already
been developed and is located immediately west of the road alignment.
Residents of Phase I will have improved access to Highway 32. West 8th
Extension will be an alternative to the Sacramento Avenue/Highway 32
intersection, which is becoming congested. In the event of an
emergency, improved access to Highway 32 may be of great benefit.
13a: The road will not generate traffic, but may affect distribution
of existing traffic. The stretch from Highway 32 to Sacramento Avenue
will serve the Sacramento Avenue neighborhood, an elementary school zf
constructed, and sections of the West 12th and west 11th Avenue
neighborhoods within the proposed school attendance area.
The entire Sacramento Avenue area is served by four access points onto
Highway 32:
* Sacramento Avenue, a collector, with 12,000-vehicle capacity;
* Oak Avenue, a local road with an 8,000-vehicle capacity;
* Glenwood Avenue, a local road with an 8,000-vehicle capacity;
* Stewart, a local road, no capacity rating available.
6
Only two of these roads, Sacramento and Glenwood/West Lindo, continue
east of Highway 32, East 8th would be a fifth access to Highway 32 and
a third route across Highway 32. West '8th Avenue is a minor arterial
with a 9,500-1x,000 vehicle capacity.
Refer to diagrams labeled "Road Classification" and "Roadway Capacity."
Traffic counts have been taken for the major roads in the study area.
Trafffic volumes for 1987 are shown on the enclosed diagram ...The Chico
Urban Area Traffic Model has calculated future traffic volumes for the
year 2007 based in part on residential, commercial and industrial
development, and the number of new employees generated by those
developments. Pass-through traffic (traffic traveling through the
urban area but not stopping) has also been included. These traffic
projections were then distributed aver the circulation network
according to location, capacity, and travel time. Traffic projections.
for the year 2007 as generated by the traffic model are shown on the
enclosed diagram. The following table shows-the change in traffic
volumes from 1987 to 2007.
Increases in Traffic volumes (~ Change), 1987-20071
West Sacramento
Westbound 75.74. 209 .221.3 262.5
Eastbound 74.47 267. 158..3 150
Sacramento
Wes ound - 4.8$ 3.9 22.4 41
Eastbound -32.7 -34 27.9 34
west 1st
Weser ound 3.8 35.6
Eastbound 6 53
West 8th
Westbound 18.8 17,9 60.2 54.9
Eastbound 4.5 2$ 72.4 52.7
Highway 32
Westbound 40.2 35.5 37.8 38.3 34 51
Eastbound 42.3 32.8 35.9 44.3 39,3 80
1Derived from T-Medel, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes.
Percentages are listed beginning with the most easterly traffic count
on the segment of the road within the study area to the west.
West Sacramento Avenue has the highest percentage increase in traffic
volumes. This is primarily a result of growth in the immediate area.
Three of the traffic zones in the West Sacramento neighborhood
(92,97,147) will realize a 165.7-454.5 change in the number of
residential units between 1987 and 2007. As many as 900 new
7
residential units are projected. These three traffic zones ,have the
highest percentage change in residential units in the study area.
Sacramento Avenue and west 1st pass through neighborhoods which are
largely developed zones 93,94). The percentage of change in dwelling
units from 1987 to 2007 is 5.9 to 15.4. The percentage of change in
traffic on west 1st and Sacramento Avenue ranges from .34 to 53. This
is somewhat surprising, considering both West 1st and Sacramento Avenue
are minor arterials. Traffic loads on arterials are not as sensitive
to growth in the immediate area as a collector is. Low growth in
adjoining areas does not necessarily equate to law increases in traffic•
volumes. Arterials carry traffic from neighborhood to neighborhood and
across town. Collectors feed into arterials after collecting traffic
from small local roads and some frontage parcels. volumes on arterials
'are affected by regional growth, availability of alternate routes, and
roadway capacity. By 2007, Sacramento Avenue will be operating at 79-
57.5~ of capacity, well within acceptable levels of service. Over the
next 20 years, Warner Street is projected to carry heavy traffic
volumes, which may be trips diverted off Sacramento.
Traffic volumes on West 8th are projected to increase from 4.5 to
72.4, while housing in adjoining traffic zones will increase by 14 to
45~.
Extension of west 8th will not generate traffic, but is expected to
affect the distribution of existing traffic. west 8th has a higher
capacity than Glenwood/West Lindo because of its alignment. West,Bth
is projected to carry less traffic than west Sacramento, and will
utilize a lower percentage of its capacity in 2007 than west
Sacramento. Therefore, for school-based trip ends (to the new school
on Sacramento Avenue), trips heading north from Sacramento, and trips
heading south into the Sacramento Avenue neighborhood, West 8th is
anticipated to be the route of choice. As a result, traffic volumes on
8th Avenue are expected to increase, and volumes on west Sacramento
between Highway 32 and West 8th Extension can be expected to decrease,
improving existing congestion.
Volumes across Highway 32 on 8th will be low until turn pockets and a
signal are installed. Turn pockets and a signal at Highway 32 and 8th
are projected to be installed within five years, financed 50~ with
state funds and 50~ with city funds.
Proposed Improvements: Improvements to the circulation system are
necessary to~ha~nc'.Le pprojected traffic volumes through 2007. In the
East 8th Avenue Extension study area, all of the improvements shown on
Chico's 20-year improvement plan will be required within 10 years. All
but one of the projects are needed within 5 years.
Approximately half of the improvements will be funded with federal,
state or university monies. The City of Chico will fund approximately
30~ of the improvements, with the remaining 20~ being funded with
County revenues. Local revenues (city/county) will be augmented with
traffic impact fees assessed on residential, commercial and industrial
building permits. The fees were adopted in early September 1988.
S
Improvements Prvposedl in Area
Location
Esplanade/W. 11th
Im rovements
Traffic signal
-Timing
0-5 years
SR 32 (W. 1st-Sac.)
SR 32/8th Avenue
SR32/Sacramento
Warner ~(W. 1st--W. 6th)
Warner (W. 2nd-W. 1st)
SR 32 (Sac.-East Ave.)
Sac. (SR 32-Glenwood)2
widen to 5 lanes, bridge
Phase I
Traffic signal, turn lanes
Traffic signal, realign
Widen, reconstruct
0-5 years
0-5 years
immediate
immediate
Reconstruct street, bridge immediate
Widen to 5 lanes, Phase II 5-10 years
Reconstruction, widening,
curb, gutter,.. realign where
necessary immediate
1City of Chaco Summary of 20-Year Capital Improvement Needs, July 1988.
2Butte County Capital Improvement Program, 1988-1989.
Land Use and Employment Data by T-Model Traffic Zone1
Land Use
Single-Family 2 Multi-Family
Total ~ Change,
1987 1997 2007 1987 1.997 2007 2007 1987-2007
66 294 394 594 30 80 130 72a 123.4
67 156 206 206 61 61 61 .257 0
71 169 219 219 51 101 101 320 45
75 24 24 24 134 134 134 158 0
81 255 315 315 14 24 39 354 26.8
82 160 160 160 177 227 227 387 14.8
92 54 54 54 12 162 312 366 454.5
93 142 142 142 1153 1253 1353 1495 15.4
94 I06 106 106 318 325 340 446 5.9
97 177 377 477 4 4 4 481 165.'
98 95 95 95 0 0 0 95 0
1PST Tnc., Draft Technical Report, March 1988.
2Number of dwelling units,
9
Land Use
Sin gle-Family Multi-Family
1987 . 1997 2007 1987 1997 2007
103 I76 276 276 219 219 219
104 22 22 22 1035 1236 1236
145 26 26 26 689 689 689
109 65 80 90 4 4 4
110 46 46 46 453 653 653
147 176 , 476 476 0 0 0
Total 2153 3018 3328 4352 5172 5502
Em to ment
Li ht Commercial3 Nan-Commercial
1987 1997 2007 1987 1997 2007
66 0 0 0 2 2 2
67 25 50 75 0 0 0
71 144 169 194 93 93 93
75 21 21 21, 0 38 75
81 7 7 7 1 1 1
82 45 45 45 1373 1423 2473
92 20 58 95 22 22 22
93 5 5 5 0 0 0
94 49 49 49 6 6 6
97 0 0 0 0 0 0
98 0 0 0 278 278 278
103 0 0 4 0 0 0
104 254 304 354 0 0 0
105 0 0 0 1125 1375 1625
109 3 3 3 0 0 0
1 I 0 41 9 ~. 141 19 ]. 9 19
147 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 614 802 989 2919 3257 3594
3Persons employed.
Total
2007
495
1258
715
94
699
476
$830
Total
2007
2
75
287
96
8
1518
117
5
55
0
278
0
354-
1625
3
lso
0
4583
No industrial employment to report except where Hated (*)
Change,
1987-2007.
25.3
18.9
0
36
40
170.4
14a: The California Department of Forestry has been collecting fees in
order to construct a new fire sta4ion west of the Southern Pacific
Railroad tracks in the vicinity of Highway 32 and Dak way, They are
aware of the proposed road extension, and have indicated extending West
8th Avenue would increase their access to the entire Sacramento Avenue
neighborhood and decrease response times. Roadway construction will
therefore improve fire protection in the long term,
la
~~~
~R ~
~,
~4 A- to-'
~•r S'R~
C2fi,~
C" '~
_ F 4 R ~. 5TptTIO+s
~ 42~ 14 - 3 4 r
'~o
,~~ ~k Sid
t
C
4z- t4-»9
p2o po sF.p
Scl+a~ L
4Z_ 14 ' 3~
L
42_ yg- Z ~ q-2-15 - 3
mac. ~ ~i~ rn ~e~
R_~ S,~ ~.
~~~
263
.\ t ~
i~
c-i
'Y
FILE NO. ~" ~.
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING DATES ~~ Z~ t9$8 ; A~zeovs
APPLICANT~~3oP-tty o~ S~,p~~~so2s OVV STPING . ~ONE~ R'> > Asp, e'~ SCALE
REOUE~T= G ~r~zA~ ALAN ~4ME.ubMHW EX I ,, _ 4oO,
'CO Ac,l.twu 13"t'~ ASE- ~XZF~stoN.
YO G rLC~t~?toN F,~,~M~n1T
14c: The Chico Unified School District has proposed to locate a new
elementary school on•one of the parcels adjoining the new road
alignment. Without the west 8th Avenue Extension, this would not be a
feasible parcel for a school. The new road will serve an attendance
area south of Lindo Channel and throughout the West Sacramento Avenue
neighborhood. Construction of West 8th will reduce bus trip length,
and avoid further impacts to the Sacramento Avenue/Highway 32
intersection.
14d: .The Chico Area Recreation & Park District has expressed an
interest in constructing a park between the proposed fire station and
school. They would also utilize the West 8th Avenue Extension for
access.
16e: Stormwater drainage will be provided along the roadway length.
Off-site drainage may be required at Highway 32 and West Sacramento
Avenue. The extent of off-side work will not be known until the
Department of Public works completes its engineering studies.
19: Construction of the West 8th Avenue Extension is prerequisite to
Chico Unified School District constructing a new elementary school,
CARD constructing a park, and will improve access to the proposed fire
station. The CARD park and adjoining school facilities will improve
recreational opportunities in this section of Chico.
20a: Archaeological surveys have been prepared for the Sacramento
Avenue Estates subdivision and adjoining subdivisions, No
archaeological resources were discovered, Therefore, it is not
expected that road construction will impact these resources.
Growth Inducement
While extension of west 8th Avenue will affect all adjoining parcels
{AP 42-14-30, -31, -32, -44 and -119, 42-15-02, --03 and -04), only AP
42-14-30 and -119 will become more developable as a result. AP 42-14-
30 has been proposed for a new elementary school. Extension of West
8th will avoid access onto Oak way at a dangerous curve. Extension
will also reduce bus trip length by avoiding the Sacramento Avenue
intersection. AP 42-14-119 has two General Plan designations (Low
Density Residential and Medium Density Residential} and zoning (C-.1 and
A-SR). The boundaries of zoning and General Plan designations do not
coincide. Approximately 2-1/2 acres now designated for low-density
residential uses will be served by the West 8th Avenue Extension,
eliminating the need for access onto Highway 32.
As all surrounding properties have been slated for urban development,
growth inducement is minimal. The road extension may provide for a
greater number of design options, improving project aesthetics.
LMT/sj s
11
yWY
WEST El C~HT~-1 ExTEnSto n - l~i~S
C.~t lCn ~ ~6pn ~ ~E ~
C~OA~ c.~.~ss~F~cwTwn - r3~-rY~ c,.o~ty
c.~ctc.uuR-nan 6-Er~f1T
J
Hwy
WEST ~~ C~H-CH ExT~ns~o n ~~~
~.~-t lC~ V ~L3An 1~ t~.~ ~
i~.GP-D1~`C C.~APIAGI"Cyj #i LranCS
J
~'wi
W E 57' E ~ C~H~~ ExTEns to n -
~.~~CO UC~L~Rn I~R~~
Yt~Xi~rFIL U41UrnES {4$7
-9~8
J
Hwy
WEST E~C~H~'H ~xTEns~on - ~q~g
~.~ttCO u~L~~n ~R~F~
P~O~E.~TED 'i"v~aFF ~ Lsol~mCs zc+a ~
"r mo oE~
66 •
6 5 • - ,~" - ~.. -. '~
~ 72
-
70 .
~ ~ ~ .. ~
~ .~.
7f
~
•~ 77
• ~ ~ - •76
~ ~
-
• 75 ~ ~
-. 83• r
- - 81 ~ 82 •
87
C ~y ~
-
9! 5 .9 ~ 04
~ ~
°
93 95
~
g X97
Io4
98 ~ s,
• •
i C
Sect (ZIR~ "fib
l03 - l05 • l06 ~
®! 47 !o
110 , II . i12
c~,y-ESC
~ ~ ~. X23
- ~ ~ 120 ' 121 ~
i26
•
_- i25 X148 ,-
12
- +
135 ..
f~
1 ~
4 ~
.. I ~5
~7 ~s`~ Et~tt-CH ~x`rErr~S~drl ~ tQ~~ !41
C~tt 1C.a u ~~wrtin wra--E~ .
~CZ..w~~ tc. zor E.s ~,n s~~ ay
. ~ ~ ~ ct.E.~R -
.- - r