HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-074B~?ARQ ~- ~UP~R1~~~t~R~
COUNTY C3>` ~UT°TE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
BUTTE APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM OPEN AND GRAZING LAND AND TIMBER
MOUNTAIN TO AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL .
WHEREAS, private individuals, Anne Russell and Don Hinton have petitioned
the Butte County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate
application, to amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, for a change from
Open and Grazing Land to Agricultural Residential, for that property identified on Exhibit
A-1 attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, a private individual, Garland Hart has petitioned the Butte
County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate
application, to amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, for a change from
Timber Mountain to Agricultural Residential, for that property identified on Exhibit B-1
attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, a private individual, Dan Pickard has petitioned the Butte County
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate application, to
amend the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, for a change from Open and
Grazing Land to Agricultural Residential, for that property identified on Exhibit C-1 attached
hereto; and
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendments have 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 Environmental Checklist (Exhibit A-2, B-2, and C-2)
prepared on the amendments pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has held hearings on the
General Plan Amendments at which all interested parties were heard; and
WHEREAS, the Butte County 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 amendments provide for compatible development with existing
land uses.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOt_VED as follows:
1. The General Plan Amendments to Agricultural Residential as shown
on the attached Exhibits A-1, B-1, and C-1 are hereby incorporated
by reference.
2. The General Plan Amendments are hereby adopted and by the Board
of Supervisors of the County of Butte as amendments 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
findings pursuant to law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Government 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 County Board of Supervisors on this
25th day of June , 1996, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Houx, Thomas and. Vice Chair Meyer
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chair McLaughlin
NOT VOTING: None
~ ~ f
./r-'
'' - ° ~ Vice Chair
ED MCLAUGHLI , CHA ' AN
Butte County Board of supervisors
ATTEST: John S. Blacklock, Chief Administrative
Officer and Clerk of the Board
By:
BUTTE COUNTY BOARD of SUPERVISORS
Applicant: Anne Russell & Don Hinton Owner: Same
Hearing Date: June 25, 1996 ~ 9:00 a.m. Existing 7.,une: FR-40 (Foothill Recreational, 40 acre min.) RI
Request: General Plan Amendment from Grazing & Open Lands to Agricultural Residential. No Scale
I Assessor Parcel Nn: Ptn O1 l -340-014 I File: GPA 96-01 1
CA 1"11131 1 1'7 -" ~
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03 ~ x
l~ , f y.
COUNTY OF BUTTE
INITIAL STUDY
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
I. BACKGROUND
A. Applicant and/or Project Name: Aru~e Russell and Don I~irtton General Plan Amendment and Rezone
B. Project No. and AP No.: GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03, APN Ol 1-340-014
C. Address of Applicant and Representative: 13510 Centerville Raad, Chico, CA 95928
D. Project Description and Location: This is a request to amend the General Plan designation from
Grazing-Open Land to Agricultural-Residential, and to change the zoning from FR-40 to FR-20, on
a 20-acre portion of the applicant's 61-acre property. Approval of this project could lead to the
creation of a 20-acre parcel. The property is located on the east side of Centerville Road, behind the
Centerville Museum, in Butte Creek Canyon. The property sits on the east side of Butte Creek
Canyon (Nimshew Ridge) and is developed with one single-family dwelling. Fortions of the property
have been extensively mined, both hydraulically and by underground mines. Several 100 foot-plus
cliffs, resulting from hydraulic mining, are located an the property. One filled-in mine exists, and the
potential for more mines on the property is high. The property is covered with mostly young oak
and pine trees, extensive bnash, and some grass lands. The property is located in Deer Herd Critical
Winter Range, but is in a Designated Development Zone. Additional project description and area
description can be found in the data sheet at the end of this document.
II. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMEI~'TAL IMPACTS
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures?
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: The project is a Legislative action, not a development project. No earth moving or
development activities are involved. This is a project that may result, if approved, in changing the land
use designation fora 20 acre portion of the project site from Grazing-Open Land to Agricultural-
Residential and changing the zoning from Foothill-Recreational 40 to Foothill-Recreational 20.
Approval of this project would allow the applicant to submit a tentative parcel map application to
create a 20 acre parcel. At that time, the County wilt have an opportunity to address any and all
potentially significant, substantial, incremental, and cumulative impacts relating to a development
^ Butte County Development Services Depart»:ent ^ Planning -ivision ^
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
project.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause any madiCications to the soil. Future development on the
property could impact the soils on the project site. These concerns will be addressed at the time of
tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Substantial change in topography ar ground surface relief features?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause any changes to the project site's topography. Future
development on the property could impact the topography an the project site. These concerns will be
addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause any modifications to any unique geologic or physical feature
located on the project site . Future development on the property could impact any unique geologic or
physical feature on the project site. These concerns will be addressed at the time of tentative parcel
map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Any substantial increase in wind or water erasion of soils, either an or off-site?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off
the project site . Future development on the property could cause an increase in wind or water erosion
of soils. These concerns will be addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may
modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of any lake?
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
2
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not change the deposition or erosion that will modify any drainage.
Future development on the property could cause changes in deposition or erosion. These concerns will
be addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project site does not contain prime agricultural soils.
Mitigation: None required.
h. Exposure of people or property to gealogic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-slides, ground
failure, or similar hazards?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Based upon the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan there are no known
geologic faults in the area and approval of this proposal will not expose people ar property to geologic
hazards.
Mitigation; None required.
2. Air. i~'ill the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Approval of this project will not cause an increase in air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality.
Mitigation: None required.
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not create objectionable odors, smoke or fumes.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or
regionally?
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
3
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-43
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Only large projects such as the construction of a large high-rise buildings, the creation of
a large water body (such as a lake or thousands of acres of rice fields), massive defoliation, or
introduction of large tracts of vegetation where there was previously none, would have the climactic
effects discussed in this question. Since this project has none of these characteristics it will not result
in any change in air movement, moisture, temperature, or climate.
Mitigation: None required.
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in fresh waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: One small seasonal drainage is located on the subject property. The project will not affect
this watercourse. Setbacks from the drainage may be required at the time of land division application.
The parcels are large enough to accommodate these setbacks.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff on-site
or into any water body?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause any changes in the absorption rate or amount of surface runoff,
either on or off the project site, nor will it alter the drainage patterns on the site. Future development
on the property could alter the drainage patterns, and cause an increase in the absorption rate or
amount of surface runoff. These concerns will be addressed at the time of tentative parcel map
submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation removal, channelization or culvert
installation?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not create a need for off--site surface drainage improvements. It is not
likely that the creation of a 20 acre parcel will require any off site drainage improvements, but the issue
will be addressed in detail at the time of parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
Alternations to the course or flaw of flood waters?
^ 13utte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
4
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause alterations to the course or flow of flood waters because no
portion of the project site is located in a flood zone.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration or surface water quality, including, but not limited to,
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause a change in water quality. Future development on the property
could lead to a degradation in water quality. These concerns will be addressed at the time of tentative
parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Alteration of the direction of rate of flow of ground waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause a change in the direction or rate of flow of ground waters.
Future development on the property could cause a change in the direction or rate of flow of ground
waters. These concerns will be addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: 1V'one required.
h. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See response in item 3.h.
Mitigation: None required.
Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: No public water system or supplies serve the area and a substantial reduction in public water
supplies will not occur as a result of project approval. Potentially ane additional 20-acre parcel could
be created with the future approval of a tentative parcel map. Generally, ground water is available in
the area to serve such a development.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
5
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
j. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site is not within a designated flood zone area and therefore no people or
property will be subject to a flood hazard.
Mitigation: None required.
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops and aquatic plants)?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site is located in a foothill woodland habitat and the proposed project will not
significantly affect the diversity of the area plant life. If a future land division is approved, there will
be the potential for some loss of oak trees which will have to be mitigated through the land division
process.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site contains habitat that is known to support unique, rare ar endangered plant
species. Botanical surveys conducted on nearby properties have identified such plant species. If a
future land division is approved, there will be the potential for some loss of unique, rare or endangered
plant species which will have to be mitigated through the land division process. A botanical survey
would most likely be required to identify any endangered plant species prior to any land division.
Mitigation: None required.
c .Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project will not introduce new plant species into the area, nor will it cause a barrier to
the normal replenishment of existing species. Future development on the property could introduce new
plant species and may prevent normal plant replenishment. These concerns will be addressed at the
time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Buue County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
6
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
d. Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The site does not contain any agricultural crops and therefore this project wilt not reduce
the acreage of any agricultural crop.
Mitigation: None required.
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, reptiles, fish,
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause a change in the diversity of animal species or the numbers of
any animal species. If a new 20 acre parcel is created and developed with one residence, it is unlikely
to impact the animal diversity of the area.
Mitigation: Vane required.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare ar endangered species of animals?
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: The property does not contain habitat that would support any unique, rare or endangered
species of animals.
lllitigation: None required.
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of
animals?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not introduce new species of animals into the area, nor will cause a
barrier to the migration of movement of animals. Future development on the property could introduce
new animals species into the area. Future development on the property could also act as a barrier to
the movement of deer. The project site is located within critical winter deer habitat, but is inside a
Designated Development Zone. Concerns about barriers to deer movement will be addressed at the
time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
7
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not cause a deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat. Future
development on the property could lead to a deterioration to these habitats. These concerns will be
addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increases in existing noise levels?
Yes No X Maybe
Resaonse: The proposal will not result in a substantial increase in noise created on-site or in the
vicinity.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: No noise will result from this project.
Mitigation: None required.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project will not create any new tight or glare.
Mitigation: None required.
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area?
Yes No Maybe X
Response: This proposal is for an amendment to the General Plan designation fora 20 acre portion of
the 61 acre parcel. The applicant wishes to change the General Plan designation from Grazing-Open
Land to Agricultural-Residential. Most of the subject parcel has a General Plan designation of
Grazing-Open Land, but the west most portion of the parcel has a designation of Agricuitural-
Residential. There is Agricultural-Residential designation immediately to the west and northwest of the
subject parcel. Evaluating the land use based on the General Plan criteria would indicate that the
property fits the Agricultural-Residential designation better than the Grazing-Open Land designation.
Grazing on the subject parcel is not practical due the heavy brush and mining spoils located on the
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
8
Project: Russell and Hinto„ GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
parcel. Based on the teat of the General Plan, staff could make the findings that parcels less then 40
acres would conform to the General Plan.
This proposal is also a request for a rezone of the 20 acre portion from FR-40 to FR-20. Approval of
this project could slightly alter the land use on a portion of the 61-acre parcel by increasing the density
of development. Rezoning the 20-acre portion to FR-20 would allow the creation of a 20-acre parcel
after a tentative parcel map has been approved and finalized. Surrounding parcels are zoned FR-10
and FR-20. Nearby properties (within 2,000 feet) are zoned FR-5 and FR-20.
Mitigation: None required.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resource?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect the use of any natural resource.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See response item 9.a.
Mitigation: 1~'one required.
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion ar the release of hazardous substances {including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project will not cause an explosion or the release of hazardous materials.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: There is not an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan that far this area and
therefore the proposed project will not affect any such plan. This is not a development project that
could potentially impact upon any emergency evacuation plan, were there one in existence.
^ Buue County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
9
Project: Russell and Hint., GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Mitigation: None required.
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population
of an area?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect the population of the area because the proposal is not a
development project but rather a plan project, that is, a change in land use designation and zoning.
Mitigation: None required.
12. Housing,. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project will not directly result in the creation of a new parcel . However, approval of
this project could allow the applicant to apply for a tentative parcel map to create a 20 acre parcel. The
addition of one new residence to the area will not affect the housing market.
Mitigation: None required.
13. TransportationiCirculation. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
Yes h'o X Maybe
Response: This project will not generate any significant additional vehicular traffic to the local area
than is already occumng. If a new 20 acre parcel is created approximately seven additional daily trips
will be generated. This will not affect the Level of Service on Honey Run Road.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect parking because compliance with the parking standards
contained within Butte County Code Section 24-35 will be enforced.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation services?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
la
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Response: Approval of this project will not result in a substantial increase in congestion and
maintenance requirements on area roads and on public transportation services.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people andlor goods?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not alter the present pattern of circulation in the area. The circulation
pattern on Centerville Road will not be affected.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project is not located near any railroads, harbors, or airports and will therefore have
no effect on those facilities.
Mitigation: None required.
f. increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Yes 1~'o X Maybe
Response: This project will not result in traffic related hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians.
Mitigation: None required.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire Protection?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project is located in an area with a very high fire hazard designation. The proposal will
not directly result in an incremental increase in demand for fire protection in the area. Approval of
this proposal could allow the applicant to submit tentative parcel map application in order to create
a new parcel. The tentative parcel map would be then conditioned to meet the requirements of the
California Department of Forestry to mitigate the impacts caused by a new parcel .
Mitigation: None required.
b. Police protection?
^ Buue County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
11
Project: Russell and Hints., GPA 9b-02 and Rezone 96-03
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Approval of this project will not result in a need for increased police protection.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Schools?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Approval of this project will not result in a need far increased school facilities. If a new
parcel is created, school fees will be collected at time of building permit application.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an incremental increase to demand for park and recreation
facilities in the area.
Miti ation: None required.
e. Maintenance of public facilities including roads?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an increase in the need for maintenance of roads and other
public facilities in the area.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Other governmental services?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an increase in demand for all other governmental sen•ices
in the area.
Mitigation: None required.
15. EnerQV. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
12
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 46-02 and Rezone 96-03
Response: This project will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources
of energy?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project will not result in substantial increases in demand upon existing sources of
energy. The project is located in an area that is already served by Pacific Gas and Electric and can
serve the energy requirements of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities.
Mitigation: None required.
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Pacific Gas and Electric already has electric distribution lines in the area and can serve the
energy requirements of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Communication systems?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Pacific Telesis already has distribution lines in the area and can serve the communication
needs of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities.
Miti atg_ion: None required.
c. Water?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The residential unit on the project site obtains its domestic water from a well located on the
site. Water needs for future parcels would be addressed at time of tentative map application submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
13
Project: Russell and Hint.. GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Response: The residential unit on the project site uses an on-site septic system for waste disposal.
Sewage disposal needs for future parcels would be addressed at time of tentative map application
submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Storm water drainage?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Storm water runoff' is directed according to the topography of the site to natural drainage
channels. The proposal will not effect water drainage,
Mitigation: None required.
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Currently, the Butte County Landfill still has capacity to serve any development proposed
on the parcel by the applicant.
Mitigation: None required.
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not create any health hazard.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not expose people to any health hazards.
Mitigation: None required.
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in 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?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an aesthetically offensive view because it is consistent with
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
14
Project: Russell and Hinton ~:rPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
surrounding development.
?1litigation: None required.
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
Yes No X Maybe
Respanse: The proposal will not result in an impact an the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities in the area.
Mitigation: lti'one required.
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Wiil the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological
site?
Yes No X Maybe
Respanse: The subject property is located in an area designated as having a high archeological
sensitivity. Historic mining operations have occurred on the subject property and the potential exists
for historic structures andlor objects to be found on the site. The proposal will not affect archaeological
sites. Future development on the property could impact archeological sites. These concerns will be
addressed at the time of tentative parcel map submittal.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to the prehistoric or historic building,
structure or object?
Yes No X Maybe
Respanse: See the response to item 20.a.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect cultural resources.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?
^ Butte County Develop»:ent Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
15
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect religious resources.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
16
Project: Russell and Hint„ GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-43
IiI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
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 elirnirtate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Yes I~To X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section II of this document, approval of this project will not significantly degrade
the quality of the environment.
2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-ten-n, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period
of time while long-term impacts will endure will into the future.}
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project, as discussed in Section II of this Initial Study, will not result in short-term benefits of
the expense of impacting long-term environmental goals.
3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment is significant.)
Yes No X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section II of this document, this proposal will not have a significant cumulative
impact on the environment.
4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section II of this Initial Study, this proposal will not have a significant adverse
effect on human beings.
IV. 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.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
17
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
I find that although the proposed project CQULD HAVE a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described herein have
been added to the conditions of approval far the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRC}NMENTAL IlviPACT REPORT is required.
Date: December 18, 1995 Prepared by: '~~s'~~,
Stephen Betts, Assistant Planner
~ _ ~
Reviewed by:
Craig S ders, Senior Planner
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Drvisron ^
18
Project: Russell and Hintu~~ GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REOUIREME1v'TS
None
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
19
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
DATA SHEET
A. Project Description
1. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment from Grazing-Open Land to Agricultural-Residential and
Rezoning from FR-40 to FR-20.
2. Proposed Density of Development: One new 20-acre parcel could be created.
3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Very minimal.
4. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Private road Centerville Road.
5. Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual septic systems.
6. Source of Water Supply: Individual wells.
7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property.
8. Potential for further land divisions and development: None under existing zoning and mitigations.
B. Environmental Setting
1. Terrain
a General Topographic Character: East slope of Butte Creek Canyon.
b. Slopes: 0°lo to 40%, some vertical slopes as a result of hydraulic mining.
c. Elevation: b40 to 1200 feet above sea level.
d. Limiting Factors: Slopes over 30%.
2. Sails
a. Types and Characteristics: Aiken Clay Load, Stony Phase; mining spoils
b. Limiting Factors: Limited soil depth, highly erodible
3. Natural Hazards of the Land
a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII.
b. Erosion Potential: High
c. Landslide Potential: Moderate overall, vertical cliffs from hydraulic mining may be prone to
landsliding.
d. Fire Hazard: High
e. Expansive Soil Potential: Low
4. Hydrology
a. Surface V4'ater: One small seasonal stream
b. Ground Water: Unknown, potentially limited.
c. Drainage Characteristics: Downhill to Butte Creek
d. Annual Rainfall {normal): 45 inches per year.
e. Limiting Factors: Unknown ground water quantities.
5. VisuaUScenic Quality: Good.
6. Acoustic Quality: Good. Vehicle traffic on Centerville Road can be heard throughout site.
7. Air Quality: Good, except when stagnant air conditions persist in the canyon.
8. Vegetation: Oak and pine trees, extensive brush and grasses, possible habitat for rarelendangered plants
9. Wildlife Habitat: Small birds and animals common to foothills. Critical winter habitat for the Mooretown
deer herd.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
20
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: High sensitivity area for archaeological resources.
Historic mining operations occurred on site.
11. Butte County General Plan designation: Agricultural-Residential and Grazing-Open Land
12. Existing Zoning: FR-40 (Foothill-Recreationa140 acre minimum parcel size).
13. Existing Land Use on-site: Rural residential
14. Surrounding Area:
a. Land Uses: Rural residential
b. Zoning: FR-40, FR-10
c. Gen. Plan Designation: Grazing-Open Land, Agricultural-Residential
d. Parcel Sizes: 8 to 257 acres
1 S. Character of Site and Area: Rural residential
] 6. Nearest Urban Area: Paradise
17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: None
18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: None
19. Fire Protection Service:
a. Nearest County (State} Fire Station: Station number 27 approximately 1 mile away.
b. Water Availability: Fire tankers only.
20. Schools: Chico Unified School District.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
21
Project: Russell and Hinton GPA 96-02 and Rezone 96-03
ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL
1. Butte County Planning Department. Earthquake and Fault Activit~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.
Oro~711e, CA CH2M Hill, 1977.
4. Butte County Planning Department. Erosion Potential Map 111-2 Safet~Element. Oroville, CA: CHZM
Hill, 1977.
5. Butte County Planning Department. Expansive Sails Map 111-3 Safety.Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M HiII,
1977.
6. Butte County Planning Department. Noise Element Mai IV-1 Scenic Hig_hway Element. Oro~7lle, CA:
CH2M Hill, 1977.
7. Butte County Planning Department. Scenic Hi~hways Map V-1 Scenic Hi~hway Element. Oroville, CA:
CH2M Hill, 1977.
8. Butte County Planning Department. Natural Fire Hazard Classes Map 1 I 1-4 Safety Element. Oroville, CA:
CH2M Hill, 1977.
9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity Map. Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983.
10. Butte Caunty Planning Department. School District Map. Oroville, CA.
11. Northwestern District Department of Water Resources. Chico Nitrate Stud~Map, Nitrate Concentration in
Shallow Wells. The Resources Agency, State of California, 1983.
12. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agricultural Preserves Maw established by Resolution No. 67-178.
Oroville, CA: Butte Caunty Planning Department, 1987.
13. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Federal Emergency Management Agency.
19$9.
14. USGS Quad Maps.
15. Soil MaQ, Chico (1925)/Oroville 1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture.
16. Soil Survey of Chico X1925)/Oroville (1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture.
17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte Counhl Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Map. Butte
County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989.
18. Trip Generation. Institute of Transportation Engineers. 1991
k~lprojectslrussell. gpa~russell. is
^ Butte County Development Services Department ^ Planning Division ^
22
BUTTE COiTNTY BOARD of SUPERVISORS
Applicant: Garland Hazt ~ Owner: Same
Hearing Date: June 25, 1996 ~ 9:00 a.m. I Existing Zirne: TM-40 (Timber Mountain, 40 acre min.) I
Request: General Plan Amendment From Timber Mountain to Agricultural Residential and
Rezone from TM-40 to TM-20. Assessor Parcel Nn: Ptn 060-0'70-02?
N
No Scale
Fite: GPA 96-03
cnnia~ ~ ,rte _
General Plan Amendment: Dan Pickard, File # 96-01
COUNTY OF BUTTE
INITIAL STUDY
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
BACKGROUND
A. Dan Pickard -General Plan Amendment & Rezone ~ F
B. Project No. 96-01 and AP No.: APN 064-010-031
C. 1531 Newaurgh Drive, Fairfield, CA 95533
D. Project Description and Location: This application is a request for a General Plan amendment to change
the Land Use Element Map designation from Grazing and Open Lands to Agricultural Residential on 31.6
acres of land located a the end of Tika Lane south of Nimshew Road, in the Magalia area. The area subject
to change is a portion of a 94 acre parcel and will add to an existing 6 acres within the Agricultural
Residential designation. The Agricultural Residential designation is configured in a 100' x 2,600' strip
running northJsouth along the westerly property boundary. The proposed change will move the Agricultural
Residential designation east to the Hupp Coutelenc canal. The property has two zoning classifications:
ARMH-3 (Agricultural Residential Mobile Home, 3 acre minimum) on the 6 acres within the Agricultural
Residential designation, and R-C (Resource Conservation) on the balance of the property within the Grazing
and Open Land designation. There is a concurrent application to rezone the proposed Agricultural
Residential land to ARMH-3. The project is located in Supervisorial District 5. Additional project description
and area description can be found in the data sheet at the end of this document.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project is a planning project, a Legislative action, not a development project. No earth moving
activities will occur as a direct result of this project. However, if approved along with the concurrent rezone, potential
wil! exist for the creation of a maximum of 10 additional parcels. These parcels could then be developed with single
family dwellings. The direct physical impacts of this development will have to be addressed in the Initial Study
prepared for the land division. The extent of the impacts can not be accurately gaged at this time Experience with
other similar projects in the area has shown that the expected impacts can be mitigated to a level that is not
significant.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
1
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Miti ation: None required.
c. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item la.
Mitigation: None required.
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Miti ation: None required.
e. Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off-site?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item la.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify
the channel of a river or stream or the bed of any lake?
Yes __ No X Mavhe
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project site does not contain prime agricultural sails.
Mitigation: None required.
h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-slides, ground failure,
or similar hazards?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department . Planning Division
2
Response: The site is not near any known fault or in a high landslide area. The Butte County Seismic Safety
Element does not indicate any faults in the area and the risk of ground rupture in the event of a seismic event is
remote. However, all of Butte County is still classified as a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII and potential
ground shaking is passible.
Mitigation: None required.
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal does not alter or change the ability of the applicant to build his one (permitted use)
residential unit on this site. The approval of this General Plan Amendment (GPA) does not, in and of itself, allow
additional residences to be constructed, leading to additional air quality impacts -- from traffic, paints, chemicals,
barbecues, and other uses. What the GPA will allow the applicant to do, with approval of a rezone, is to construct
his home further back from his (western) property line. See Response Item 1a for additional comments.
Mitigation: None required.
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not create objectionable odors, smoke or fumes. See Response Item 2a.
Mitigation: None required.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response 2a.
Mitigation: None required.
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in fresh waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project is a planning project, a Legislative action, not a development project. No earth moving
activities wilt occur as a direct result of this project. However, if approved along with the concurrent rezone, potential
will exist for the creation of a maximum of 10 additional parcels. These parcels could then be developed with single
family dwellings. The direct physical impacts of this development will have to be addressed in the Jnitia/ Study
prepared for the land division. The extent of the impacts can not be accurately gaged at this time because lot
configurations, road locations, and the number of parcels is not known. There is one water course an the project
site (Middle butte Creek). The creek is approximately 800' away from the easterly edge of the proposed Agricultural
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division ^
3
Residential boundary. Based an past experience with other similar projects, potential impacts to the water quality
in Butte Creek can be mitigated to a level that is not significant at the development phase.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff on-site or
into any water body?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 7a, 2a & 3a.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Need for off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation removal, channelization or culvert
installation?
Yes No X Maybe
Resoanse: See Responses Ja & 2a.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Alternations to the course or flow of flood waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The site is not prone to flooding, nor are there any water courses in the area that could cause a flood
and therefore no impact to flood waters is possible. Approval of this project, a GPA, does not affect the physical
issue of altering or influencing the flow of flood waters.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration or surface water quality, including, but not limited to,
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 7a, 2a & 3d.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Alteration of the direction of rate of flow of ground waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect the direction or flow of ground waters. However, approval of this project
along with the concurrent rezone wilt result in the potential of 70 additional residences being placed in the area.
All new homes will receive water from private welts. Groundwater in the area maybe limited and proof of adequate
water will be required prior to final approval of any /and divisions for the praperry. This impact is best addressed
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
4
in the environmental documents prepared far a future land division.
Mitigation: None required.
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not directly affect any aquifer.
Mitigation: None required.
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: A substantial reduction in public water supplies will not occur as a result of project approval.
Mitigation: None required.
i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site is not within a designated flood zone area and therefore no people or property will be
subject to a flood hazard. See Response Item 3d.
Mitigation: None required.
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops and aquatic plants}?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The property is located in a foothill woad/and habitat and the proposed project will not significantly affect
the diversity of the area plant life. See Response Items 1a & 3d.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division
5
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or
in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: There are no physical changes affecting plant Life that would result from this GPA. See Response Item
7a.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The site does not contain any agricultural crops and is presently undeveloped. The character of the site
is foothill woodland and canyon land. The nature of this project would not, in and of itself, impact the site were it
characterized by agricultural acreage or not. See Response Item 7a.
Mitigation: None required.
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, reptiles, fish,
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects}?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal wilt not result in a substantial change in animal habitat.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in any reduction of any species of animals. See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required,
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division ^
6
Response: See Response Item ~a.
Mitigation: None required.
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increases in existing noise levels?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in a substantial increase in noise created on-site or in the vicinity.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: No noise will result from this project.
Mitigation: None required.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light ar glare?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project will not create any new light or glare. See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of the area?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not alter the rural residential use of the parcel. The project site is zoned ARMH-3 and
R-C. The ARMH-3 zone allows one dwelling unit per 3 acres, while the R-G zone does not allow any residential uses.
The site is designated by the Butte County General Plan as Agricultural Residential in the ARMH-3 zoning area, and
Grazing & Open Land in the R-C zoning area. The proposed project would extend the Genera/ Plan designation of
Agricultural Residential eastward to encompass an additiona137 + f- acres, bringing the total acres of the parcel to
approximately 37 acres with this designation. The remaining approximate 58 acres would remain Grazing & Open
Land. The effect of this change will be to make the land area within the Agricultural Residential much mare suitable
for land division and ultimate development with single family residences. It the concurrent rezone to ARMH-3 is also
adopted, the zoning would be consistent with the land to the west.
Mitt ation: None required.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resource?
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division
7
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal wi!! not affect the use of any natural resource. See Response /fem 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource?
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 1a and 9a.
Mitigation: None required.
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
Yes _ _ No X MavhP
Response: See Response Item 1a.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: There is not an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan that for this area and therefore
the proposed project will not affect any such plan. This is not a development project that could potentially impact
upon any emergency evacuation plan, were there ane in existence.
Mitigation: None required.
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an
area?
Yes No X Maybe
Respanse: The proposal will not affect the population of the area because the proposal is not a development project
but rather a plan project, that is, a change in land use designation.
Mitigation: None required.
12. Housing. Will the praposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This project wilt not result in the creation of new parcels for residential development. Approval of this
proposal will allow the applicant, with approval of a rezone, to have more flexibility in determining his building site.
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division ^
8
Any creation of additional parcels that would affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing would
first require an application fora Tentative Parcel Map.
Mitigation: None required.
13. Transportation jCirculation. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not generate any additional vehicular traffic to the local area than is already permitted.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect parking because compliance with the parking standards contained within
Butte County Code Section 24-240 will be enforced.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation services?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: An increase in congestion and maintenance requirements on area roads and an public transportation
services will not result due to project approval. At this stage of entitlement changes -- approval of this GPA -- the
applicant will only be able to construct his one home on this 95 acre parcel, only with a greater degree of flexibility
regarding where that building envetape shall be located. Currently, he is permitted to build his one residence, but
is confined to a narrow portion of his parcel without a GPA and rezone.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people andJor goods?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not alter the present pattern of circulation in the area. The existing access to the
parcel, Tika Lane, will continue to provide access to Nimshew Road, a collectarstreet/ minor arterial. The circulation
pattern on Nimshew Road will not be affected.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
9
Response: The project is not located near any railroads, harbors, or airports and will therefore have no effect on
those facilities.
Mitigation: None required.
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an increase in traffic and related traffic hazards in the area. See Response
Items 12, 13c and 13d.
Mitigation: None required.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire Protection? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project is located in an area with a high fire hazard designation. The proposal will not result in an
incremental increase in demand for fire protection in the area. The amendment to the General Plan does alter the
requirements for parcel sizes for potential future parcel maps from 40 acre minimum size parcels to one acre size
parcels. Were this GPA the only step, or discretionary act, the applicant had to meet in order to proceed with his
development plans, approval of this GPA would pose a potentially significant increase in demand for public services.
At this stage, approval of the GPA only means that the applicant , with approval of an additional discretionary step
(an approved rezone), will be given more flexibility as to where he may build his home.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Police protection? Yes No X Maybe _
Response: See Response Item 14a.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Schools? Yes No X Maybe _
Response: The proposal, a legislative act, is subject to full mitigation costs.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? Yes
Response: See Response Item 14a.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Maintenance of public facilities including roads? Yes
Response: See Response Item 14a.
No X Maybe
No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
10
Mitigation: None required.
f. Other governmental services? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item 14a.
Mitigation: None required.
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 7a, 2a, 13c, and 14a.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of
energy?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Respanse Items 7a, 2a, 13c, and 14a.
Mitigation: None required.
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems ar substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item 2a. Pacific Gas and Electric already has distribution lines in the area and can serve
the energy requirements of this project without substantial alteration to existing facilities.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Communication systems? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 1a and 2a.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Water'? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items 1a, 2a and 3d.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Sewer or septic tanks? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The applicant is currently allowed to build one single family residence an his parcel. With approval of
this GPA he still will only be allowed to build one single family residence on his parcel. With approval of a rezone
^ Butte County Development Services Department . Planning Division .
11
to be configured with the GPA, the applicant will sti/! only be allowed to build one single family residence on his
parcel, but now will have flexibility as to where he may build it. The demands on any septic system will not be
increased by this GPA, or a rezone, over what the current status of the property would require. Any additional
substantial changes to septic requirements resulting from the future potential of further development on this parcel
as a result of approval of this GPA will require an application of a Tentative Parcel Map. At that time, the County will
have an opportunity to address any and all potentially significant, substantial, incremental, and cumulative impacts
relating to a development project.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Storm water drainage? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Item t6d.
-Mitigation: None required.
d. Solid waste and disposal? Yes No X Maybe
Response: Currently, the Butte County Landfill still has capacity to serve any development proposed on this parcel
by the applicant. See Response Item 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health}?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not create any health hazard. See Response Items 7a, 2a, 14a, and 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal wiN not expose people to any health hazard. See Response Items 1a, 2a, 14a, and 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in 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 apen to public view?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See Response Items la, 2a, 8, 13c, 14a, and 16c1.
Mitigation: None required.
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division
12
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities.
in the area. See Response Items la, 2a, and 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect archeological sites. The subject property is located in an area designated
as having high archeological sensitivity in a portion of the parcel. The area which is indicated as being most
sensitive will remain in the Grazing & Open Land General P/an designation and R-C zone (Butte County
Archaeological Constraints Map). See Response Items 1a, 8, 14a, and 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to the prehistoric or historic building, structure
or object?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect historic sites. See Response Items la, 8, 14a, and 16d.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect cultural resources. See Response Items 1a, 13c, 14a, and 2Qa.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect religious resources.
Mitigation: None required.®
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
13
III. MANDATOF3Y FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section II of this document and more specifically subsections 4(a-c} & 5(a-d}, this
project will not significantly degrade the quality of the environment.
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
(A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure will into the future.)
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project, as discussed in Section II and subsections 1(a-3), 2{a-c}, 3{a-j}, (a-b}, 8, 8, 9{a-b), 10(a-
b), 11, 12, 14{a-f}, 15(a-b}, 16(a-f}, 1(a-b}, and 19 of this Initial Study, will not result in short-term benefits of the
expense of impacting long-term environmental goals.
3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? {A project's impact
on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on
the environment is significant.)
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not have a significant cumulative impact on the environment. As discussed in
Section II of this Initial Study, this proposal will not have any significant cumulative impact on the environment.
4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Yes Na X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section II of this Initial Study, this proposal will not have a significant adverse
effect on human beings.
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
14
Tentative Parcel Map, Mel Oliver, File #96-06
IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation:
5
~~ 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 signficant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described herein have been added
to the conditions of approval for the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date: November 28, 1995 Prepared
Reviewed
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division ^
16
DATA SHEET
A. Project Description
1. Type of Project: Legislative Action -General Plan Amendment
2. Proposed Density of Development: N jA
3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: N jA
4. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Tika Lane and Nimshew Road
5. Method of Sewage Disposal: NJA
6. Source of Water Supply: N/A
7. Proximity of Power Lines: To property.
8. Potential for further land divisions and development: Potential exists for further parceling with approval of a
rezone.
B. Environmental Setting
1. Terrain
a General Topographic Character: Foothill woodlands and canyon land.
b. Slopes: 14% to 28%
c. Elevation: -2000 to +2300 feet above sea level.
d. Limiting Factors: steep slopes
2. Soils
a. Types and Characteristics: Aiken series; slow permeability; medium-to-high timber suitability
b. Limiting Factors: None
3. Natural Hazards of the Land
a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII.
b. Erosion Potential: slight to moderate
c. Landslide Potential: low
d. Fire Hazard: High
e. Expansive Sail Potential: moderate
4. Hydrology
a. Surface Water: Middle Butte Creek through and along southeast portion of parcel.
b. Ground Water: Generally available.
c. Drainage Characteristics: drains toward eastJsautheast into Butte Creek Drainage Basin.
d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 65-70 inches per year.
e. Limiting Factors: None
5. VisualJScenic Quality: Good - of onsite woodlands.
6. Acoustic Quality: Good.
7. Air Quality: Good.
8. Vegetation: forest woodland
9. Wildlife Habitat: Small birds and animals common foothill woodlands. Non-critical winter habitat for the deer
herd.
10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: High Sensitivity area.
11. Butte County General Plan designation: Agricultural Residential, Grazing & Open Land
12. Existing Zoning: ARMH-3, R-C
13. Existing Land Use on-site: undeveloped
14. Surrounding Area:
a. Land Uses: rural residential, undeveloped
b. Zoning: ARMH-3, R-C
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division ^
16
c. Gen. Plan Designation: Agricultural Residential, Grazing & Open Land
d. Parcel Sizes: 10+ to 100+ acres
15. Character of Site and Area: forest woodland, canyon land
16. Nearest Urban Area: Paradise
17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: Town Of Paradise; Paradise Property Owners Association; Del Oro Water District
18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: N jA
t 9. Fire Protection Service:
a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station: County Fire Station #33, approximately 3 miles away.
b. Water Availability: Water tender; Middle Butte Creek.
20. Schools: Union School District(s). Paradise Unified School District.
ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL
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, GA
CH2M Hill, 1977.
4. Butte County Planning Department. Erasion 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 Mai 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)IOroville (1926) Area United States Department of Agriculture.
16. Soil Survey of Chico (1925) jOroville (19261 Area United States Department of Agriculture.
17. Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Maw Butte County Fire
Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989.
^ Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division .
17
-. s ~~ ' ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~~~~-' --~~~-- - - Garland Hart -GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
COUNTY OF BUTTE
INITIAL STUDY
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
BACKGROUND
A. Applicant andlor Project Name: Garland Hart -General Plan Amendment, Rezone and Tentative Parcel Map.
B. Project No. (If applicable) and AP No.: GPA #96-03, REZ #96-04, TPM #96-07 on APN 060-070-027.
C. Address of Applicant and Representative (if applicable): Garland Hart, POB 3320, Chico, CA 95927.
L ~ L Surveying, POB 671, Paradise, CA 95967
D. Project Description and Location: The project to be reviewed consists of three parts: a General Plan Amendment
to allow the conversion of proposed parcel one from Timber Mountain to Agricultural Residential; a Rezone to allow
the conversion of proposed parcel one from TM-40 {Timber Mountain-40 acre minimum) to TM-20 (Timber
Mountain-20 acre minimum); and a Tentative Parcel Map to create to two parcels of 20.62 acres (parcel 1}and
45.06 acres {parcel 2}. The 66.69 acre parcel is located on the east side of Humbolt Road directly north of the
Butte Meadows Volunteer Fire Station #11 and approximately one mile east of the intersection of Humbolt Road
and Skyway.
The parcel, at present is without any significant improvements other than a small agricultural structure, fencing and
cattle pens. The parcel currently has the potential for one homesite that would most likely be located on the
southern 113 of the property because the northern 2l3 is without any significant usable sewage disposal area due
to a large wet meadow. The net result of this project will not increase the residential density on the property
because the proposed parcel 2 will not be permitted to be developed leaving only one buildable parcel.
The property is located in a rural mountainous setting in an area defined as Butte Meadows, a small community
straddling Humbolt Road with appro>mately 175 seasonal cabins, a small number of permanent residents, a small
store, two bars and a volunteer fire station. In 1991, a 29 lot subdivision was approved approximately 1000 feet
west of the project site. The surrounding area is predominantly utilized for commercial timber harvesting and is
owned by the Diamond International Corporation. The project area has been altered from its original natural
condition by grazing activities, logging and other human occupation that resulted in the reduction of the number of
plant and animal species that once occupied the project area. The project site is characterized by a large wet
meadow on the northern 2/3 of the site and a mixed conifer-deciduous woodland with riparian habitat found along
two creeks on the southern 113 of the site. The southern most year-round creek is identified as Mallory Creek, while
the northern fork of this creek is seasonal and nameless. The site does provide wildlife habitat, including summer
range for the East Tehama Deer Herd. The topography is relatively level with an average elevation of approximately
4400 feet. Additional project description and area description can be found in the data sheet at the end of this
document.
II. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Response: The project as submitted has the possibility for only one residential structure and will not affect subsurface
earth conditions because no significant earihmoving or use of explosives will occur and no active fault zones are located
within the project area. Any fill placed on site for road or homesite construction wilt have to meet the requirements of
Chapter 70 of the Uniform Bui~ng Code and wilt be compacted to accepted engineering standards and will not represent
a hazard.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project as submitted may result in some disruption, compaction and overcovertng of the site from the
development of structures, driveways, and other improvements associated with one single family dwelling. However,
because approximately 70•~ of the site will be undevelopable due to the large wet meadow and two creeks and parcel
sizes are in excess of 20 acres without any significant slopes, any development that might occur is unlikely to create any
significant disruption offhe site. Home construction, driveways and accessory uses are estimated to cover only .01 % of
the site based on 8000 sq. ft. of impervious surfacing. Any grading associated with residential construction will also be
subject to the requirements of Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code. While the proposed Agricultural Residential
General Plan designation does allow for the creation of smaller parcels, the proposed TM-20 zoning would not. Any
future attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential
impacts of additions/divisions on the site. Based on this information, the project will not result in significant soil impacts.
Mitigation: None required.
Substantial change in topography ar ground surface relief features? Yes _ Na X Maybe
Response: The project as submitted will not require substantial modifications to the existing topography to accommodate
site development because the topography is nearly level, slopes on the site do not exceed 10%, and no signtfrcanf
surface relief features are located on the site. Any future attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require
additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site.
Mitigation: None required.
The destruction, covering ar modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
Yes No X Maybe _
Response: The site has no unique geologic or physical features that will be impacted by the proposed land division. A
wet meadow and two creeks are found on the site, but will not be impacted because mitigations found in Section 5d and
16d of this document will prohibit any development within 100 ft. of the creeks and prohibit development in the wet
meadow area altogether. AU future attempts to further divide the land will be subject to these same restrictions.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Rny substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off-site?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: As discussed in items lb,c, & d, the property is without any sign cant development potential due to the
physical constraints found on the property and the large lot sizes. Because of these constraints, the limited amount of
soils exposure and impervious surfacing (.OJ % of the site) is not expected to generate an inordinate or substantial amount
of runoff that would result in any significant erosion either on or off-site.
Mitigation: None required.
Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,deposition or erosion which may modify the
channel of a river or stream or the bed of any lake? Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
2
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Response: The southern portion of the project site is crossed by two creeks. The proposed land division and anticipated
residential development is not expected to impact the functionality of this drainage because of the large lot size (20 ac.)
and the lack of any substantial slopes as discussed in items 1a-e above. Additionally, standard erosion control
techniques will be utilized fo further reduce the possibility of erosion to a level of insign~cance and the project will be
subject to conditions resfricting any development within 100 feet of the creeks. Any future attempts to rezone or divide
the land further wit! require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the
site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
g. Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas?
Response: This project site does not contain prime agricultural sails.
Mitigation: None required.
Yes No X Maybe
Exposure of people ar property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-slides, ground failure,
or similar hazards? Yes No X Maybe -
Response: The Butte County Seismic Safety Element does not indicate any faults in the area and the risk of ground
rupture during a seismic event is remote. However, all of Butte County is in a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone Vlll
and the potential for ground shaking is possible. Construction of buildings to Uniform Building Code standards will
provide adequate protection to occupants in case of seismic activity. Mobile homes are required to be anchored to the
foundation throughout California in accordance with Section 18613 of the Health and Safety Code. As discussed in items
1a-f above, the property is without any significant slopes that may result in earth related hazards.
Mitigation: None required.
2. Air. WII the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project as proposed has the potential to result in only one residential homesite that will result in a
cumulative impact on air quality created by the increased traffic generated and the use of wood burning devices. The
California Air Resources Board has identified Butte County as aNon-attainment Area in meeting the standards of the
California Air Quality Act The Butte County Air Pollution Control Plan does not address the air quality impacts of small
developments for possible mitigation measures, but does recommend particulate control strategies be implemented
during construction. Because of the remote location of this parcel and its likely use as a weekend recreation home or
vacation home the anticipated traffic is insignificant and will not cause substantial air quality impacts. Any future attempts
to rezone or divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of
additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
b. The creation of objectionable odors? Yes No X Maybe _
Response: The proposal will not create objectionable odors, smoke or fumes beyond what is customary and expected
from residential uses utilizing waodbuming heating devices.
Mitigation: None required.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally?
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Response: The proposal wilt not affect the focal or regional climate. Qnly large projects such as the construction of high
rise buildings, the creation of large water bodies, massive defoliation, or introduction of large areas of vegetation where
there were previously none, would have the climatic effects discussed in this question. Since this project has none of
these characteristics it will not affect local or regional climates.
Mitiqation: None required.
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in fresh waters?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project area is crossed by two creeks that flow into Butte Creek approximately 800 feet to the west of
this site on the west side of Humbolt Road. The project will not significantly affect the the direction and movement of the
creeks or create excessive run-off or redrect any drainage on site because as discussed in items 1 a-f, the land is without
any substan6aJ slopes in the area of the creeks, the parcel is 20 acres in size, and impervious surfacing will be limited
to improvements associated with the creation of one additional homesife which will result in only minor increases in run-
off: Total lot coverage of impervious surfacing will amount to less than .01 % of the parcel. These improvements will not
significantly impact the water carrying ability of the creeks. Additionally, the project will be restricted from encroaching
on the creeks by mitigations found in item 5d. Any future attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require
additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitiqation: None required.
Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff on-site or into
any water body? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See response in item 3a .
Mitiqation: None required.
c. Need far off-site surface drainage improvements, including vegetation removal, channelization or culvert installation?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See response in item 3a.
Mitiqation: None required.
d. Alternations to the course or flow of flood waters? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The southern 1l3 of the project site is crossed by two creeks that cause this area fa be identified on the
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 00617-0258 as being located in Flood Zone A. The proposed project will not
substantially alter the course or flow of flood waters because of the Large /at sizes (20+ acres), the limited density of
homesites that will be permitted and the restricted 100 foot setback from the creeks as identified in item 5d. The project
as proposed for one homesrte will not significantly impair the ability of these creeks to cant' flood waters because of the
factors discussed here and in items 1 a-f and 3a. Any future attempts to rezone or divide the land further wiN require
additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions an the site at that time.
Mitiqation: None required.
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration or surface water qualify, including, but not limited to, temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal for a residential use wiN neither discharge pollutants into surface creeks nor alter the quality
of the water. As discussed in items 1a-f and 3a, this project will not create signficant erosion due to the large parcel sizes
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
and the lack of slopes on-site. Stormwater contamination from the residential use of pesticides, herbicides, petroleum
products, and other pollutants could result from development of the property. However, the use of these products in
accordance with manufacturers guidelines on 20+ acre lots is not expected to cause any significant impacts to the
watershed. Any future attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess
the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposed land use change, land division and anticipated residential development wilt not result in the
cumulative reduction of ground water supplies in the immediate area because the project will only create the potential
for one homesite that will not withdraw substantial quantities of ground water. Any future attempts to rezone or divide
the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the
site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
h. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of
an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See response in 3f.
Mitigation: None required.
Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: A substantial reduction in public water supplies will not occur as a result of project approval because there
wll be only one additional homesite created and there is abundant ground water in the area.
Mitigation: None required.
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Yes No X Maybe _
Response: As discussed in item 3d, the southern 1~3 ofthe project site is crossed by two creeks that cause this area
to be identified on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 00617-0258 as being located in Flood Zone A. The
proposed project wilt not substantially after the course or flow of flood waters because of the large lot sizes (20+ acres),
the limited density of homesites that will be permitted and the restricted 100 foot setback from the creeks as identified
in item 5d. However, because the southem portion of the property is potentially in a 100 year floodplain and this is the
area most likely to be utilized for a homesite, a large flood event could expose both people and property to this hazard.
Water level records are not available for these creeks, however, records are available for Butte Creek for a period
between 1961 and 1976 from the United States Geographical Survey (USGS) which utilized a gauging . The USGS
records indicate that during these years that Butte Creek had a maximum flow of 4,290 cfs which is less than the
Department of Public Worlts predicted 50 year flood event of 7,386 cfs. tt is difficult to predict the exact water levels on
this site, but it is reasonable to assume that flood water levels on the project creeks roughly parallel those numbers found
along Butte Creek, or are less considering the disparity of elevations that means precipitation downstream maybe rain
while at this site it may fall as snow with little or no runoff. The series of storms in February-March of 1986 produced the
highest stream flows or record throughout Butte County, but no substantial data exists for Butte Meadows. However,
personal accounts of citizens familiar with the Butte Meadows area indicate that the 1986 storm did not significantly flood
the project site.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
5
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
To reduce this potential hazard to a level of insignificance the applicant will be required to establish 100 year floodplain
elevations and the lowest floor elevations far any structures. This information will also be required to show these
elevations on the parcel map. Any future attempts to rezone or dmde the land further will require additional environmental
review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
MITIGATION #1:
Establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the
additional map sheet the elevations {by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark, place a
temporary benchmark on-site and identify the 100 year floodplain on the additional map sheet.
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants {including trees, shrubs, grass, crops
and aquatic plants)? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site is characterized by a mixed coniferous forest on parcel 2 (approx. 9 ac.)and along the
perimeter of parcel 1 (approx. 2 ac.), riparian vegetation along the creeks on parcel 7 (approx. 7 9ac.), and a large wet
meadow on parcel 2 (approx. 44 ac.). Approximately 93% ofthe site will not be developed due to the environmental
constraints posed by the riparian areas and the wet meadow. In the remaining 7% some clearing will take place to
accommodate site development and non-native landscaping may be introduced, but significant losses of vegetative
diversity are not anticipated to occur because mitigations found in item 5 will prohibit encroachment into sensitive
environmental areas of the site. Any future attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require additional
environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The area proposed for this project does not contain any unique, rare or endangered plant species therefore
no reductions in these species will occur.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment
of existing species? Yes X No Maybe _
Respanse: Approval of this request may result in the introduction of plant species used for residential landscaping.
Because the non-nafive vegetation is nat expected to be extensive and approximately 93% of the site will be prohibited
from development, the impacts will nat be significant Any future attempts to rezane or divide the land further will require
additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site does not contain any agricultural crops and is presently designated for residential and timber
management uses. Timber can be considered a renewable agricultural crop, but the project site has been long used as
grazing and open space area and is without any substantial timber that could be harvested commercially.
Mitigation: None required.
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Change in the diversity of speces or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, shellfish,
benthic organisms or insects)? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The area is seasonal habitat for the East Tehama Deer Herd and a variety of small animals and birds,
however, a substantial change in animal diversity is not expected because of the large lot sizes (20+ ac.), the creation
of only one hamesite, and mitigation measures found in item 4d that will prohibit the encroachment into sensitive
environmental areas that make 93•~ of the site unusable. The project may result in the introduction of domestic pets into
the area which could have an impact on the diversity of animal life. This should not have an impact on the diversity of
wildlife because the lots created will be large and only one new homesite will be created. Any future attempts to rezone
or divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potenfial impacts of additional divisions
on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site does not contain habitat that would support rare and endangered species.
Mitigation: None required.
Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal may involve the introduction of pets or other animals into the area. Although domestic animals
represent a threat to deer habitat, it will nat result in a substantial change in species representation.
Mitigation: None required.
Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Yes No Maybe X
Response: The project site contains a mixed coniferous forest on parcel 2 (approx. 9 ac.)and along the perimeter of
parcel 1 (approx. 2 ac.), riparian vegetation along the creeks on parcel 1 (approx. 11 ac.), and a large wet meadow on
parcel 2 (approx. 44 ac.). These areas contain extensive fish or wildlife habitat that have the potential to be impacted by
the project: The areas of the wet meadow and the creeks represent approximately 93% of the site and are not suitable
for development. In order to protect this habitat from human encroachment, a 1 QO #. No Disturbance Setback will be
enforced along both creeks and the wet meadow. The project is located within the critical summer range of the East
Tehama deer herd. The Ca/ifomia Department of Fish & Game does not consider the summer range to be sign~cant/y
impacted by development at this time and no mitigations are necessary at this time. Any future attempts to rezone or
divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts of additional divisions
on the site at that time.
MITIGATION #2:
Show on the map a 100 ft. No Disturbance Setback along Mallory Creek, the unnamed tributary creek located on
parcel 1 and the wet meadow on parcel 2.
MITIGATION #3:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map
sheet stating that; "Structures, dumping, fill material, vegetation removal and/or excavation shall not be allowed
within the 100 ft. No Disturbance Setbacks as depicted on the final map. The 100 ft. No Disturbance Setback
shall be measured from the top of bank or the outer edge of riparian/wetland vegetation along both creeks and
the wet meadow, whichever is greater. Any alterations to these No Disturbance Setbacks shall be approved by
the Department of Fish 8~ Game and the Planning Division"
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increases in existing noise levels? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposed project will not result in a substantial increase in noise created on-site or in the vicinity because
residential uses do not customarily create high levels of naise.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project site is located in an area of rural residential uses away from customary sources of significant
noise. However, the specific site is located directly next to the Butte Meadows Volunteer Fire Department and maybe
subjected to occasional high levels of noise generated by emergency response vehicles. These episodes are not
numerous and last for only a few minutes before the vehicles are out of the area and the noise levels are no longer
significant. The site is also located in an area that maybe subject to togging activity and associated naise generated by
this use. Logging activities are permitted in this area and while noise is generated, it is not anticipated to be at severe
levels. Overall, the proposal will not expose people to severe noise levels.
Mitigation: None required.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare. Yes Na X Maybe _
Response: The proposal will not result in a substantial increase in light or glare created on site or in the vicinity because
the anticipated residential development does not require ar customarily utilize intensive lighting.
Mitigation: None required.
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not substantially alter the /and use in the area. The project site is presently zoned TM-40
(Timber Mountain-40 acre min.) which allows residential uses. The site is designated by the Butte County Genera! Plan
as Timber Mountain. The applicant is seeking a General Plan Amendment fo allow the conversion of proposed parcel
one from Timber Mountain to Agricultural Residential, a Rezone to allow the conversion of proposed parcel one from TM-
40 (Timber Mountain-40 acre minimum) to TM-20 (Timber Mountain-20 acre minimum); and a Tentative Parcel Map to
create two parcels of 20.62 acres (parcel 1) and 45.06 acres (parcel 2). The requested actions will not result in a
substantial alteration of the present or planned land uses in the area because:
1. The surrounding area defined as Butte Meadows, is a small communify straddling Humbo/t Road for a distance of
approximately 2 miles on either direction of the project site. This area is developed with approximately 175 seasonal
and permanent homeslcabins, a small store, two bars, a volunteer fire station and in 1991, a 29 lot subdivision was
approved approximately 1000 feet west of the project site with an average density of one unit per 4.25 acres with
a General Plan designation ofAgricultural Residential and 1, 3, & 5 acre zoning. Overall, the general area consists
of approximately 238 parcels of which the preponderance are less than 2 acres and residential in nature; and
2. The parcel currently has the potential for one homesite that would most likely be located on the southern 1r3 of the
property because the northern 2!3 is without any significant usable sewage disposal area due to a large wet
meadow. The net result of this project will not increase the residential density on the property because the proposed
parcel 2 is not be approved for sewage disposal per Environmental Health Division requirements which wilt leave
only one buildable parcel for a net density of one unit per 66 acres. Overall, the applicant is only seeking a land use
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
change for parcel 1 (20.62 ac.), which comprises only 30•~ of the entire 66.69 acre property and of which only 4.33
acres (21l) of the parcel will be developable ;and
3. The Butte County Planning Division is currently reviewing and updating the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
for possible designation changes to various areas of the County to better reflect the actual land uses. The Butte
Meadows area as defined above (1) is being considered for changes that will more accurately reflect the present
residential uses. fl is not known at this time what specific designations will be called, but it is clear that the Timber
Mountain designations are not appropriate for the residential and commercial land uses in the area.
Any future attempts to rezone or deride the Land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential
impacts of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitigation: None required.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resource? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project as proposed will allow for the construction of one residential unif at rural densities. The use of
natural resources will be limited to those products needed to construct the home and the energy to heat, coo% and tight
the home. Much of the electricity used in Butte County is generated by hydroelectric power plants and is considered a
renewable source of energy. The wood used in the construction of the home is also considered a renewable resource.
The proposal for one additional residential unit will not significantly affect any natural resources.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? Yes No X Maybe
Response: See discussion in item 9a.
Mitigation: None required.
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but eat limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals
or radiation} in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not involve the use of hazardous materials other than those materials designed for
residential use, nor is located close fo any facilities which store or utilize such materials. The residential use of
herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers is not expected to create any significant risks when used in compliance with
manufacturers standards. Continuing education of the public regarding the proper use and deposal of household
chemica/s also helps to eliminate local contamination.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal for one residential unit will not significantly affect emergency services planning. At present
there is not an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan for this area.
Mitigation: None required.
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an
area? Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
9
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Response: As indicated in the discussion of item 8, the proposed residential lot division and Jand use change will not
alter loco/population density because the project site is planned for the possibility of rural residential densitiesluses in
the general plan and the area is being developed for these purposes.
Mitiqation: None required.
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect housing demand because the project will create new homesites.
Mitiqation: None required.
13. Transportation/Circulation. WII the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will represent an incremental increase in traffic in the area. Because of the remote location
of this parcel and its likely use as a weekend recreation home or vacation home, the anticipated traffic is insignecant and
will not cause substantial circulation impacts. The proposal for one homesite has the potential to generate approximately
5 vehicle trips per day, this number of trips is not expected to significantly impact the local circulation system. Any future
attempts to rezone or divide the land further will require additional environmental review to assess the potential impacts
of additional divisions on the site at that time.
Mitiqation: None required.
Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal for one residential unit on a 20+ acre lot wilt not create a demand for new parking or other
parking related improvements on-site. The proposal will also be required to comply with the parking standards contained
within Butte County Code Section 24-35.
Mitiqation: None required.
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation services?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: This proposal will not substantially impact existing transportation systems because the rural residents are
not expected to utilize public transportation and the number of expected residents associated with the project is small.
See additional discussion in item 13a.
Mitiqation: None required.
d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people andtor goods?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: See items 13a,b,c.
Mitiqation: None required.
Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not affect waterbome, rail ar air traffic because the project is not located near, nor wilt it
utilize any such facilities.
Mitiqation: None required.
Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
10
Garland Hart - GPR 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Response: This project will not result fi an increase in traffic related hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians
because the level of use indicated in the discussion in items 13a-d.
Mitigation: None required.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
Fire Protection?
Yes No Maybe X
Response: The project site is located in an area designated as a high fire hazard area, but is located directly next to
Butte Meadows Volunteer Fire Station #10 and approximately 2 miles from Butte CountytCDF station #11. The fire hazard
in this forested area is two dimensional, in that all structures are exposed to external fire hazards as well as presenting
a potential source of fire ignition to surrounding lands. The Butte County Fire DepartmentlCalifornia Department of
Forestry has indicated that cumulative development in rural areas will impact their ability to provide frre protection
services. They have stated that the installation of automatic fire suppression sprinkler systems in residential structures,
the use of frre resistant building materials and the availability of water supply systems will reduce the demand for fire
protection services. As a condition of project approval all new structures must meet the Fire Safe Regulations of Butte
County and Public Resources Code 4290. This requires a property owner to maintain a cleared space of 30 ft. around
all structures. The parcels created under the TM-20 zoning are subject to a 25 tt. building setback along the side property
lines and 50 #. setback along the rear property line. This does not ensure 30 tt. of cleared area around all structures.
To allow for the required fire clearance, the side yard setback will be required to be a minimum of 30 tt.
MITIGATION #4:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map
sheet stating that; "Fire suppression sprinkler systems shall be installed in all new residential structures in
accordance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard for the installation of sprinkler systems in
one and two family dwellings and mobile homes, NFPA Standard 13D unless a pressurized community water
system with hydrants serves the parcel."
MITIGATION #5:
Show on the map a 30 ft. building setback line along the side yards of all parcels and place a note on a separate
document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "To
ensure the mandated fire clearance established in the County, a minimum building setback line of 30 ft. is
required along all side yard property boundaries."
b. Police protection? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will cause an incremental increase in demand for police protection services. The cumulative
impacts of increased development in rural areas impacts the ability of the Sheriffs Department to adequately provide
police services to outlying areas. As a condition of project approval, the applicant will be required to place a note on a
separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that; 'A
development impact fee for Sheriffs facilities shall be paid pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, Article /1 of the Butte
County Code, prior to issuance of building permits. Said fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the date of
application for the building permit.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Schools? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will result in an incremental demand for school facilities in the area. As a condition of project
approval, the applicant will be required to place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concur-ently with
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
11
Garland Nart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
the map or on an additional map sheet stating that; 'A development impact fee for school facilities shall be paid prior to
issuance of building permits. Said fee amount will be determined and calculated as of the dafe of app/icafion for the
building permits" While the school district maintains that these fees do not fully mitigate the impacts of the project, the
County is precluded from imposing additional fees by the State Legislature.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not result in an increase in demand for park and recreation facilities in the area.
Mitigation: None required.
e. Maintenance of public facilities including roads?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will result in an incremental increase in the need for maintenance of roads and other public
facilities in the area that is not considered significant.
Mitigation: None required.
Other governmental services?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will result in an incremental increase in demand far all other governmental services in the area
that is not considered significant.
Mitigation: None required.
15
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not utilize substantial fuel or energy. For the short term, the use of energy will be limited
to that fuel needed to operate the machinery needed to prepare the site and construct a home. For the long term, energy
will be required to heat, cool and light the homes. The project will not create a strain on existing energy supplies in the
county because a significant portion of the electricity needs in Butte County are generated byhydro-electric plants which
is considered a renewable source of energy.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of
energy? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project is an area presently served by Pacific Gas & Electric, which forecasts energy consumption in
their service area and provides facilities planning. The proposal will not substantially increase the demand for energy
because PG&E has adequate resources for the generation of elecficity.
Mitigation: None required.
16. Utilities. WII the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Response: See response in item 15b.
Mitigation: None required.
Yes No X Maybe
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
12
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
b. Communication systems?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Pacific Telesis presently has distribution lines in the area and can serve the communications needs of this
project without any substantial alteration to existing facilities. The cost of extending new service lines to individual homes
maybe borne by the new residents.
Mitigation: None required.
c. Water? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal wilt not affect public water systems because the proposal will utilize private wells.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Sewer or septic tanks? Yes No x Maybe
Response: This project will not require or impacf any sewer system because the project will utilize private septic systems.
The Environmental Health Division wilt require the applicant to submit septic system plans to the EHD for review and
approval.
Mitigation: None required.
Storm water drainage
Response: See response in item 36.
Mitigation: None required.
Solid waste and disposal?
Yes No X Maybe
Yes No X Maybe
Response: Currently, the Butte County Landfill has the capacity to serve the proposed project. There is no mandatory
garbage collection required in rural areas of the county. Some residents may choose to transport their own refuse to the
landfrll.
Mitigation: None required.
17
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not create any health hazard.
Mitigation: None required.
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposed rural residential land use continues a trend to develop lands located in the foothill environment
These foothill areas are recognized by the Department of Fish & Game and the State Legislature as being prime habitat
for mountain lions. An increased human presence in these areas exposes property owners to potential mountain lion
confrontations and/or attacks. Incidents of mountain lion sightings, confrontations and attacks have been well
documented throughout the foothill and mountainous regions along the Sierra Nevada and a state wide ballot measure
is presently proposed to allow sport hunting of mountain lions as a method of population control. At this time no
regulations or guidelines exist for mountain lion control or avoidance.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
13
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in 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?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will utilize undeveloped foothill land for the purpose of building residential units. The
subsequent clearing and building will permanently after the present viewshed. However, the project is not considered
to be ofl`ensive or out of character with surrounding land uses. To ensure that the natural viewshed is protected to the
extent feasible, the property owners will be required to limit vegetation removal to that what is necessary for the
construction afa homesite by placing a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map
or on an additional map sheet stating that, "The removal of vegetation shall be limited to what is necessary for the creation
of a homesite, roads, accessory buildings, and to meet fire safety regulations. ").
MITIGATION #6:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map
sheet stating that; 'The removal of vegetation shall be limited to what is necessary for the creation of a homesite,
roads, accessory buildings, and to meet fire safety regulations."
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposal will not significantly impact existing recreational opportunities in the area because the project
site is private property and abundant public lands are located within 2 miles of the project site.
Mitigation: None required.
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
Yes No Maybe X
Response: The project site is located in a general area characterized as being of high potential archeological sensitivity.
A review of archeological reports previously done in this area show a limited number of archeological sites were
identified. Because approximately 93'~ of the site is undevelopable due to physical constraints and was utilized for cattle
grazing activities, the potential for significant disruptions of archeological sites is minima/ and does not warrant an
advanced survey of the site. However, during development of the site archeological sites maybe discovered requiring
the following mitigation.
MITIGATION #7:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map
sheet stating that; "During site development, should any archeological artifacts be discovered, the Planning
Division shall be notified immediately, and all work shall cease until a qualified, professional archeologist has
examined the artifacts and the site and submitted findings to the Planning Division, and recommended clearance
to continue. Recommencement of construction shall be upon the approval of the Planning Division."
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to the prehistoric or historic building, structure or
object? Yes No X Maybe
Response: The site has no significant historic or prehistoric structures or items that would be disturbed by the proposed
project. As discussed in item 20a above, any items found will require additional scrutiny.
Mitigation: None required.
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
19
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project wilt not result in any significant changes to the site that affect cultural values.
Mitigation: None required.
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?
Yes No X Maybe
Response: The proposed project will not impact any existing religious or sacred uses in the area.
Mitigation: None required.e
^ Butte County Development Services Department =Planning Division ^
15
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
III. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Yes No Maybe X
Response: As discussed in Section II, items 1 8~ 5 of this document, this project has the potential to significantly
degrade the quality of the environment. However, mitigations and conditions imposed on the project will reduce
these impacts to a level of insignificance.
2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
(A short-term impact on the environment Ls one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure will into the future.) Yes No X Maybe
Response: The project, as discussed in Section II of this Initial Study, will not result in short-term benefits at the
expense of impacting long-term environmental goals.
Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A projects impact on
two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.} Yes No Maybe X
Response: This project, as discussed in Section II, items 1,4,5, 8 14 of this Initial Study, may have a significant
cumulative impact on the environment. However, mitigations and conditions imposed on the project will reduce
these impacts to a level of insignificance.
4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly? Yes No X Maybe
Response: As discussed in Section 11, items 3j, 6-8of this Initial Study, this proposal will not have a significant
adverse effect on human beings because mitigations and conditions imposed on the project will reduce these
impacts to a level of insignificance.
IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
X 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 mfigation measures described herein have been added to the conditions
of approval for the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date: January 18, 1996 Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Stephen Lucas, Associate Planner
Craig Sanders, Senior Planner
^ Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ^
16
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
MITIGATION #1:
Establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the
additional map sheet the elevations (by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark, place a
temporary benchmark on-site and identify the 100 year floodplain on the additional map sheet.
MITIGATION #2:
Show on the additional map sheet a 100 ft. No Disturbance Setback along Mallory Creek, the unnamed tributary
creek located on parcel 1 and the wet meadow on parcel 2.
MITIGATION #3:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional
rnap sheet stating that; "Structures, dumping, fill material, vegetation removal and/or excavation shall not be
allowed within the 100 ft. No Disturbance Setbacks as depicted on the final map. The 100 ft. No Disturbance
Setback shall be measured from the top of bank or the outer edge of riparian/wetland vegetation along both
creeks and the wet meadow, whichever is greater. Any alterations to these No Disturbance Setbacks shall be
approved by the Department of Fish 8~ Game and the Planning Division"
MITIGATION #4:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional
map sheet stating that; "Fire suppression sprinkler systems shall be installed in all new residential structures
in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard for the installation of sprinkler systems
in one and two family dwellings and mobile homes, NFPA Standard 13D unless a pressurized community water
system with hydrants serves the parcel."
MITIGATION #5:
Show on the map a 30 ft. building setback line along the side yards of all parcels and place a note on a separate
document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet stating that: "To
ensure the mandated fire clearance established in the County, a minimum building setback line of 30 ft. is
required along all side yard property boundaries."
MITIGATION #6:
Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional
rnap sheet stating that; "The removal of vegetation shall be limited to what is necessary for the creation of a
homesite, roads, accessory buildings, and to meet fire safety regulations."
MITIGATION #7:
Place a note an a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional
map sheet stating that; "During site development, should any archeological artifacts be discovered, the
Planning Division shall be notified immediately, and all work shall cease until a qualified, professional
archeologist has examined the artifacts and the site and submitted findings to the Planning Division, and
recommended clearance to continue. Recommencment of construction shall be upon the approval of the
Planning Division."
Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division #
17
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
DATA SHEET
A.
Protect Description
1. Type of Project: General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Tentative Parcel Map
2. Proposed Density of Development: one unit per 30 acres.
3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Incremental in the form of homes, driveways, accessory buildings.
4. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Humbolt Road via SR32
5. Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual septic systems.
6. Source of Water Supply: Individual wells.
7 Proximity of Power Lines: To property.
8. Potential for further land divisions and development: No
B.
Environmental Setting
1. Terrain
a General Topographic Character: Level mountainous terrain.
b. Slopes: 0% -10°t°
c. Elevation: 4400 feet above sea level.
d. Limiting Factors: None
2. Soils
a. Types and Gharacteristics:McCarthy Series-Cobbly sandy loam.
b. Limiting Factors: Moderately erodible
3. Natural Hazards of the Land
a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII.
b. Erosion Potential: Low
c. Landslide Potential: Low
d. Fire Hazard: Moderate
e. Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate to low
4. Hydrology
a. Surface Water: Mallory Creek, unnamed tributary to Mallory Greek.
b. Ground Water: Unknown aquifers.
c. Drainage Characteristics: good
d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 70 inches per year.
e. Limiting Factors: Creeks will require a 100 ft. setback
5. VisuallScenic Quality: Good.
6. Acoustic Quality: Good.
7. Air Quality: Good.
8. Vegetation: Montane environment with conifer mix and riparian along creeks, meadow.
9. Wildlife Habitat: High quality among various vegetation types.
10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the area: High sensitivity area.
11. Butte County General Plan designation: Timber Mountain
12. Existing Zoning: TM-40
13. Existing Land Use on-site: Undeveloped grazinglpasture area.
14. Surrounding Area:
a. Land Uses: Timber, residential, open space, public
b. Zoning: AR-1 to TM-2, 5, 20, 40, TPZ 160
c. Gen. Plan Designation: Agricultural Residential and Timber Mountain.
d. Parcel Sizes: 1 - 100+ acres.
Butte County Development Services Department ~ Planning Division ~
18
Garland Hart - GPA 96-03
REZ 96-04
TPM 96-07
15. Character of Site and Area: Rural mountain residential
16. Nearest Urban Area: Chico
17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: None
18. Improvement Standards Urban Area: None
19. Fire Protection Service:
a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station: Station number 11approximately 2 miles away, #10 on-site.
b. Water Availability: Fire tankers only.
20. Schools: Chico Unified School District(s).
ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL
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. Rrchaeological Sensitivity Map. Oraville, 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. Jonesville 15 Minute Quadrangle
15. Soil Map Chico (1925)IOroville (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.
Butte Caunty Development Services Department ~ Planning Division #
i9
BUTTE COUNTY BOARD of 5UPERVI50RS
Applicant: Dan Pickard ~ Owner: Same
~ Hearing Date: June 25, 1996 a~ 9:00 a.m. ~ Existing Z.nne: ARMH-3, R-C ~
Request: Rezone from R-C and ARMH-3 to TM-10, and General Plan Amendment to Agricultural Residential
N
No Scale
~ ~ Assessor Parcel Nn: 064-010-031 ~ File: GPA 96-02 ~