HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-007.•
4~ .,~•~ _
;0~1 ::~;
.~. ''` :~n. B'OARD OF 'SUPERVISORS
~* ~: ? *; COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
~' N
31rq r,rn•"
'~.,~ QpUs~ ~esojution No. go-o~
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE
ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE GRIDLEY AREA LAND USE
PLAN AND AMENDMENT TO THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, a private company, Robinson and Sons, has
petitioned the Butte County Board of Supervisors, through an
appropriate application, to amend the Bufite County General Plan
Land Use Element, for a change from Orchard and Field Crop to
Industrial for that property Identified on Exhlblt A-I attached
hereto; and
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment has been
studied and revlewed by the Butte County Board of Supervisors 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
revlewed and considered the contents of the environmental review
study checklist (Exhibit A-2) prepared on the amendment pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors finds
the proposed General Plan Amendment and subsequent development
could have a potentially significant impact on the environment,
but will not In this case because of the Mitigation Measures
which have been attached to the protect and are described on
Exhlblt A-2; and
WHEREAS, the Butte Board of Supervisors finds the
proposed amendment compiles with all elements of the Butte County
General Plan and comprises an overall Internally consistent
whole, specifically:
I. The protect complies with the policies of the
Butte County General Plan.
2. Adequate separation between noise generators and
sensitive receptors is provided.
3. The land In Its present state Is not suitable for
orchard and field crop use.
4. The protect site has direct access to the existing
processing plant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the land use designation
from Orchard and Field Crop to Industrial as shown on Exhibit A-i
are hereby adopted and approved by the Butte County Board of
Supervisors as an amendment to Gridley Area Land Use Plan and
Butte County 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 Initial study and
negative declaration prepared for the General Plan Amendment are
adequate for this protect for compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, pursuant to Government Code
Section 65359 that the General Plan be endorsed to show the above
amendment has been approved by this Board.
8E IT FURTHER RESOLVED, pursuant to Government Code
Section 65357 a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
City Councils of the Cltles of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of
Supervisors on this gth day of January 1990, by the
following vote:
AYES: Supervisors McInturf, Dolan, Vercruse, Fulton and Chairman McLaugh1in
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
C
Ed McLaughlin, airman
Butte County Board of Supervisors
ATTEST: WILLIAM H. RANDOLPH, Chief Administrative
Officer and Cie k of the Board
By ~ zi.t~
T.19N
T.IB N:
f r~ .k
G/ , 4~
;.r~ W~.
~ n
3• ~
9 ~_ '.'
1 rq9-Nrkl j +
~ _ ~ -
~t. _ ~• T
~..~// y4 ~1.,, i
•~ 1. r,p rf ~.( S
~ T~,, 1
'~61I
z +~
_~
n~
v~
4...I
~4k
._
'^~~~ i~~
t ,,I
}ras
I
:k 1`
~s
.. •_. Iii
+-
,'..'. ~
-, 11[JJ[`` ~r~j~~~
~7fr5 ~1{ 4i ' 1~..
1 `~
i ~'~;
I fI
r' I
yV1A ~~ i
}i
0
- Zro' I +~ ~ I
- c ,~ I 1 , .y o II ~'
`O?46 I r S ICI,. ~j¢ ry '~ ` I
'I II ' 11 ~•^t `1 ~ ~ _ k~ .~~~~ I ~f I 1 1 * {'' W • ;~ ~ ~
}. ~ I .., ~ - I .~-
pp ~ _[-
`~ I S -'f^ ~1l Its` - l ~ 1 liio ..4.-~1 r -
' ~s' v
~11 ~ i ~~ ~ r S 111! j ' ~ nom.. .r• 1
I s1 -, I•\ ~ i ralso4~~_1l o~ i .o
I ~ T I` I I 11 ., s: A~~
I. ', ~ I I~ _ .l_
i ,II i # .I . ~ i 1 I 4 j :-
.~ ;a o~
l` .._. O •ll f~4 'n. rV i4.. .n 4. 1. ~5 ~ '( , I 11 .r`~ •--•i
IT8 .r III ~r C'~ 5 4. :.I I ` I ,1111~~• n Arro~{~~~ 'y-' r~_•~A..
41 ,, I ~ I •1 Al.~a ~ yaa~~-~'~~ / r~i:;e~ROAa
•rds~l 1~~J' iiz r~7~E. ~~ ~ I ~ ~ ., I
~ t r ! 14, _ ,: ~
' 111 .'~' ~ E .-_ e;.-~fw ~ ---~-~- -iii'" _ 0 ~ .,1•
P:'4 ,Oa~ Gro r ~I r ~.
„ Wcll
. ,,,
,~ a, ~o s
' `1Q p~IS !G
~ /~ ~ I ~.
{ I
~• ~ ! ~
r- i ~ ~
,_ ~4;~.
~--
1 ~ ~~rJy• ;1: n l ~
J ' "; ' ~,
r I1.~~;,,,. u.
c!'=er~.E'wt~attc?rra. >s,:a+r,.~=°.i.,4•I
+~s~
xs`
r
4
~ :~:
~~.:~:
'; .• ~^ ~~
. ~ ~•~~-
,,. ci 1~SC
~]G000 4
•~Irl• '1• •~ o ~ r~l ~'-\( fIR .1t .•L .•If~ 1~,I
. -^ ~ o I k ~ = n .
I _ r~ ~~~_-~` I6 1
r {.J ~ rk ~ - lA -.
D i~ ,
~~
,la .r: _ \Il,__•-113 =o
14 - ff -- ~ ~ ~G.
- 1 I `~ ~~ J~ ..
r - t S -•-
-. , , . ` ~ r ~ ~ 1 Wnll T,~?
I~ 1I1I,~E ~ J~r.etr#~~ 1 r73 ~ ~~ . I71s
Ilf~~~p ~aa saac ap'}chap j ~ k ~~
{ R / 6 -
BM. _ ~_.--.-`~__. -. Atly" I
~;
23 >'1~s I+ ----~- •- - ' .~' I ' 14 { xrrs r-... 1 rr9
1~ l rl~~ ~ ~.]
~ ~ ~ I o ~
xr1~ 4 ! ~\ I ~ ~ f.
1 '
FILE No. ~9~ ~.3fk. _
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING DATES ~-sy~89
APPLICANT ~~ilrso ,F-+so,y OWNER~.sT~r~ os cAr.~~olial~4
REQUE~T~~-FR~•~' A'^N ~ s+1°"sr~~ ExISTING ZONEI SCALE
~~ x,o~~
f
l :tiller
~. - ~ .` ~ APPENDIX I
f'
COUNTY OF BUTTE
ENV 2 RONMENTAL CHE CKL = 5 T F ORIyI
~XNiBIT A_a,
Files #84-43A,B,&C
LDC xD. 89-05-12-01
AP N0. 25-16-~~~,
25-23-33, 34
Lead Agency)
1. Name of proponent Robinson and Sons, Inc.
2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable):
P.O. Box 1620 Barnh art--Brown & Assoc.
Orov~ e, CA P. Box
rove e,
3. Project description: General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Mining Permit/
Reclamation Plan and Development Agreement.
II. MANDATORY T+'~1~FD2NGS OF S2GN=F=C~iNCE
YES MAYB$ NO
1. Does the project have the gotential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substanrial7y reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drog below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant ar animal or eliminate important examples of major periods
of California history or prehistory?
2. 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-termm 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 or morn 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 effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
ITI. D ETERM=NAT = ON (To be completed by the Load Agency). On the basis of
this initial evaluation:
T/WE find the proposed project COUT.D NOT have a significant effect on the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
IJWE 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 have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prapazed. _
IJWE find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect an the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. '~=
CDQNTY OF BUTTE, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~~
DATE: July 21, 19 89 $y: ~ , .
avid R. Hironimus
Senior annex
Reviewed by: ~~f~ G~i! p J . ............„,,,.,
IV. EN'V'2RQNMEI~T.AI~ ~F~IPAC"TS
(Explanations of all "YES" and "HAYBE" answers are required on attached sheet(s).
1. EARTH. Will the proposal zesult in significant: YES MAYBE NO
a. Unstable earth conditions, or changes in geologic substructures? ~~
b. Disruption, displacement, compaction ar overcovering of the soil? ~
c.
Change in togography or ground surface relief features?
~C $ ~
d. Destruction, cavezing or modification of any unique geologic or physical
features? ~~
e. Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either an or off site? ~~
£. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erasion which may modify the channel o£ a river or stream
ar the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet ar lame?
g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban
areas?
h. Exposure of people or groperty to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X G
2. AIR. Will the proposal result iat substantial:
a. Air emissions or deterinzation of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke ar fumes? ~G
c, Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in ~/
climate, locally or regionally? J~ G.
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in• x
either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount
of surface runoff?
c. Need for af£-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation
removal
h
ii
i
, c
anne
zat
an or culvert installation?
d. Alterations to the course ar flow of Flood waters? h
e. Change iari the amount of surface water in any water body? ~~
f. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration o£ surface water
quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen ar
turbidity? ~~
g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? ~C
h. Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters, eit4~er through
direct additions oz withdrawals, ox through intezception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations?
i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies? ~
;~
j. f'acposure of people or property to water-related hazards such as flaading? 4
4. PLA~fT LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Change in the divezsity of species, or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of
plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, ar in a barrier to
the normal re
le
i
h
t
f
i
i u
p
n
s
men
o
ex
st
ng species? ~
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
-2-
5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: XES MAYBE NO
a. Change isi the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, organisms ,~
or insects)? ~_
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique, raze or endangered species of
anim
l
? ~
a
s C
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to ~
the migration or movement of animals? x
d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ ~~ L
6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Increases in existing noise levels? ~(
b. Exposure of geople to severe noise levels? ~C ~
7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce significant light and glare? ~~
8. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the
es
t
l X
pr
en
or p
anned land use of an area?
9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in substantial:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? xG
b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resources? K
10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but
.not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency x
evacuation plan?
11. POPULATION, Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or
growth rate of the human population?
12. ROUSING, Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement? ~~
b. Effects an existing parking facilities, or demand far new parking?
c. Substantial impact an existing transportation systems? ~Cf
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation ar
movement of people and/or goods? X '[~
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x ~~
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need
for new or altered government services:
a. Fire protection? ,~
b. Police protection? ~C,
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ~ ~~
f. Other governmental services? ,~
_3_
15. ENERGY. WiII the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X C
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, ar
i
h
requ
re t
e development of new sources of energy?
I6. UTTLITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following:
a. Power ar natural gas? ~ ~
b. Communications systems? _ x
c. Water availability? ~C ~
d. Sewer or septic systems? _~
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal? ~C G
I7. HUt7AN NRAT•T$. Will the proposal result in: '
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental
health)? x
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
I8. AESTI~TICS. Will the proposal result i.n the obstruction of any scenic -
vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ~C
I9. RECREATION. Will the proposal result ui an impact upon the quality or
quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Y
J1 '~
Z0. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a
prehistoric ar historic archaeological site? x
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects
to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or ob,~ect? X
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 ar sacred uses within
th
t
i
l i
e po
ent
a
mpact area?
D2SCITS52O1V OF' Elv~1~ROIVMEIVTAL. EV'.A,LL7ATTON
See attached.
_~_
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP ~ 25-16-105, 25-23-
33, 34
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
GeneraE Plan Amendment - from Orchard and Field Crap to Industrial on
132 acres located south of Welsh Road, 1 I/2 miles west of Highway
70 along the Feather River.
Rezone - from "U" (Unclassified - ! single-family dwel[Ing unit and
ag uses per parcel) to M-2 (Heavy Industrial} on the same properties.
Mining Permit/Reclamation Plan - to allow sand and gravel extraction,(
and process[ng on I10 acres. Remaining property will be occupied by
a buffer area.
Development Agreement - to ensure that once the conditions of
approval are agreed upon, the use w[II be permitted for 50 years.
Applicant has entered Into a 50-year cease with the Department of
Water Resources to allow gravel extract[on and processing.
Other - Department of Water Resources lease - Robinson and Sons and
the Department of Water Resources have entered into a 50-year lease
on the site. In exchange for the aggregate and use of the land,
Water Resources wilt receive large ponds to be managed by the
Department of Fish and Game for habitat Improvement, and title to 280
acres located between the Feather River and Paclflc Heights Road,
approximately i mile west of State Highway 70 near Oroviiie.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTENG
The property Is located in an area known as "Gold Dredge Fiats" along
the Feather. River. Hydraul[c mining of the 1800s and more recent
channel dredging has Inundated surrounding agricultural lands with
mine tallings. These tallings'have no soil development; what little
soil exists has been deposited by wind drift. Riparian vegetation
has become established on the tailing fringes where water Is
plentiful. Experience has shown that upon removal of the tailings,
riparian vegetation will reestablish Itself. immediately north of
the proposed mine site, tallings were removed for construction of the
Oroville ^am (circa 1985). It took approxlmateEy 12-15 years to
recolonlze. The process of colonization can be sped up through
reclamation and revegetatlon of the site.
Geology
Dredger tallings are underlain by alluvium
epoch {most current). These Include sire
deposits along the Feather, Sacramento and
of sand, gravel, silt and minor amounts of
surface Inflltratlon range from moderate to
H drolo
depos[ted [n the Holocene
~m channel and floodplain
Yuba Rivers, and consists
clay. Permeability and
high.
-5-
The mining pits are located between 350 ft. to 2800 ft., from the
Feather River. Even though spatially segregated, it is hydraulically
interconnected. Groundwater levels fluctuate with water levels in
the Feather River. When River flaws are low (400-1,000 cfs), water
depths in the ponds immediately north are 7 ft. River flaws up to
10,000 cfs increase pond depth from I to 5 ft. At river flows above
20,000 cfs, standing water can be expected.
(Reference: DwR Bulletin 1i7-18. Oroville Borrow Area}
The property suffered significant flood damage in tie winter of 1.986
even through It Is not a zone A Floodway.
Groundwater on-site Is fresh, not brackish. Based on available data,
water level contours in 1971 were 80 ft., 90 ft. In 1977. Depth to
groundwater, Spring 1965 (pre-Dam} ranged from 10 to 4O ft. Base of
fresh groundwater is approximately 800 ft. High permeability and
infiltration of the cobbles yield large quantities of .water In
shallow wens. Are will yields are 500-l,Q00 gpm. Overdraft in the
basin Is not a problem; average annual recharge exceeds discharge.
Tailings are an important aquifer recharge area.
Vegetation/W1ldllfe
A corridor of well-established riparlan vegetation Is iocated along
the Feather R[ver. It !s commonly made up of these species:
Willows, Cottonwood, Sycamore, and Valley Oak are dominant;
Elderberry, Black Walnut and Box Elder form a mid-story; Blackberry,
Poison Oak, and W[ld Grape are common shrubs. Many grasses and herbs
occur. As a habitat type, riparian should be considered endangered.
{Reference: Department of Fish and Game Report}
Revegetatlon of the excavated barrow areas has been rapid. Periodic
inundation during construction has hastened the introduction-and
growth of phreatophytes, principally Willow and Cottonwood. The
edges of many ponds have filled [n w[th dense riparlan growth,
notably Cattail, Mugwort, and Western Ragweed.
Riparian supports the greatest wildlife densities and diversity of
all terrestrial habitats. Several species face extinction or
extirpation because of impacts an riparian.
Mammals: Deer, Gray Squirrel, Beaver, Opossum, Red Bat, Cottontail,
Deer Mouse, Red Fox and Ringtail.
S[rds: Bird activity Is usually noticeable. Typical species are:
Great Egret, Mallard, Wood Duck, Red Shouldered Hawk, California
Quail, Screech Owl, Scrub -Jay, Downy Woodpecker, Yellow-Bumped
Warbler, and Wh[te-Crowned Sparrow.
Flshlife: Thirty-nine species of fish either now exist or can be
expected to exist I~n the ponds and canals and the nearby river. The
undisturbed ponds continue to support warmwater fish populations.
_~-
Many of the newly excavated ponds and canals contain warmwater fish,
which have traveled form the river or adJacent ponds during overflow
periods. One species usually predominates In any pond, with the
Largemouth Bass found most frequently. The Ilst below shows the
expected habitat of the most common game fish.
The Feather River Es the most important King Salmon spawning
tributary ]n the Sacramento River system.
Habitat F[sh Species
Rocky bottom ponds and canals
Largemouth Bass, 5mallmouth Bass,
Green Sunfish, Black Crappie.
Sandy or s[ity bottom ponds
l=eather R[ver
Largemouth Bass, Biuegl[I, Wh[te
Grapple, Brown Bullhead.
5mallmauth bass, Green .Sunfish,
White Catfish, Channel Catfish,
King Salmon (fall and spring
runs), Steelhead (winter and
spring runs), American Shad (June
run}, Striped Bass (June run).
Species of speclaf concern: Ringtall, Deer Mouse, Deer, Beaver,
Otter, Cattontail_ Birds: Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, Yeilow-
Tailed Cuckoo. Plants: California Hibiscus, Black Walnut, Arabis
Brewer[[.
Land Uses
Surrounding land uses west of the
pasture, rice, some tailings and
the river, most ^f the property Is
area, or occupied by tailings.
pasture. Numerous residences are
frontage. .
river [nclude orchards, irrigated
the adJacent Mathews pit. East of
within the W[ldllfe Area, borrow
The only agricultural use Is dry
clustered along the Highway 70
Permanent human activity In the area Is Iow. the nearest residences
are:
1600 ft. west
2800 ft. west
2300 ft. east*
4700 ft. west
6200 ft, west
*Numerous residences are located between 2300 and 4700 ft, east of
the pro~eet near Highway 70.
Daily human activity is higher from recreatlanlsts, primarily
fishermen/women. The w[ldlife area prov[des opportunities for
fishing, walking, bicycling, swimming, wildlife observation, and
hunting.
-7-
MINING OPERATION
Rob[nson & Sons will remove and process mining tailings above ground
elevation. Tailings are to to 30 feet high. The mine area Is
limited to I10 acres by the water Resources lease. Mlning wi[1
commence with building a pit. ^epth Is estimated at 50 ft. Side
slopes will be 2:[ vertical.
Rock will be removed from the two pit areas by means of draglines,
front end loaders, dozers, and 80 ton bottom dump-trucks. The rock
will then be taken north to the exlsting plant via a haul road
approximately 3 m[Ies long. The haul road will run west of Paclflc
Heights Road and will be constructed of local rock.
Grading, sartEng, stockpiling and crushing will take place a the
exlsting Robinson Construction Co. Plant off Paclflc Heights Road.
ENV I I30NM1=NTAL IMPACTS
Note: x8 ~ beneficial impact
la: Pit/pond construction could result in unstable geoiog[c
conditions. The pit's s[de slopes could cave Inward. Damage would
be Ilm[ted to the immediate mine site. Reclamation of the site
pursuant to SMARA (Surface Mining and Reclamation Act) and the Fish
and Game lease will ensure that the ponds are properly engineered.
The Mlning Permit wl[i be conditioned to require 2:I slope on pit
walls.
Ib: Tail[ngs cover the entire site; there is very little soil {se
Environmental Setting). Alluvium underlies the cobbles at an unknown
depth. The alluvium will be .rnlned for sand and gravel to a total
depth of 50 ft. (SO ft. above mean sea level).
Ic: The- site is presently covered by dredger tailings 10--30 ft.
high. All tailings will be removed in the I10 acre pit area. the
Alts will slowly be dug, down to an estimated 50 ft. After mining,
the land wil[ be level, with two large ponds. This Is a significant
change from the present topography. The Impact Is beneficial.
Recla[med [ands will be suitable for wildlife habitat and recreation.
[f: See Items 3f,h.
Ih: All of Butte County Is within a Moderate Earthquake Intensity
Zone VIII. No known faults are located within 5 miles of the praJect
boundary. The pit structure as proposed should provide adequate
stability In case of seismic actl~lty.
2a: Deterioration of ambient air quality Is possible from a number
of different sources:
*haul roads
-8-
~, *loaders and crane loading and stockpiling materials
*conveyors, screens
*stockplles
Ail of the above, except the loaders and haul road, are currently In
use at the existing plant. As such, no additional signlfEcant
Impacts should occur.
Excavation
>=xcavatlon of ta[Iings, sand and gravel Is In many respects
comparable to construction actlv[ty. The variable 1s the amount of
property undergoing actlve disturbance. It Is estimated that 2 acres-
will be actively disturbed on any one day. An EPA emission factor
for construction sites Is 1.4 tons per month per acre of actlve
construction. Multiplying [.4 by 2 acres yields 2.8 tons per month.
Transport
Excavated materials will be transported to the aggregate plant v~la
the haul road, north approximately 3 miles to the existing plant,
Aggregate Plant
At the existing aggregate plant excavated materials, sand, gravel and
cobble are separated. There is very I[ttle dust generated because
the material Is kept moist during the process, A portion of that Is
used in concrete and asphalt Is crushed and then segregated according
to size. The gravel Is kept dry through crushing, screening and
rehandling. Without dust controls, these operations can produce a
cons[derable mount of dust.
The EPA estimates emissions at .I Eb/ton of dry material for
uncantrolEed plants, At 120.18 - 250 tons per hour, emisslons are
12.02 - 25 lbs. per hour. At~10 hours a day, 5 days a week {216.5
hours per month), 2602.33 - 5412.5 ibs, per month could be generated,
This will be a contlnuatEon of the existing use which has been in
operation approximately 21 years.
Emplo ee Traffic Emissions
Robinson & Sons will employ up to 20 persons at the plant. Based on
20 employees making an average of 2.8 trips per day with an average
trip length of 10 tulles, the following emisslons wi[I occur.
wg_
Composite
Bmisslon
Factor
f~ollutant {gram/ml}
CO 24.23
NQx 2,41
Bmisslons,
Miles/Day lbs./Day
5B0 29.91
560 2,gg
Total:
Hydrocarbons 3.26 560 4,02
Particulates .3[ 560 .38
The s[gnlficance of any air pollution source Es dependent on many
factors:
Surround[ng air quality.
Distance to receptors.
5ensltlvlty of Receptors.
Wind patterns.
Dropout rate.
Air quality on-site Is goad. The nearest res[dences are 1600 and
2800 feet west. Residences are sensitive.. A second potentially
sensitive receptor Is recreatlonists. Two popular fishing spots are
I I/2 and 2 i/2 miles west-northwest.
A wind rose Is attached. Winds blow towards the west 3.4%, and to
the northwest (0.196 of the time. According to the F.Iw.1.R. sand and
gravel operation River Bend Ranch, fallout rate of these materials
15.
74.6% will fall out within 4Q ft.
92.4% will fall out within 2000 ft.
94.7% w[[I fail out withfn~5 ml[es.
99.4°6 wi11 fall out wlth[n 150 miles.
Based on these rates, 7.896 of emiss[ons may reach the residences when
winds are blowing to the west and northwest. 6.45% of the emissions
may reach recreatlonists under the same wind conditions.
Dust can be mitigated by obtaining a "permit to construct" from Air
Pollution Control, watering of work sites and haul roads, and
planting of trees to the north and west in the IQO ft. buffer.
3b: On-site drainage patterns will change wEth excavation. No
longer will water pond In small depressions. A[terat[on of drainage
patterns will be [fmlted to the mine site. A 100 ft. buffer of
tailings surrounds the pit area and will contain stormwater runoff.
After reclamation, drainage wilt return t^ a semi-normal pattern,
flowing west-southwest to the Feather River: The 100 ft. buffer of
tailings will Impede surface flows. •
-I.g-
' 3e,f,h: No d[rect discharge to the Feather River is planned or
permitted. However, by Its very nature, the mine may discharge to
groundwaters thence surface waters. A pit will be constructed.
Groundwater Is expected to be intercepted at 10 to 40 ft. A crane
will remove materials beEow groundwater, and pile them up to dry.
Excavation underwater will create turbidity. Constant disturbance
w[II keep particulates suspended. Groundwater flows to the r[ver may
flush these sediments out of the pit. Input from Regional Water
Quality Control will be requested to determine if Impacts to the
Feather River could be s[gnifEcant.
31: Federal f[aad maps Indicate the property Is completely
surrounded by, but outside of, a Zone "A"'flood boundary. A 6 to 8
ft. levee Is supposed to protect the land from flood. Reclamation
Board maps (State of California) Indicate the plant site 1s wlth[n
the floodway. The 1986 flood washed out the levee road. During high
water, pond and pit water will m[ngie with floodwaters. At th{s
time, contain{nation Is possible, but~not of concern because of the
dilution factor. Mining operations weather floods fairly well.
Floods are fled Into releases from~Oroville Dam. Employees will have
plenty of forewarning to evacuate.
4a,c: The mine site is essentially devoid of vegetation (see
Environmental Setting). After mining is Complete, the land will be
managed b~y F1sh and Game for wildlife habitat. The "pit" will be a
freshwater pond stocked wEth fish. riparian vegetation will slowly
colonize the perimeter. Co[on{zatlon will be sped up through
vegetation as part of reclamation. improvement to wildlife habitat
on-site is a beneficial Impact. Native spec[es should be used.
5a,c: Reclamation of the site and recolonfzation by r[parian
vegetation will provide prime wildlife habitat for a muit[tude of
species. Though the lease is for 50 years, reclamation may occur In
as little as 15. These impacts are beneficial. Fish and Game has no
obJectlons to the project.
5b: The protect s[te incorporates a i00 ft. buffer around the pit
area. The buffer, If planted wEth native vegetation to screen the
plant site, will Ilmlt noise, dust and incompatible land uses from
spilling into the Wildlife Area.
6: Noise levels generated by the equipment on a similar protect are
estimated to be:
Peak dB Constant
(2) loaders i04
{2) crushers _ {10
grader IOg
water truck 85
crane 104
conveyor 104
(2) dump trUCks I08
X
X
X
X
X
X
-I1-
Intermittent
X
;r ~ r
.n `~ .,.
.-~~. , i
N
E
WIND ROSE
• OR~VILLE AIRPORT
w
-zz-
TI;RA GORF'ORATION
. S
- -. :,::> ~I ZO N E A - - - ~zaN o wadar~ nRS 4 ~ , cam' .-:;_~ _ ^,;.,=_ -. „., .:.....:..:_ _ .-, r.
~~.. ~.. 4 ~ ~~~ Rs~w.l' {i"rk"` P._" - ~ ~
~~ ~ ~J"'~, ZO N E X ~ w. .~^h '~.i~..,+e~-.< ~~a1{ _ - ..-~~s'c.".; ~.w'., • ~ _. ~.
if' - /
l! ~ 1r
`~ rr_
Jkr
FEATHER ~ % : =f :;,. ~ .,.: ...,~ ~ - . ~~ , ' ` , ,
7 a RIVER ac. - - ;: ~~~-0: ;~ ~-~e" l- „ - r ''
~ Road = ~.~~ `~" :~ - 35
.,~ ~~y~ =~ i .
r Levee J+ti` `- `"LO~,Q_~- _~ ' _ ~ - /~ I~
'~]Viidiife'Area _ I / ~ / ,
'1 r. 19 N 1 • T , ~
T. 18 N.~ ~ 4 ~~~
I
• lu - !~
Ororillt wildlife F ,
1 ~ E -
+ r i.
•f ZONE x k
.. ...... . .. . . ..... .. - ~ ~ I
ZO N E X z ~`- F ~ ~~
- ~ ~ !~
.. ~ °, ~..
OROVILLE WiLDLi~EAREA r1~ ' 4 - ~~ ~.', -
. I I ~ ~
V } ,~
_ I ;
f ~ i ~ ,
- ~.
..` _-
,,~:~-
~• ~~
,.:~ FEAT R ~ _t_ ~
~~ •- .~~ ~~=yam ~ I~ ~ t~-----
iii ~. _:_.-ir. is •..'j,` I
~~, ZONE X ~ ,.~~, ~~~;
ZONE A - -.;y~t~-:~.,: ...-_ ._ - __ , .,~ -_-- - _
- .-. i ~-... ~~. y= - ... ~ v.~r
. i• '• f' _~+~+ ~'::}-/` ~ .fjj"~~~_,_ti,`~•. ~..~ ONE "e ~ k-«L`
".T ~Lr?;~•t`wln_ F4': X,` --tY~" '~~G~-rL„~a,
' ~~ ~- zo ~=~~~~~ zoN~~ - ~.. yam.:, :.~~„> 13
....
~ .~r ~ ~ . ~.. ~ _~~z:~yC~~' ..~ _- fir'.:-.;; _w ~; . .
~;~,~..
~'-`~"-:
~ ~~ •w~r`C. ZONEA
~aw~=--: -{;i•--.-` ~`'_• ;:+~:~,~ri~'-:~i.'-- •~ '~ Z4NEX~ .~ 7 :~ -~.J- N
_ -~ ,.:i}L.? ,c,s': iC• ..',~-r-'mow';,? - ~ ~~ ZO f X
•.. _ _ _. . ~ ~~ -ice r_~ , •+'~'•-- .. ~ ZONE A i y ~ r
Based on the noise analysis, noise generation Is not a sfgnlflcant
impact. No mitigation Is necessary..
8: The property Is currently designated Orchard and Field Crop on
the General Plan. Site designation criteria are:
a. Sol[ conditions welt sul
b. Adequate water supply.
c. Predominant parcel sizes
d. Used for crop production
e. Adjacent uses compat[ble
In its present state, the
production.
ted to plant crap operations.
of 5 acres or more.
ar secondary uses.
with primary and secondary uses.
land is not suited to agricultural
An Industrial General Plan designat[on has been requested.
Industrial Is the only designation In. place which Is suitable for the
proposed use. Upon completion of the mine, a General Plan Amendment
to Public should be In[tlated. A suftabie zoning category Is Public
ar Resource Conservation,
A mine wilt promote Intensive human activity In a remote area. The
mine and related equipment Is visually much different from open
expanses of rock piles,
This impact Is temporary, Ifmfted to the Iffe of the mine.
9a,15a: Dlesef fuel will be utilized to power most of the plant's
equipment. Up to f30 gallons or more will be combusted each day.
13: Access to the pit areas wl[1 be via a haul road connecting the
pits to the existing Robinson Construction Co. Plant on Paclflc
Heights Road. The haul road will be approximately 3 miles long.
Most access wi[1 be at the ~pl~ant site, but two other access points
are possible The first Is at the west end of Welsh Road (westerly
extension ,of Palermo Road) and the other Is where the haul road
crosses the Orovflle W[Idllfe Area access road. Three gates across
the haul road will keep unauthorized traffic from accessing the pits
or the haul road. (see Exhibit "AN)
Robinson has been using part of the haul road to access land
immediately southwest of the plant site. That resource has been
depleted and will be deeded to the Department of Water Resources
(see Exh[bit "D"). Truck traffic will simply continue south along
the haul road to the new pits. Accordingly, no new traffic will be
generated on area public roads.
14b: A security fence should be constructed around the site to
prevent unlawful entry.
14d,19: The Oroville Wildlife Refuge borders the property to the
north and east intrusions of noise, traffic and dust may adversely
affect the recreational experience. Although there are no developed
-I4-
facilities In the Immediate vicinity, two popular flshEng holes are
within I I/2 and 2 I/2 mE[es. These fishing areas should not be
adversely affected.
RecEamattan of the property far wildlife habitat wilt benefit Flsh
and Game and the res[dents of California.
Robinson wI[E deed 280 acres of river frontage to Fish and Game In
exchange far m[neral rights. The river frontage will become part of
the wildlife refuge, open to the public.
16a: Robinson will extend power to the site. Lines should be
discreetly placed. -
16c: Water will be supplied from the existing plant.
ISe: Stormwaters wi[I flaw into the ponds,
IBf: The lease spec[ftcally prohibits accumulation of garbage ar
debris.
References
Butte County Planning Department, "Green Rock Quarry EiR," 1984,
California Division of Mines and Geology, "Geology of t-he Orov[I[e
Quadrangle," Bulletin 184, 1966.
The Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources, "California
Protected Waterways Plan," 1971.
The Resources Agency, "Evaluation of Groundwater Resources,
Sacramento Valley," Bulletin EI8-6, 1878.
The Resources Agency, "Groundwater Resources In Butte County, 1985°.
The Resources Agency, "Orovltle Borrow Area," Bu'Ilet[n 117-18, 1968.
Environmental Assessment and Resource Planning, "Sand and Gravel
Operations at River Bend, l~1R," 1975.
Rau, Wooten, "1=nvironmental Impact Analysis Handbook," McGraw-HIi1,
1980.
Homburger, Kell, "Fundamentals of Traff[c Englneering,° Tenth
Edition, Institute of Transportation 5tud[es, Berkeley, 1981.
Butte County Planning Department, "Gordan Mathews Initial study" Log
X86-pI-28-04, AP 25-I6-47 (pin), File *86-31.
Tentative Llst of Mltl atlon Measures/Conditions:
1. State permits required:
Discharge permdt from RegEonal Water Quality Control.
-~5-
Permit to operate from State Reclamation Board.
~. Local permits:
Authority to construct from Alr pollution Control Distr[ct.
Permit to operate from Alr Pollution Control.
Butte County Mosquito Abatement.
Envlranmentai Health.
Butte County Public Works.
Cai[fornia Department of f=orestry.
3. Panel slopes to be no steeper than 2:1 above groundwater; I:I
below.
4. Engineer ponds to carry design capacity + [00-year rainfall.
5. Regularly water work sites and hau! roads to min[mize dust.
8. No flocculants permitted.
7. Revegetate site with native riparian species under the d[rectlon
of responsible state agenc[es.
8. Limit plant operations to Monday-Saturday, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
S. install security fence along north and east property Ilne.
10. All equipment to be equipped to minimize noise.
EI A!I trees and vegetation taken out to be removed from the
project area.
I2. The sharellne of the large ponds be constructed In such a way as
to prevent any shallow vegetated areas far mosquitoes to breed
In. The shoreline banks should be clean and sharp along the
edges• Aquat[o vegetation that surfaces. should be kept to a
minimum if not prevented, to discourage mosquito breeding.
Control and maintenance of surface and sharellne vegetation may
require herbicide appffcatlons and, therefore, access should be
provided for power sprayers or mechan[cal control equipment.
Similar Project
On Slte Equipment
Loaders
Crushers
Grader
Water Truck
Crane
Conveyor
rump Trucks
Sound Output In Declbefs
107.OD
If3.Q0
108.00_
85.00
104.00
(04.00
III.00
-16-
~'.~ Concrete Mixer Truck [08.00
• Screens 103.00
Asphalt Plant 85.00
Total equipment sound output
logar[thmic sum of sound pressures
( Ipl/IO)
P total ~ 10 l09 (n10 )
50118723362.73
I9852623i49S.89
83095734448.02
316227766.02
25118864315.10
251[8864315.10
125892541179.42
6309573444$,02
19952623149.89
316227768.02
Sum of a2s to a38
572551772246.99
estimated plant
output at site
117.58
Notes: Where twa of the same pieces of equipment will be Located on-
slte, the dB output Is equal to output from one plus 3 dB.
All formula distances are In meters.
Sound Propagation Worst Case
Distance
P
t Atmospheric Barrier Totai
ee Distance Decibels Absorpt[on Attenuation Saund
50.00
(00.00 E5.24
30
48 82.92 0.11 0.00 82.8[
200.00 .
60.96 78.90
70.88 D.22
0
44 5.00 71,6$
400.00
121.92
64.86 .
~ 0.88 5.00
5
00 65.44
800.00
243.84
58.84
1.76 .
~ 5.00 58.98
52
08
1600.00
2000.00 487.68
809
60 52.82 3.52 5.00 .
44,3Q
3000.00 .
914.40 5D.88
47.36 4.40
6
60 5.00 41.48
4000.Q0
12[9.20
44.86 .
$
80 5.00 35.76
5000.00
1524.00
42.92. .
II.00 5.00
5
00 31.06
6000.00
($28.80
41.33
13.20 .
5
00 26.92
7000.00
2133.60
40.00
15.40 .
5.00 23.13
19
60
8000.00
9000.00 2438.40
2743
20 38.84 17.60 5.00 .
16.24
10000.00 .
3048.00 37.81
36.90 19.80
22
00 5.00 13.01
11000.00
3352.$0
36.07 .
24.20 5.00
5 9.90
.00 6.87
DRH:Ir
-17~
-~-' t ' -~ ~'~~ ~ ~ ?z~+~ j°~r :fem. " : ! ,,,,, ,~ ~
.r ~~. :..: ~1 i'~Y'--
'l:l _J ~~ d~{'~~ r NJ04Q~ J. •.r~~~. - •~ XCifiY~l
• 1% ~ _ ~r~• ~ M ~t ~~ ~~~ ref .~~ . _ .r yy-'""'~' ~ }- _ •r._ .,:.- t ~"•• _ ~~C~ ~ ~JU ^L
q {~ I ~' 't; ~8~'r a , ~r~d~~1:.. s+~ ~ . ~~7e "T ~ _. ~ i „b
~rr. •~~ ~.-• I " Sk;kf E - ~~e.~sp ° rt~•'~o e. ~;;,~'dipi..•:' r'-` ' " v' }
'~•~`,~` t7y ,:' ru-w~y~ :.,~-------------- -_ ''y,e.. ~~=~~~;,. ~,:.: (r .: -~ { ~ 1~ :Il' l _ ~l
,~ ~~ 2".+_ J• ~_..r ,Gaa..._: ~•~;.:~ip~.':: ~ ' : ~Jr j ~•1'•,, _, _ -^t'' •es +.~•. .
~ ~3 ~`~~ ;;:. - ~ ~3.4 ~ °~~34.':;~~:-=:r.~ f +9~"'~;~ ~w~ ~ _ ~.lj '~ '.... , :J~ . ~.
{t 1 ~ E -~ -~ ~ ~'^ :::I s ~ ~.,~ ... , •` "+•~r,1 1ieI1 i 1p 1} ~ t ` `~ •~~~ . 7ra~ V /
:. ,R~.I` 1 JIf4 •~ x,1,,5 _,'/' ,~~r~ A7~ ,_~ ,, 4'j•,{r ,~ _
t l Ir{ ~ a~~+~ r n~` l Il ~ ` ft, i-. J~ , ~ ~+! " • • ssk .. ' • .~•'. ~•--^ y-
~jk ~:: ~ ~ 3 3 r~ ~ ~ ~
i i I 1 _ _ ~. ~ ~~~.. -
`;' a. ~ 1Jr _,~~vJ//roc-- pp r ~ . + ~ C / 1 i I
.g ~ Un ~ `~~ ~ i~a l,''1 7G• :I. 4` st) 1 +r i ` hJ `ix1 ` `~ 1 i Y •`1 -. l11
` • I ~ 0 ~ p~t.Erznr~ !
i y._.; t ~' a ~. r23
. `~k '~~~:_ r, -t: ~`?~ , . tom. ~ :~`... _ ~ r:~- n
'k -. :,~ v-;~1'' +~9+~t`~:,I _ _ 0'.'r'• •QS~t Grov'e._a i ~ o ~ , ,
~ ~ -~S R o-"'~••"`•:\r,s,11a 1 ~kk ~~ Trarer• ~. ~'.r1,~~mr ^~Y--•- ---14 ~ -.'~,
,S ~ ~ V. ' ~ S a, \ , '7`~~ ~t J, i . r• ~ ~ ~, Parx1 r riy o '" ~~ ! ~~--.~~--~Y.~~~
1 :_~. ~ Imo', l .;•'td ;q,J~ t_. .l .' -r '' ~'.~ ~ -•r p
;s , ~ ~ I~Jr` 'l~•F '~ ~. "~.' ~'j 'S~ ;r'i ` `; r _' - ,.rte ~ - -
' n ~ ~ •/;-:•r.r 'n, ~:. Well 1 ~..~ - ! -r._..~
I g R r~r ~ ~ 1 .. ~: ~~~. I ,•
rv'~~ ivE•o w 1 ~ ar .!!~ iaL a• Wefl ! ~ .~li, r .rl r~ •k~' 1 _ ~ ~~ 1
l~' ~ ~ ~ s !G' ' ~ • ~ ~ 7'~,? _A.~'~ ~'S14 r r ). 77 , . +; ~ •-~ ~ T113
~: I ` al~:~. r 1ti 4~Cd ~:~' `.J~F^~S'r~,:ir. i~ •,r~r~/r ~ _! ~. ~ •~._ ~~ 'u 1,~ %~ ~ ~ .tj _ n
waY~ •~~ ~ ~•. 1 r~lAarr r ~) ~• A
r`• ~--: :''Y.g~~^'~ ~",,fr~a`~- ~ ' l eH. J I f I fr ` _.J .~~7_~-~~__----
k q~•,,y ~ C3n~°'~ 1 '~~ "'`.•; rt; i' ' i~ - t _. ~ ,__...-, r~ tia_, -I~O~., _: ~ I r , i-=n- ~~
i~~:. d4:.:~~~-'~~.•~'-1 e~oe+:t~r ~r:~h ik~55 1 rr_ 1~ -'tJ0- - 'ri ~ ,~ 1 'Weil za 1 ~
- P. :.
~ t ~i ~~4 ,jam! ~- .,j •~~.s._G av' --.. ±f
T 1t= •d ~ a;`l: ~ ' ° Pit ~,
;,,~~, --
-~ ~ ~ •-r ,DDB/,U54,c/ G4.(/ST,2[JGT/4.(/ „~`
~,~ - - _ 'tifi'~ 4~~.-- Q~1 /f ~~ ,. Ala:. I
'T r....--... -yw~~ ~, ~` LV V `/i,~U9r' r ' S~1 _. / ~' ~ _. r J.'~ j a~i
~`y~'14~fG t~ -- f •~ ,~'. ~- ~.~ ! '.y ~., ~ fly `~~.
,~.. , ~
~;-~. . c :'* •~~ v - :~': ~ ~,,.:• _ . _ ~ . ~ r ~ - Q , 4, __. ~ row.. .
~~ jay JI' _ w' •
~~ ~ f ~ti M ~ ~= ~ is
c. ..r~ ! ~ e r
~ ~, ~~~ ~ r..l ~* ~ H \\'- y Graz rte. L~~ li.r~-•- .~~ •'S' ~_~
x'65 .,1~ $~.~`q. ~ ~ ~ Oak Grove i~ '~.?-- " ~ ':;^
~: NV' 7Z+Q V 4 yn~ J"~n Parkes , ~ 'j _ >`r ~ ~~7:
~ ~. ~ ~. i;
~~ ` ~ .1A ~ PJZOPd5E0 rr~ 9 ~.. $uf'Fe Co, Pla^ftinq G`orr'tra.
25, ~ ~s i .. lOros+ille. California
~ WeU ~' --
Applicant: Robinson & Sons, Inc.
DATA SHEET
A. Project Description
Assessor's Parcel
25-IS-105, 25-23-33, 34
Lag ~ 88-05-12-Of
I- Type of Project: General Alan Amendment, Rezone, Mining
Permit, Reclamation Plan and Development Agreement.
2. Brief Description; _
3. Location: Seven mites south of Orovllle, I I/2 miles west
of Highway 70, via an unnamed DWR road along the Feather
River, T18N, R3E, Section 15.
4. Proposed Density of Development: N/A
5. Amount of impervious Surfacing; 3 miles of Haul Road,
6. Access and Nearest Public Road{s}; Access road off Pacific
Heights Road 3 miles north.
7• Method of Sewage D€spasa#: N/A
8. Source of Water Supply: From exist#ng plant site.
9. Proximity of Power Lines: Approximately I mile away.
IO. Potential far further fend divisions and development:
None.
B. Environmental Settin
Ph sicai Environment:
I. Terrain
a. General Topographic Character: Bolting rockpiles
{dredger tailings).
b. Slopes: Micro relief of 10-30%.
c• Elevation: 100-200 ft. A.S.L.
d• Lim€ting Factors: -None.
2. Soils
a- Types and Characteristics: Dredger fallings, minimal
If any sot! development. Dirt has accumulated in low
spots between mounds, supporting riparian vegetatlon_
b. Limiting Factors;
3. Natural Hazards of the Land
a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate.
b. Erosion Potential: None to slight.
c• Landslide Potential: None,
d. Fire Hazard: Moderate.
e. Expansive So€i Potential: N/A
4. Hydrology _
a. ~5urface Water; Adjacent to Feather R[ver on west.
b- Ground Waster; Hlgh groundwater table.
c. Drainage Characteristics: To Feather River.
d • Annua I Ra i n fa I [ ( norms #) : 20-»22 ~~ .
e- L1miting Factors: H[gh groundwater.
-20-
'.; 5. VisuallScenic Quality: Highly scenic views of r[ver,
trees, f[elds.
6. Acoustic Quailty: Excellent.
7. A[r Quality; Good.
6fola ical Environment:
8. Vegetation: Rlparfan species, Cottonwood, Poplar,
Blackberry, Poison Oak.
9. Wildlife Habitat: Limited Rlparfan and marsh habitat
suitable for ducks, rabbits, birds, etc, .
Cultural Environment: ~
ID. Archaeological and Historical Resources In the area: High
potential for resources listed on Butte County maps.
However, dredger tallings would have overcovered any
artifacts.
~~. Butte County General Plan designation: Orchard and Fieid
Crap.
12. Existing Zoning: ~~~".
73. Exlst[ng Land Use on-site: Rack plies.
14. Surrounding Area:
a. Land Uses: Feather River, ag lands, no significant
residential development before 2000 feet east.
c. Gen. Plan Designatlon~: Orchard and Field Crop,
Agricultural-Residential, Pubflc.
d. Parcel Sizes: West: 20-25. North: 161. East: 178, 1
300. South: 25-34.
e- Popu[atlon: Sparse.
15. Character of 51te and Area: Dredger tallings along Feather
River.
Z6. Nearest Urban Area: City of Oroville.
17. Relevant Spheres of _Infiuence; Butte County Mosquito
Abatement District.
78. Improvements Standards Urban Area: N/A.
19. Fire Protection Service:
a. Nearest County {State) Flre Station: ~r72, X63.
b• Water Avallabiilty: engine capacity only.
20. Schools In Area: N/A
- 2I-
BvFFa Co. Planning C.~
. '. ~ CRY 15199
~~la c~;~
~i~.TTTE CUL~?~TTY MOSQLTITQ ~LB~~TEIVIENT I~IST~ICT
013T RIOT p1=FICE AT 517 LARKIN ROAD WiL LlAM E. M•,Z EL TlN E, PN.6,
•. E. CORNER OF ORO VILLE AIRVORY MANAGER - Ea•1 JIftONMENTJ•L [ST
pN LARKIN RoAO ORQVILLE• CALIFORNIA 95955
PHONE IOtp1 >435-e03e
34 2.7 3'J O
May 11, 1969
Butte County Planning Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroviile, CA_ 95965-3397
RE: Robinson & Sons, INC.
Environmental Project Review
AP p25-16-1QS & 25-23w33,34
The project area and the lands surrounding it are
man-altered breeding sites for disease vectoring mosquitoes, '
and any inf iux of people into this area for what ever reason
will increase the risks of mosquito vectored diseases.
It is our understanding that the altered landscape
which results from this project will be left to the state as
wildlife habitat for recreational purposes. Two large ponds
will replace the smaller dredger ponds now present, as a
result of rock and gravel removal. This will eliminate the
smaller mosquito breeding sources and make access into the
area more convenient for our purposes. However the large
replacement ponds may become a suitable mosquito breeding
habitat and a substitute problem for the smaller ponds, if
constructed improperly. - .
We have discussed this issue with Fish and Game
Wildlzfe personnel who will regain use of the land after the
project ends.
As mitigation, we would urge that the shoreline of the
large ponds be constructed in such a way as to prevent any
shallow vegetated areas for mosquitoes to breed in. The
shoreline banks should be clean and sharp along the edges.
Aquatic vegetation that surfaces should be kept to a minimum
if not prevented, to discourage mosquito breeding. Control
and maintenance of surf ace and shoreline vegetation may
require herbicide applications and therefore access should
be provided for power sprayers or mechanical control
egxzzpment.
If you have any questions regarding our
reccommendations on this issue, please feel free to contact
our office. We would be happy to meet with you for
discussion.
Sincerely,
i~~~
Daniel Moench
Regional Supervisor
DM/th ~ -22-