Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MUP 00-08
11 !{'1i PROJECT SUMMARY SHEET ,FI -E #:_MUP 00-08 PROJECT TYPE: Minor Use Permit APPLICANT: AirTouch Cellular c/o S12bctraSite, James Simpson AJDRESS:.2277 Fair Oaks Blvd, Ste, 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 OWNER: Shasia Vista Orchards, Inc. ADDRESS REPRESENTA . ADDRESS PROPERTY ZONED:( Agricultural, 1 a r ar LOCATED: On the south side of Anita Road, approximately 35 miles West of Highway 99, north of Chico AP#: 047-130-159 TOWN/AREA: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: OFC (Orchard & Field Crops) 1. Application complete: H— Amount: $ 350.00 Receipt #: 18120 2. Comments sent to: E.H.. Public Works, LAF o, DDS., Assessor, Building, Ag Commission, CDF, & CalTrans 3. Comments received from: 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 Rezone Petition Signatures Checked: Mailing List/Lead-in Sheet: Assigned To: Stephen Betts Environmental Determination: State Clearinghouse No: Categorical Exemption-CEQA# Negative Declaration Mitigation Negative Declaration Subject to Fish & Game: Environmental Impact Report Gen. Rule Ex. -CEQA # 15061.(bx3) Other Staff Report: Project Video: y �s Clearinghouse circulation required: Yes No Date Sent to SCH: 10. Publication Notice Written: 11. Notices Mailed: 12. Newspaper Publicaion Date: i -&-0 13. Planning Commission Hearing(s): Action taken: Special Conditions: Commission Resolution No. ` 14.. Board of Supervisors'• Hearing(s): Action taken: Board Resolution No.: 15. Type Minor Use Permit/Send for signature: 16. N.O.E. / N.O.D. / APPENDIX G:' 17. Send validated Minor Use Permit: 18. Assessor's Memo: =9. Copy of Minor Use Permit / Variance to Planning Technici Display Ad Prepared: Number of Notices: 3 Ordinance No: Adopted: Fish & Game Fees Paid: Yes No o- cc II Avv , CIS�- -, - � I BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES MEETING MINUTES - JULY 269 2000 The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a. m. in the, 7 County Center Drive Development Services' Conference Room, Oroville, CA. Present: Randy Wilson, Principal Planner Lynn Richardson, Secretary I. ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION AirTouch Cellular,, c/o SpectraSite, proposed Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts and Minor Use Permit to erect a 150 foot, self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico, on property zoned A-15 (Agricultural - 15 acre'parcels). The project is located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. APN 047-130-159 (SB) MUP 00-08) (Continued open from 6/28/00) Mr. Wilson stated that the hearing was continued from June 28, 2000. Mr. Wilson also stated that staff received a request to withdrawal this application. The hearing was opened to the public. No one was present to speak on this item. The hearing was closed. Mr. Wilson accepted and approved the applicant's request to withdrawal this project, MUP 00-08, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. II. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 a.m. Randy Wilson, Planning Manager Butte County Planning Services Meeting c:\wpdocs\m in utes\mi nor. rni n] ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES MEETING 0 MINUTES - JULY 26, 2000 ■ PAGE 1 ■ AirTouch Cellular, c/o SpectraSite, proposed Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts and Minor Use Permit to'erect a 150 foot, self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along,the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico, on property zoned A-15 (Agricultural - 15 acre parcels). The project is located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. APN 047-130-159 (SB) MUP 00-08) (Continued open from 5/24/00) No one was present for this hearing. Mr. Parilo continued the hearing open to July 26, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. to allow for the applicant to be present. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES MEETING ■ MINUTES - JUNE 28, 2000 ■ AirTouch Cellular, c/o SpectraSite, proposed Negative Declaration regarding environmental impacts and Minor Use Per to erect a 150 foot, self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico, on property zoned A-15 (Agricultural - 15 acre parcels). The project is located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. APN 047-.130-159 (SB) MUP 00-08) (Continued open from 3/22/00) Mr. Betts said this was a continued hearing pending the outcome of Item B on today's agenda. He said the applicant would like a 30 day continuance. The hearing was opened to the public. Tom De Luca, SpectraSite, restated the reason for the continuance process. He said they do not want to abandon their application for this site until there is a final decision on the second site. Mr. Parilo asked if the second site is found unacceptable, would there still be interest in colocating on the third site? Mr. DeLuca said that the most northerly site would probably not work for them. He said they have gone out to the site and tested the third site, put up an antenna at a certain height, drove around with computer models, and they could not achieve coverage.. He said even the middle site is not a perfect site for them. He said the best site is this original application. He said they have already reached a compromise by moving to the middle site. He said the result of the northerly site being approved would result in them having to apply for a new monopole site somewhere else. He said it is really a matter of this site or the middle site. He said they will not go to the northerly site. Mr. Parilo asked if the first and second sites are unacceptable then what are his options? Mr. DeLuca said his option would be to find another site that would be acceptable in proximity to these two sites. Mr. Parilo explained the hearing process. He said the Planning Commission will take an action on this hearing and that action is appealable to the Board of Supervisors. He said the overall object is to colocate where they can. Mr. DeLuca asked for the 30 day continuance. Elaine Grey reminded Mr. Parilo that the Agricultural Commissioner, Richard Price, submitted a letter opposing the Anita Site. Bruce McClintock said that pilots now have to avoid buildings and equipment and could avoid a tower. Barbara Wallace noted the petitions that were submitted against this project. Richard Wallace said there are concerns for the viewshed, property values, the agriculture husbandry issues, and the petitions showing that we do not want the tower at this site. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES MEETING ■ MINUTES - MAY 24, 2000 ■ Carol Gallon said the tower is higher than any buildings or equipment in the area. Mr. Wallace said that there is a cell tower less than a mile away from the Anita Road site to the south. Mr. Parilo continued this hearing open to June 28, 00 at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Parilo said staff would send Ms. Grey and anyone else who requested notice of the continued hearing date, an agenda. j ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES MEETING ■ MINUTES-- MAY 24, 2000 ■ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUTTE COUNTY UNIFORM APPLICATION APPLICANT: Agent information to be provided is on other side: APPLICANT'S NAME ( If applicant is ditierent from owner an affidavit is requir d) ASSE SOB'S PARCEL NUMBER -ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP.CODE: FILE NUMBER: (FOR OFFICE US NAME F PROPOSED PROJECT (If any) i TELEPHONE LOCATION OF PROJECT ( Major cross streets and Address, if any ) `n � ! GENERAL INFORMATION REQUIRED OWNER'S NAME '*4 tqM, t rlKi. TELEPHONE wr�c , k I (430)Sit, = e3-77 ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP CODE: ZONE GENERAL PLAN EXISTING LAND USE BOUNDARY LME MODIFICATION SITE SIZE ( in Square Feet or�Accres ; ❑ 452 /�1,V!/b�L�IV ❑ }�rL 16 Z Sim EXISTING STRUCTURES (min Square Feet) PROPOSED STRUCTURES ( in Square Feet ) MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN ` ❑ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (Check One) i I t ,' :� s 1i' t . i 'ti s , } (Check One) , �*:` ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE SEWERED_ ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON PUBLIC WATEr. ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON SEPTIC ❑ PROPERTY 15 OR PROPOSED TO BE ON WELL. WATER r,. APPLICATION REQUESTED ❑ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑ TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ❑ REZONE ❑ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP USE PERMIT RECEIVED, ❑, WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP 'MINOR USE PERMIT AN 07 2000 ❑ BOUNDARY LME MODIFICATION p •VARIANCEti I • • - COUNTY' ; ❑ LEGAL' LOT DETERMINATION BUTTE ❑ MINOR VARIANCE PLANNING DIVISION ❑ CERTIFICATE OF MERGER ❑ ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT ❑ MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN ` ❑ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ❑ OTHER J PROJECT DESCRIPTION FULL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT (Attach necessary sheets. If this application is for a land division • describe the number and size of parcels.) I 1 I-, u.( r&,Lf -, )tr1., r . It t4t:r I '1' t71 ►s 1—,144 cif 1 k )Il' 12X' elFr-)C t►�.r(..i l Z OWNER CERTIFICATION ER'1'IFY't'11.A'T I r\VI PRESENTLY THE LEGAL OWNER OR'THE AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE OWNER O E ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. FURTHER. I ACKNOWLEDGE THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION AND CERTI THAT ALL OF THE•AB INFORMATION IS TRUE AND AC'CURA'TE. (If an agent is to be authorized, execute an affidavit of authorization a in ude the atlida v i pplication.) DATE.: �, � _ 4c� SIGNATURE: /i2%� j AGENT AUTHORIZATION Ta Butte County, Department of Development Services; Print Name of Agent and Phone Number I''I •227'7 �is-ll� O�°-�� `�t.X>� �li.�`�'O � ���i o C� °��v2� Mailing Address is hereby authorized to process this. application for:—Ar %liuwL u4a� m� on my property, identified as Butte County Assessor Parcel Number: 151 This Authorization allows representation for all applications, hearings, appeals, etc. and to sign all documents necessary for said processing, but not including document(s) relating to title interest. Owner(s) of Record: (sign and print name) 1�t�GF ! x (q�ikl ��( 't'GC�c Sf S 1Glstf'� c �k1N { 1 U .P_r_int Name Print Name Signature Signature Architect and/or Engineer: Pint Name of Architect/Engineer and Phone Number Mailing Address Current fee for this application is S as of Make check payable to "Butte County Treasurer". Payment of the currently required Application Fee and/or Deposit (Any unused portion of a deposit) will be returned upon final action. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY , Taken by Date Received: Total Amount Received: Planning E.H. Land Dev. Receipt No. Fire Dept. _ AP Number(s) _ Legal Description Owners Authorization _ Zoning Requirements Project Description _ Copies of Plot Plan �J v- Vr Payment of the currently required Application Fee and/or Deposit (Any unused portion of a deposit) will be returned upon final action. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY , Taken by Date Received: Total Amount Received: Planning E.H. Land Dev. Receipt No. Fire Dept. _ AP Number(s) _ Legal Description Owners Authorization _ Zoning Requirements Project Description _ Copies of Plot Plan RECEIVED COUNTY OF BUTTE JAN 0 7 2000 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM BUTTE COUNTY (To be Completed By Project Applicant) PLANNING DIVISIO V Date Filed General Information: 1. Name and agdres5 of owner, and/or developer, and/or projects onsor:. AKr 25S [ 1/YZ. ` �j5 0 2. Address of project: 4u AVVM A;::�A(i c4hca Assessor's Parcel Number: c.-,;-+-7 3. Name, address, "and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: <1UWt016VJ . %2 Segn�6�To 22 n YWtyL 0** -6. rgl-wo- sTO -0-A - , �.AOA--r% -All- Q /.i /_ N a7-7 _ roKd7 4. List and describe any other related permits and other publica provals required for this project, including those required.by city, regional, state and federal agencies: 1.V2rk. 5. Existing general plan designation: C> �i 6. Existing zoning district: I� 7. How is land currently used? A_Vtow WWW( 4061 �j� 'C�Ohi 8. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form�is filed): G✓�lt /� /��3DYV C.��i�%I'ROk7 Project Description: 9. Site size: 10,*rAc, t-,ql9ALVi I49rU% - irk (Acres/Sq. Feet) 10. Off-street parking spaces: Full size: Compact: Total: M-7— 11. Plans attached Yes V No _ 12. Proposed development schedule 13. Associated projects W(U,4"-_ w (Fila Orr-- 14. rr% 14. Anticipated incremental or phased development ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 1 Attach description of project containing the following information: 15: If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and -type of household size expected. 16. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. 17. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. 19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use, rezoning application, or any development_permits, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. If permits have already been issued, please attach as Exhibit Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES 20. Change in existing features of any hills, buttes, canyons or substantial alteration of ground contours. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. _ 22. Change in pattern or character of general area of project. _ 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. _ 25. Change in bay, lake, river, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or -alteration of existing drainage patterns. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. _ 27. Site on filled land or on slopes of 10 percent or more. _ 28. Use of, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. _ 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. including special districts). 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). _ 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ■ Butte County -Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 2 NO WFA, Environmental Setting: (Attach brief description) 32. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stabiliy, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 33. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one - family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set- back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted- Certification - I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and informaticn required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date K:\FORMS\SUBMITTAL\ENV-INFO ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 3 ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW Responses to the County of Butte Environmental Information Form: (cont) 15. Not Applicable. This proposal is for an unmanned public utility telecommunications facility. 16. Not Applicable. This proposal is for an unmanned public utility telecommunications facility. 17. Not Applicable. This proposal is for an unmanned public utility telecommunications facility. 18. Not Applicable. This proposal is for an unmanned public utility telecommunications facility. 19. The proposed project requires a minor use permit because it is a telecommunications facility within a "UA -40" — Agricultural, 40 -acre minimum parcel zoning district. The site is developed with an almond hulling operation with associated paved areas, structures and silo/hoppers. 20. Change to existing features: The proposed project includes minimal grading for the equipment pad and access driveway only. Access to the proposed facility would be via a new gravel paved driveway from Anita Road extending along the westerly property line. 21. Change to scenic views or vistas: No change to existing scenic views or vistas will result from the proposed project. The proposed project will locate a 150' monopole within a site that has been developed with agricultural uses and multiple large, tall structures. The height of existing structures and the setback from Anita Road work to reduce potential visual changes resulting from the proposed project. 22. Change in pattern or character of the surrounding area: No change to the pattern or character of the general area will result from the proposed project. The proposed project will not impact the existing use of the property or adjacent properties. 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter: The site is an unmanned communications facility. No significant solid waste or litter will result from the proposed project. 24. Changes in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity: The proposed project will not generate any objectionable odors, fumes, smoke, ash or dust. 25. Change in bay, lake, river, stream, or ground water quality: Minor additions to existing surface development will be the only result of the proposed project. The proposed project will not result in any changes to existing drainage patterns, ground water quality or quantity nor will it result in any changes to bays, rivers, lakes or streams. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels: The proposed AirTouch facility will not result in significant changes to existing noise or vibration levels in the area. No back-up emergency power generator is proposed that would have a potential for noise and vibration. G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Enviro Doc.doc Page 1 of 1 0 0 27. Site on filed land or sloes over 10 percent: No. The proposed telecommunications facility is situated on a relatively level parcel. The proposed. equipment pad and driveway access will be developed with no fill or cutting required. 28. Use of, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials: The proposed project will utilize batteries for emergency back-up power. These batteries are a gel type containing a solution of sulfuric acid, in sealed maintenance—free casings located in a secure radio cabinet. This type of battery has been used for this purpose by many telecommunications carriers for similar facilities and proven to be a low risk hazard. 29. Substantial change in demand for public services:. The proposed project will be located on an a parcel developed with a radio tower and broadcast facility. 'Existing public utilities serve the site and no new services will be required. No additional public agency services such as police, fire, sewer or water services are required to develop the proposed unmanned .telecommunications facility. 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption: The proposed project will not use substantial electrical power and no fossil fuels. 31. Relationship to larger project or series of projects: The proposed project is a portion of an existing wireless telecommunications system. The proposed project is necessary to provide for a conversion to digital service from analog and to provide improved service to the North Butte county/Chico area along Highway 99. 32. Existing site characteristics The property is developed with existing agricultural uses and structures including a large steel shed/warehouse type building and almond huller with tall storage silos/tower components. The balance of the subject parcel is vehicle turnaround /maneuvering area. No sensitive or endangered species of plant or animals are known to inhabit the site or facility. The site is not known to possess any archaeological, cultural or historical significance. 33. Surrounding property characteristics: . Properties adjacent to the west, north and east are characterized by agricultural uses including producing orchards. Immediately to the south is fallow land with the producing orchards approximately 1,000 further south. The closest residence is approximately 1/8 mile to the southwest. The adjacent area is not identified with possessing any archaeological, cultural or historical significance. G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Enviro Doc.doc Page 2 of 2 0 RECEIVED JAN 0 7 2000 AirTouch Cellular Proposed Wireless Communications Facility BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION TOWER OWNER: AirTouch Cellular SITE ADDRESS: 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA APN: 047-130-159 AIRTOUCH SITE NAME: Meridian SITE PREMISES: Proposed 50' x 50' AirTouch Lease Premises TOWER TYPE: Proposed three-legged self supported lattice tower TOWER HEIGHT: 150' EQUIPMENT CABINET: One (1) Motorola SC614 Cabinet Approx. Size: Height = 60", Width = 35", Depth = 32" NUMBER OF SECTORS: 3 ANTENNAS: Allgon 7130.16 Height — 52"; Width —18"; Depth -12" 9 Antennas Total (3 Antennas per Sector) TOTAL HEIGHT: 152.17' APPROVAL REQUESTS AirTouch Cellular (AirTouch) respectfully requests review of the proposed wireless communications facility, a use subject to approval of a Minor Use Permit under provisions of Section 24-262 Wireless Communications Facilities of the Butte County Code as revised and adopted January, 2000. INTRODUCTION AirTouch Cellular has been authorized by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to construct and operate cellular communication facilities in the Northern California market. AirTouch is currently upgrading and expanding its existing analog and digital network. The network operates in the 880- to 894 (transmit) and 835 to 849 (receive) frequency band at a maximum power of 100 Watts per channel. The site will transmit with a maximum of 20 watts per linear power amplifier (LPA), for an effective radiated power of 190 watts per "sector" or 570 watts for the three (3) sectors at full LPA capacity. Please see the enclosed RF Engineer's report. Digital is the newest wireless voice technology and AirTouch is converting much of their existing analog system to code division multiple access (CDMA) digital. Digital works by.converting sound into ones and zeros (also known as binary code) rather than using electrical impulses as with analog technology. One of the main advantages with digital technology is that it provides improved sound quality, due in part to its ability to remove interference and static. In addition, digital is a much more secure method for transmitting sound; it provides better fraud protection. Digital phone batteries also last longer than analog phone batteries. A major benefit of the AirTouch CDMA digital service is that it works in combination with traditional analog technology to assure that users maintain call connectivity between the two technologies. CDMA digital phones sold by AirTouch are "dual mode," meaning they convert from digital to analog mode where digital service is not available. AirTouch will provide services to the public in several areas: It will enhance area emergency services It will be a fully digital alternative to traditional analog cellular telephone systems Text Messaging G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Meridian Project Desc.doc • • Roadside Assistance • Deluxe Voice Mail with Notification • 411 Connect • Call Blocking • Call Diversion • Call Forwarding • Call Waiting • Caller ID • Digital Internet Text Messaging • Information Services • Three -Way Conference Calling • All of these functions will be available in one hand held unit. Consumer goods and services companies as well as the general public currently use AirTouch Cellular. Unlike analog wireless service, the digital technology requires much better signal strength within the desired service area. This is due to digital connections getting "dropped" if the signal is too low as compared to analog calls, which will become increasingly distorted and break-up before being dropped. The signal strength for cellular is low with the maximum output only being 100 watts. The frequency of the carrier together with the desired coverage area and call capacity all factor into the height and location proposed. Please refer to the enclosed Radio Frequency Report for detail. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AirTouch currently operates from 11 locations in the County of Butte (please see enclosed coverage map). In order to expand its digital service and to provide clear, consistent mobile communications service along the Highway 99 corridor in the North Chico/Butte County area, AirTouch proposes to construct and operate an unmanned wireless communications facility at 4933 Anita Road, Chico, California (Assessor's Parcel Number 047-130-159) AirTouch Cellular proposes to develop a 150', steel monopole on this parcel inside a 50'x 50' lease premises, enclosed by a six-foot tall chain-link fence with three (3) strands of barbed wire located adjacent to the existing almond hulling building. AirTouch's proposed facility would be a new tower on the parcel. AirTouch proposes to mount"*A antennas at a rad center of 150'. The top of AirTouch's antennas will be at 152.17'. One (1) equipment cabinet approximately 60" (h) x, 35" (d) x 32" (d) will be set on a 9'x 12.5' concrete slab foundation west of the proposed monopole. A GPS antenna, approximately 4"diameter x 6" high will be mounted on a pipe 3' from the top of the cabinet. The proposed AirTouch cabinet will be painted a neutral beige/tan color. AirTouch will utilize the existing access drive from Anita road to access the proposed site. SITE DESCRIPTION The existing almond hulling building is approximately 140' from Anita Road and the proposed site is approximately 0.25 -miles west of Highway 99. The subject parcel is essentially level with few trees or other vegetation. The existing parcel is 15 acres developed for the aforementioned almond hulling facility. An existing gravel driveway provides access to the parcel from Anita Road. Unpaved portions of the subject parcel are bare dirt. AREA DESCRIPTION The surrounding area is characterized by both open fallow fields and producing orchards with residences and agricultural out buildings. The subject parcel is bounded by the following land uses: G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Meridian Project Desc.doc DIRECTION ZONING GENERAL PLAN EXISTING LAND USE Project A-15 Orchard Field Crops Almond Hulling Operation North A-40 Orchard Field Crops Producing Orchard South A-40 Orchard Field Crops Fallow Field/Producing Orchard East A-40 Orchard Field Crops Producing Orchard West A-40 Orchard Field Crops Fallow Field/Producing Orchard PRESENT LAND USE AND ZONING The subject parcel is currently utilized for an almond hulling operation consisting of multiple large structures and tall distribution towers. It is zoned A-15 with the use in substantial conformance with the Orchard -Field Crops General Plan Land Use designation. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL The County of Butte allows the Planning Commission to approve (or conditionally approve) this Conditional Use Permit request and may use the following facts to determine findings that: 1. The proposed location of the project and the conditions under which it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or the general public, and will not result in inefficient or wasteful use of energy, and will not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the project was designed by a radio engineer to adopted FCC standards and a licensed civil engineer to State and County Building Codes. Public safety related to exposure from radio frequency radiation (RF) and similar frequency fields has been evaluated by a number of professional, scientific organizations and governmental agencies in the United States and around the world. The FCC adopted standards and formalized them in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as revised. An RF report prepared for this application utilizing those standards concluded that the proposed maximum radio frequency radiation (RF) from the facilities will not exceed the maximum exposure levels in the adopted FCC standards, therefore the proposed facilities will not be harmful to the general public. 2. The proposed location of the project and the conditions under which it will be operated and maintained will be consistent with all pertinent County ordinances and the purpose of the A-15, (Agricultural) zoning district in which it is located in that a communications facility requires conditional use permit approval, pursuant to Section 24-262. Paragraph G.2.a of Ordinance section 24-262 requires proposed telecommunication towers be setback at least.the height of the tower from adjacent properties in A-15 through A-160 zoning districts with an exception provided when the proposed facility is located adjacent to an existing structure. The proposed site is located as close to the existing structure as possible taking into consideration plans for a building addition. The future addition would occur in the space between the proposed telecommunication facility and the existing almond hulling structure. Therefore, the proposed location is in substantial conformance with the ordinance requirements. 3. The proposed use will not overload utilities, and will not generate traffic on the streets in the vicinity in that the facility will only require one to two AirTouch site visits a month for a few hours. The project will not emit odors and it does not require water or sewer service. No additional noise generators are associated with this project. G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Meridian Project Desc.doc 0 1 0 4. The project will harmonize with the existing land use and land uses in the vicinity and will be compatible with the physical design aspects of the existing facility. The proposed AirTouch elements will have minimal visual impact due to the small equipment cabinet size, coloring and placement of the antennas on an existing tower with no increase in height. The proposed project is not growth inducing and has no applicable dwelling unit densities. SITE COVERAGE The siting of AirTouch facilities varies depending on topography and capacity requirements. The objective for the proposed facility is to provide radio signal coverage north and south along the Highway 99 corridor from the subject parcel. The location of the proposed facility is optimum due to the , collocation potential of this parcel, the perspective this property has over the service objective, and the alignment of Highway 70 in this area. The proposed facility performs very well due to its location and the line of sight up and down Highway 99. The proposed site provides radio signal coverage along Highway 99 to the north (to the Hwy 99/ Butte County line). The site will also provide coverage along Highway 99 to the south into the City of Chico proper. The proposed site will "hand-off' calls to an existing AirTouch site located near Corning to the north and to a facility along Highway 32 in Chico. The proposed facility will have little impact on the subject parcel as it has been substantially developed for the almond hulling use, with large structures, an access drive and utilities. Electrical and telephone service is available to the parcel with required service extensions available to the AirTouch facility. The existing access road is in close proximity to the proposed facility. The site can be accessed without constructing any additional access drives and no grading or road improvements are proposed for the development of this facility. Placement on this parcel and in the location proposed was carefully selected based on many criteria including: 1. The site is developed with multiple large agricultural structures which would help to screen the proposed tower. 2. The large parcel and location of the existing development allows the tower to be setback from the Highway 99 corridor, thereby reducing the potential visibility of the tower. 3. The proposed location is within the Search Ring established for providing the coverage that AirTouch requires. ALTERNATE CHOICE DISCUSSION Alternate site consideration was given to properties directly east and north of the proposed location in the area; however, the parcels north and west along Highway 99 are planted with producing orchards and have few large structures or screening capabilities. These parcels would provide coverage within the established Search Ring and allow the tower to be sited at a similar distance from Hwy 99. However, these locations have a number of factors that may affect the appropriateness for a telecommunications tower facility. These factors include; potential conflicts with aerial applicators operating over the orchards, potentially more visible due to a lack of large structures or tall trees, and disturbance of productive agricultural land. Specific locations evaluated include: An existing power substation east of the proposed site adjacent to Highway 99 was evaluated for a possible telecommunications facility. This site was not pursued after investigation due to a lack of ground space, the inability to expand outside the fenced area and because a tower would be highly visible immediately adjacent to Highway 99. G:\ProjectsWirtouch\Planning\Meridian\Meridian Project Desc.doc Further to the north along Highway 99 is a parcel with tall eucalyptus trees ringing existing small scale structures. This site has been used as a "junk" yard and is constrained because of the location of the material. The trees would help screen the facility tower; however, it would have to be placed relatively close to the highway and therefore, be highly visible. Directly across from the previously discussed parcel is a parcel with a large barn structure surrounded by grazing land. This site falls in the center of the search ring so expected service area coverage would be met. This location is also close to Highway 99 and has nothing other than the barn to screen the tower. CONCLUSION The establishment and operation of a wireless communications facility at the existing almond hulling facility on Anita Road, Chico, CA (APN 040-520-045) as proposed will not impair the integrity and character of the zone in which the land lies, and the use would not be unreasonably incompatible with, or injurious to, surrounding property, or be detrimental to the health and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or to the general health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the County as supported by the following facts: (1) The project site is located in an area that has few residential uses and a limited potential for additional new residential uses; and (2) The use will not generate any noise, significant light, or traffic that would conflict with adjacent land uses; and (3) The use will not create any aesthetic impacts due to its location on an existing 103' three-legged lattice tower which is adjacent to four high-voltage power lines and support towers. Service coverage mapping prepared for the project illustrates the gap in coverage between the existing AirTouch facilities to the south in Chico and to the north near Corning (see enclosed mapping). The potential alternate sites to the north have greater potential visibility due to being closer to the highway. The other alternate properties are highly visible as well as out of the established Search Ring. Properties to the north and east are within productive orchards with the increased potential for conflicting with aerial applicator operations as well as disturbing the agricultural use. They too begin to get to out of the established Search Ring. The facility is designed and will be constructed consistent with all safety guidelines, and will operate well below established thresholds and standards for human health concerns. The AirTouch frequencies will not interfere with any police, fire or emergency communications, or nearby televisions or radios due to the separation in the frequency ranges utilized by AirTouch and from those used by other communication devices. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) controls and regulates the operation of all the telecommunication equipment and devices to be used at this proposed facility. The proposed facility will conform with all FCC standards and regulations. The proposed facility will be a link to an important communication infrastructure. Individuals and business will be able to access wireless communications to stay in business, to expand their business, to provide personal convenience, or to strengthen personal safety and the ability to communicate on demand with business, government, family and/or friends. The facility will also enhance emergency communication opportunities, both for agencies using the applicant's system and for individuals during disasters or roadside vehicle breakdowns. G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Meridian Project Desc.doc USE PERMIT and MINOR USE PERMIT R'E Z®pQ COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY Ip,N 0. J_. BU N1 GOD. IVjcION APPLICATION PACKET CHECKLIST PLAN This checklist is designed to assist applicants in making sure all necessary information is included in their application packet for a communications facility. Please include this checklist along with your submittal. Applicant Planner 1. &&�_A completed, signed, Uniform Application and Environmental Information form. If the application is signed by an agent for the property owner, an agent authorization form must be submitted along with the Uniform Application. The application shall not be accepted unless signed by the owner or authorized agent. 2. 9—Payment of the currently required Application Fee and/or Deposit (any unused portion of the deposit will be returned upon final action, if any remains.) (Planner advises applicant) 3. Thirty-five (35) copies of plans which shall include a detailed site plan drawn to scale. All. plans shall be drawn on uniform size sheets no greater than 24 x 36". The finished plans shall be folded to 8%" x 11 ". The detailed site plan must include: a. ACAr, .9k Name and address of Applicant, Engineer and/or person who prepared the plan. b. Property lines and lot dimensions. c. R 3)b" Assessor Parcel Number(s) and the street address. d. Proposed use and/or uses of the property. e. ❑ ME] le. f. Dimensioned locations of existing and proposed improvements on the property (including, but not limited to, buildings, driveways, parking areas, wells, septic tanks and leach fields).. IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. I g. ❑ Distances from any significant natural and constructed features of the property, such as streets, access roads, streams, rock outcroppings, major tree stands, storm drains, bodies of water, railroads, to the property lines. h. Location of all slope banks, ponds, creeks, buttes, sloughs, rock outcroppings, natural drainage courses, irrigation canals and existing vegetation worthy of consideration for preservation, such as oak trees. i. ❑ EEr- Any existing faults or fractures and geologic hazards. j. 'R' North arrow and scale of drawing. All plans shall be drawn to an engineering scale with the preferred scale of 1" = 20', with a north arrow preferably oriented to the top of sheet. k. ❑ Building setbacks from the ultimate road right-of-way (front, rear, sides). 1. M- Proposed and existing on-site driveways and/or roads. in. ❑ M❑ Leefttiep nd materials of walls and fences (sections may be required). n. ❑ ❑ ori a,;,.o•„,.,�, a��«�to scale, on adiacent'and across the street properties within 100 feet of the subject site. o. ❑ ❑ ng cur s, gutters, sidewalks and existing paving widths on-site or within 100 feet of the site, on adiacent and across the street properties. p. ❑ ❑ ross s reets on both sides with plus or minus distances from subject site. q. �� Approximate location of all buildings within 1,000 feet, on adjacent properties. r. ❑ WEI 'ng an nearest fire hydrants. S. RIP Access, both pedestrian and vehicular, showing service areas and points of ingress and egress. t. ?.0 Elevation contours, at a minimum per USGS maps. IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. 2 4. ❑❑ ep ua Grading Plan Items to be shown include: . a. ❑ M' ❑ N tural areas to be preserved. b. 1140 Propos cut and fill areas in contrasting col s of zipatone pattern. c. ❑ l)�" ❑ Existing and roposed contours with' 100 feet of project boundaries. d. • ❑ ❑ Proposed drainage d flood ontrol facilities. e. ❑ (A ❑ Erosion control meas s (e.g. - slope landscaping). f. ❑ �W ❑ Natural draina e. g. ❑ m- ❑ Elevati s and finished contours. h. ❑ AAA— ❑ Location of retaining walls, drainage c els and existing structures. i. Location, elevation and size of proposed building pads. . j. All plans must be clear and -legible. ❑ One copy of 8 /2. x 11 transparency reduction of the detailed site plan. 6.- EN -A vicinity map showing closest major cross streets, zoning and existing land use. The followin$t. additional items are required per Butte County Code Section 24-262.E. 7. OrStatement of Justification: a. Includes a description of the proposed Facility, including the type of facility being .requested. - IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. 3 b. 0 Height from natural grade to the top of proposed. Facility. c. 0 �' Support equipment proposed. d. RFR/EMF- and wattage output data including the number of channels. e. 49 0' Horizontal and vertical location coordinates 8. fTProposed elevations of the structure and any accessory buildings, including building height and other physical dimensions, drawn to graphic scale. 9. Visual impact assessment,pho_ to montages, mock-ups as determined by the Director of Development Services or Planning Commission. The assessment shall identify ar_y proposed trimming of vegetation that will be required for the normal operation of the Facility. Stealth technology is encouraged. 10. ❑ Mock -u s required (may be required at any time during therocessin of the permit). R-A discussion of and supporting information regarding the alternative site selection of at least a minimum of three to four other sites, if available, including colocation opportunities, and a statement as to why these alternative sites and/or colocation opportunities were rejected. 12. 0' A complete service area map showing the entire wireless communications network of thie provider's twenty (20) miles in all directions from the proposed site for the time period from the filing of the.application to twelve (12) months from the filing of the application, for the purpose of visually aiding cumulative environmental analysis, with and without tl-. proposed Facility or Facilities, showing all hand-off sites within the above specified areF. 13. 07A graphic depiction of the search ring and all other technical criteria used in determinin€ the proposed Facility location. 14. ❑ tYJ Documentation which identifies failure characteristics of the Facility structure or tower and demonstrates that the site and setbacks are of adequate size to contain falling debris. 15. 0. Written evidence demonstrating that the selected Facility structure or tower design is as visually unobtrusive as possible, given technical and engineering considerations, which indicate what type of Facility is required to provide reasonably effective service and also the best technology and/or construction available to maximally achieve visual unobtrusiveness IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS -SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. 4 The use of best available technology and/or construction to maximally achieve visuF-1 unobtrusiveness is mandatory. 16.� W -Applicants which operate common carrier facilities (specifically, but not limited to cellular, PCS, SMR and paging service licensees of the FCC) shall provide written evidence that the applicant has provided notice to all FCC licensed wireless communication service carriers _-perating within the County of Butte of the plans to develop the site. 7. ❑ NK ❑ Evide ce of a valid, current operating license or construction permit from the FCC or, if tl-& licant is not a wireless communications service provider, a user operating agreement fcr ' each and every such provider to which the applicant intends to rent space on the propose Facility. 18. �Arep o si ned b a ualified radio freque=enginee>ricensed by the FCC, prepare pursuant to FCC OET 65, stating whether the maximum radio frequency radiation/electromagnetic radiation (RF/EMF) to be emitted by the proposed Facility, taking into account all other Facilities, both existing and known future Facilities, at the propose i site and adjacent properties, conforms to safety standards adopted by the FCC, if applicable. The reports prepared for Facilities shall conform to the reporting requirements set by tiff. County and FCC OET 65 human exposure standards. The report shall also analyze thr evidence provided in support of the proposed Facility location, height and radiated power, frequency, the number of channels, and all other related data and present alternatives for t1L; location, height and radiated power, pursuant to the requirements of this section. If thr proposed Facility exceeds FCC OET 65 human exposure standards, applicant shall alSD provide additional comprehensive technical and planning information regarding how the applicant shall protect all persons from such excessive exposure consistent with all FederE.l and State requirements, and any additional County requirements. 19. ❑ N- ❑ 20. &H Projects in Agricultural Zones (A-5 through A-160) shall, prior to submitting an application for a proposed Facility, submit a site plan of the proposed Facility to the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner for comment and send a notification letter' to all aeriE.l agricultural applicators registered in the County informing them of the proposed site location and tower height. No hearing on an application for a proposed facility in any agricultural zone will be scheduled, nor shall any Administrative Permit for any such facility be issued without proof that the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner and all aeriEl agricultural applicators registered in the County have been notified, as specified herein. IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. 5 0 1 0 21. ❑ ❑ acilities that are proposed to be located within the boundaries of any Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan or Airport Area of Influence, as adopted :)r designated from time. to time by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission, shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services, Planning Division, and a copy submitted to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission for review regarding consistency with adopted Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plans and for recommendations addressing potential impacts to air navigation within the Airport Area of Influence. The County may in its sole discretion retain an independent consultant to review either individual elements of or the entire application and advise the County at the applicant's sole expense. Additional information may be required in order to clarify, amplify, correct or otherwise supplement the above submittal information or to complete any required environmental review documents, as deemed necessary by the Department of Development Services, Public Works, Environmental Health Division, Butte County Fire Department, or Agriculture Commissi Signature: Applicant/Represen ative Signature: :2� Planner Receiving Application K:\FORMS\SUBMITAL\CHECKLIS\CELLUP.WPD Date %" %— 00 Date: (-1-00 IF INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED, THE APPLICATION WILL BE DEEMED INCOMPLETE. 6. • 047-130-159 McCLINTOCK FAMILY TRUST 2 NORTHWOOD COMMONS PLACE CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-160 RICE, KEVIN 4873 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-260-101 NELSON JAMES & RAJESWARI 14015 HWY. 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-004 BLAKEMAN JOHN & GISELA 4493 KEEFER RD. CHICO, CA 95926 047-430-015 LAUER, PAULINE P.O. BOX 1729' CHICO, CA 95927 047-430-019 FREDERICK CHRISTOPHER 4693 GARDENBROOK DR CHICO, CA 95926 ' 0.17-430-048 GEHA, DAWN 77 QUAIL COVEY CT. CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-051 LANGFORD RYAN & DELORES 57 QUAIL COVEY CT: CHICO, CA 95926 047-460-028 HICKS TOM & ANGELIQUE '15 PARSLEY LN CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-042 HENNIGAN & HASWELL 5130 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-125 RICE, KEVIN 4873 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973. 047-130-175 HENNIGAN & WALLACE 5130 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-260-160 HORN, HOWARD P.O. BOX 6254 CHICO, CA 95927 047-430-005 KLEMM, HARLAN KARL 49 DEL SOL COURT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 047-430-016 JARRETT, MICHAEL & JULIE 47 QUAIL COVEY CT CHICO, CA 95926 047-430-046 SAID ABDUL & MARIA 14066 HWY. 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-049 RICHARSON CALVIN & KATHLEEN 85 QUAIL COVEY CT CHICO, CA 95926 047-460-003 KINNE, MAGGIE 14234 HWY. 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-500-043 ALMEIDA JESUS & SANDRA 14286 HWY 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-055 RICE, CHESTER & DIANE 5131 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-149 PAIVA, JAMES & GERALDINE 13193 CARMEN LN. CHICO, CA 95926 047-130-176 WALLACE RICHARD & BARBARA 5032 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-003 HAUSELT WILLIAM & MAR.3ARET 1255 ACCRA CT. LIVERMORE, CA 94550 047-430-013 WOOD, ANDREW & MARGC 42 QUAIL COVEY CT CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-017 CARLSON TERRY & GIOVA-11A 35 QUAIL COVEY CT CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-047 RUDD,CARY 65 QUAIL COVEY CT CHICO, CA 95973 047-430-050 BIRCH FAMILY TRUST 61 QUAIL COVEY CT. CHICO, CA 95973 047-460-005 BATT, KEVIN 31 WALNUT PARK DR CHICO, CA 95928 047-500-044 ARNOLD ROBERT & MAXRP E P.O. BOX 7546 CHICO, CA 95927 047-130-106 SCHULLER CHICO INC 489 COUNTRY DR CHICO, CA 95928 0 0 11W, a Fill Bruce McClintock0 (916) 895-8771' 4471 Nord Hwy. Chico, CA 95926 047-130-146 HENNIGAN & HENNIGAN 5130 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-260-195 ENGSTROM ROBERT & JOAN 13987 HWY 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-130-170 ARCHER RICHARD P.O. BOX 128 FOREST RANCH, CA 95942 047-130-172 RICE DARREN 5209 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95973 047-500-051 CLENDENEN LARRY & JEAN 14318 HWY 99 CHICO, CA 95973 047-260-194 WILLIAN ALMOND FARM 5130 ANITA RD CHICO, CA 95926 047-500-052 ARCHER DAVID 14300 HWY 99 CHICO, CA 95973 { Pzyo(zjz:, DOS U y- i 3 O p �-1 - 2b0 - C ' �•r � tc ,v Oss ) 0 (4) �� w 2(,© - 19 LJ 01 (6, LI 5 GO - C4rA 0 i>6 P lO 9 JRZI;-]DE21CK G 0 L) mac- -taa�i I Os �f 1 �� ,. - 4 S ` ` , � � .K �. ' � l � , . _ 1 � � t � t .. � ' � • �- � .. '� . �. � �. RECEIVED MAR 2 12000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION w I o • l7q 33 -1 0 C 0 M5. wed m 7� 0 m Z H X w 01 (a =0 Rua Iwo 00 0 > aw 0 r 0m Pi 1 39-45—ON o l7q M5. wed m 7� W-5-ift- Jam =0 Rua aw ER, jl oi T. T. ra ra ra i x fg i i ra. M Z n �°���„Ilih II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�I m IIIUI III�IIIY UIIII�IIIIIII II 11 IIIIIII� �I!Illlllflll (I�III�IIII�llllh.. IIIIII 6” - - Batt Ned Dec 22 1& I2: ig 1999 I�IIUI User: dougp Flit Heridion.cov II Projection Type: Sacr'eaento - UTH 10 IIIIIIIII'' _ Bin size: Calc - 6' (Plot - 6' Plot Typt Coverage J (color By Sector) g Plot Pattern Rulti Line III° plP r - - - -- - - -- - - Short Ibmellc quid, I�IpIP Hand-held coverage. L ar, in -building 'n IIII .dll"� 111'1 LATIM IA=, ANLL TMK 'I'I�I Illlhlleppuq�p � � - r. FT FT MERID III IAN X48-33.00 N l2i-*a.00 M 161.3 150.0 Illlllliu�ulllp�'"null MERIDIAN 39433.00 N f21'5a.00 k 167.3150.0 MERIDIAN B-49-33.00 N 12i-WROO N 161.3 150.0 �O IIIII,IIIIII;"1111�9 1�11i aI��II I I II VIII' In I,��III _ L CIIL x.00 N 12241-49.00 r 298.0 MO �I I dllVll + III II� Ip I�,l, '1111 I MAMILTON crn -46.000 N 122-00-10.00 N 14.'1.00 08.0uII I�,III 1 I PI I I —� vim x-56-20.00 N 122-02-3.00 N 206.0 187:0 111111 , I I J— Idllp' I elle III„II(II� III n r a� ”-0000.00000 N 0-6-0.00 6 M 200.0 �.o IIII �,II IIS utp� IIII IIIU'pl'u Ipn I n" I J - I�NIIIIII� -1., - 1--,, _ _ CMloo-4a-oo.ao N 121-6-10.000 r 2aa.0 ao.0 II _ 'IIII�IIuu'I� I, ` ` v NOAIH CHI00 3-44-04.00 N 121-1-37.00 M 119.0.1 0 - _ I" � 11181 �Illg .. - .. , • _ IIII ' u 1 'II IIII 118111 Id "� I - _ NORTH CHICO "-04.00 N 121-51-37.00 N 179.0 W 0 1. �IIII� �!;'py I'II III I um VIII II II'I�l� I' NOR dP'° 1 ' M CHICO 39-".00 N 121-51-31.001 119.0 MO ( +AIS t1' IIIIIa (I I ' Illpll n ' IIIIP I ', 'IINIII�!IIItlIIIIILJq,, I� (III,I...nmIIBIIIIIIII�llllll ,i �I,,III�I1O6�1811 I dg1• Ip ggll h ,.IIIPI�' r11I1 Ip II I i IIB' I MINI III III �►� I n ddlllid Ih� II • � . III I NI4III Ir I II' III � „ it yI III u Illy. I L0 Pal II Opl r--- , I �'`:"' IAIII , ■_•'u°' a 'II',� II 4l u I IIu�18186 , II q �I I IIIIIII�I 'IIIMn� IIIIII 'n Pr0101110 u' , ' IIB' Iln 1hil (' j I rel' 1 - � u I hI II n n11 (II�I�I I'I / Iltl ■IIIl1,�, � ' IInl;1i' 1111111 1' I'1�' I'' gBIgInP I I ITT C q I ,uu ��'llla�ulM114nulhlfllll ud IIIP \18 11 1IIII Ilp'Irt�II , �' ��' dIIIA �IIII F11111-- v " „ I II'�IlBllllal II ■I III IIIPI IInIIIi Ilr IIIIII'r i11'iII II „IIIA IIT ��I►11 IIIIII' I IIOII rum � II' IIII'Blllllllpl IIP 4 II I lI n all ' II IA (I Imggl ( m I I II I II � IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII►II!1611w►IIL..._._..• n� III, ulliq i�I u Iln._ r, - In Illlh I III IIn InI II I II ' �I �IIN INIIDI mI II IIIIMI ,III IIII IIIIIII ,� �I,d AIIf��IwlB,�,rIHuI...� IIII • II,. SII II6nn n° I .I II III' III ,II"II�''�,,I�III .....:.n �""'"I IIIA n " II� � IIIIIIIN�IIII� Ill�ppuuw�,, 0011111 : I ��I�Ipll �,li m II�Ildll ,P IIIIIdIII II ndIIIIIA dllUw � 11 , III,,, 'III', .III',�Il�,o �., CII IIII'" d 'i11dII,Illlll �I I I I� •� el�lgl , INIIIII l , ,, � lil II IIIIMII I I) I NII► �MII I , I p...,h � INIIIIIWI, IIIIIIN'll II u itl HA ' IIIIIMII illloh II�IIII,TIIY� Ilh I I IIIIIIIIMI I ,p ,,Ip III gIII lIl I . � I III IIIIMI I I IIII. hl II •' .IIIIII' "• I � I IIII I I II I I Ihllann. . I Ig11111111 ' I ,III. '11gplgll IIIIIII�I .IIII : IIIIIMI� IIIIIIVq;1i Iw,n , �., : - . - _. ' 111111► � „ ��IIII I . ...� ; -.. IIIIII IlIIIIIII� .II I N inlhl I ' I II !. oraftmeutdr MAP SCALE 'I 1: 250000 4 O 4 Miles . u AIRTOUCH PHOENIX 3.7.2 t 4933 Anita Road Chico, California 95973 25 County Center Drive Oroville, California 95965 Ladies and Gentlemen: Subject: Airtouch Cellular Go Spectrasite communications tower at 4933 Anita Road APN 047-130-158 The purpose of this letter is to recommend approval of this project. My family owns and operates the almond hulling complex ( Shasta Vista Almond Huller) at the site of the proposed project. We have been doing business at this site since 1977. We have been living and farming in this area north of Chico since 1956. We do business with some of the people and are acquainted with most of the people in the project area. Last summer when Spectrasite contacted us about leasing a small portion of our property for a cellular tower, we told them that we were interested. When the representative came to look at our property I ;;::;;;,suggested to him that the best place to put the tower was in the north east corner of the property, next „ a ::t';:fto Anita road because it was close to the power lines and the phone lines. He said that because some did not like to look at the towers so close to the road he would prefer to put it behind our uildingsjSo we selected a spot behind one of our buildings that is approximately 40 feet tall. By „.puttu}g„t,ri;this location it will be, at least partially concealed from view. This seemed like a good e 1,.: anA;e%?he left I talked to a couple of the neighbors about the tower and at the time they didn't ..-�..•, '�<seem�fo:ha�e:a roblem with it. I even ll h p called the owner of the company that does most of the aerial i` a4'r” h orchards ands in the area and he said that he did have no tr a problem t t m with the tower. Betuveen last summer and the resent, a couple of our neighbors have decided the are opposed to the P P Y PP laeeu tent of the tower at this site for various reasons. There seems to be 3 main reasons that the are =``'" cgneerried with. 1. Health risk. Now, it would seem to me that if there were a health risk from these %6, —s, they would not be allowed to be placed anywhere. I have done quite a bit of research and have not found anything indicating that there is a health risk form the antennas on these towers, unless one was to go up on the tower and stand right in front of the antenna. I for one would be the first one to object to the tower if there was a risk because I spend most of my time on the property! 2. A loss of property value. I have talked to a loan officer and an appraiser at the local Farm Credit agency in Chico and they indicated that when farm property is appraised, the appraisal is based on the income that the property produces. Therefore the parcels near the site would not be impacted. In fact the appraiser said that the property at the site would be worth more because of the income from the tower. 3. Having to look at the tower. In our daily travels we all have to put up with things such as power poles, endless miles of wires hanging from these poles, billboards, road signs, and the list goes on and on. This tower will be behind some existing buildings and equipment that will, at least, block the lower portion from view. And from the road one will hardly notice it, that is unless they take their eyes off of the road to look at it! Placing the tower at this site makes a lot more sense than putting them right along the highway. The county has sent notices of the hearing on this project to 37 parcels around the project site, so that any concerns by these owners may be addressed at the scheduled hearing. The attached map of the project area ( exhibit A ) along with the map legend ( exhibit B ) shows the project area inside the black circle. This circle has a radius of .8 miles from the tower site and includes most of the 37 parcels that notices were sent to. It would seem to me that any person outside this circle could certainly hould not carry much weight because they are not really March 21, 2000 Page 2 The project area is zoned A-40 and is comprised mainly of orchard properties, a few parcels of open land and there are approximately 28 dwellings. Most of these dwellings are on the outer rim of the project area to the east. There are 2 dwellings that are approximately 1100 to the north west and 1300 feet east form the site respectively. The next closest dwelling is approximately 1/2 mile west from the site. My two closest neighbors have deemed it necessary to circulate a petition against the proposed project, which is unfortunate. Their concerns are mainly emotional and are not based on facts. Because of this petition against the project, it has been necessary for me to circulate a petition for people that are not opposed to the project to sign. I have a fairly recent copy of the petition that is against this project and there are 28 signatures on my copy. There may be a few more by'the date of the hearing. Fourteen of the 28 signatures represent 9 of the 37 parcels in the project area. The people that own 2 of these 9 parcels have recently told me that they really don't care and would rather remain neutral. Of the remaining 14 signatures, 1 is a resident of Idaho, 1 told me recently that he would like his name removed from the petition and some of the remaining 12 have told me that they really don't care and that they are far enough away that it doesn't matter to them. In fact 2 of these remaining 12 have recently signed my petition saying they are not opposed to the project. In the past several days I have been circulating a petition that says, we the undersigned are not opposed to the placement of the tower. I have tried to make contact with as many of the property owners as possible. The petition, which is attached to this letter, has 26 signatures. Twenty of the 26 signatures represent 16 of the 28 parcels that did not sign the opposition's petition. Of the remaining 6 signatures, 2 are a couple of miles west of the project and just wanted to help, 2 wanted to show that they would like to remain neutral ( these people also signed the other petition ), 1 is a employee that works for the business at the project site and 1 is the owner of the company that does quite a bit, of aerial spraying in the area of the project. Of the remainder of the 28 parcels, there are 7 that I have been unable to contact, 4 either were not opposed to or had no opinion of the project and just didn't sign petitions and the last one of the parcel owners told me that they had sent a letter to the county stating that they were opposed because they thought the tower was going to be right up next to hwy 99 and would be blocking the view of a nice sign that a local 4H club had erected. I think that these people were misinformed as to where the tower was going to be placed. The above two paragraphs have a lot of numbers and may be rather contusing. The following breakdown shows the percentages. Of the 37 parcels: 1. 54.05% are not opposed to the project. 2. 24.33% are opposed to the project. 3. 18.92% were not contacted. 4. 2.7% was opposed but I believe was misinformed. Richard Price, the Butte County Ag Commissioner, came out to the project site recently, at my request. I wanted to show him that by placing the tower up close to our buildings it should mitigate the concerns about hindering aerial spraying in the area. I think that he is satisfied that these operations will not be hindered, especially in light of the fact that a major aerial applicator does not object to the project. Up until December of 1999 Butte County had a moratorium in place as to the construction of new towers so that an ordinance could be put in place that regulated where these towers could be placed. On December 7, 2000 the Butte County Board of Supervisors passed and adopted an ordinance amending chapter 24 of the Butte County Code adding section 24-262 WIRELESS March 21, 2000 Page 3 ` COMMUNICATION FACILITIES that would become effective in 30 days. The board passed this by a unanimous vote. This ordinance has some very strict guidelines that must be adhered to and it appears to me that this project conforms to all of the guidelines of this ordinance. We are all exposed to events and things that we may not like or agree with but the fact of the matter is, life must go on. Wireless communication is becoming very popular. Some of the people that I talked to said that we needed a tower in the area so that they would have a better signal. I'm sure that some of, if not most of the people in the project area have cellular phones. These phones are used in various ways, to conduct business, to use in case of emergency or just to call a friend. Being able to make a call to 911 from the site of a vehicle accident or a farm accident could possibly save the life of someone. Without a strong signal in the area, this might not be possible! It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me that some people who oppose these towers are the same people who expect their cellular phones to work without interruption! Based on the facts that: 1. The majority of the parcels in the project area are Not opposed to it, 2. The aerial applications will Not be hindered because of the close proximity to existing buildings and equipment that has to be avoided anyway, 3. The tower will be partially hidden from view by the existing buildings and equipment and will not be seen by very many people, especially when the trees just planted near the site reach maturity, 4. Some areas around and extending from the project site have dead spots and need a better signal, 5. There seem to be no known health risks associated with these towers, 6. There will be no apparent loss of agricultural property values around the site, I urge you to approve this permit application. The enclosures with this letter include a map of the project area, a legend for the map, a petition signed by people who are not opposed to the project and some recently taken photographs of the site area to hopefully put things in perspective for you. Sincerely, McClintock Family Trust/Shasta Vista Orchards Inc. Enclosures (4) T1 EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN TAPERED INSULATION Z W l lo �o WOO z xs N x� vi EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED RIGID INSULATION 4 Y m n mo�YN NEW PARTITION ON (SEE PIAN) INSULATION A I R T O U CH- N C= CV ' CONCRETE BLOCK GRAVEL _w LANA HWY L:�:� r� N U �— `./ L TJ E u STONEWALL D O � 255 PARKSHORE DRIVE � m8 a o� g , CONCRETE GAUGE METAL PROJECT F O L S O M CA. 95630 c LOCATION KEEFER RD 5 o GYPSUM BOARD STEEL PLYWOOD ACOUSTIC CEILING PANEL z ANRA RD OASIS MERIDIAN #,� CENT LIGHTING 3 ZONING DOCUMENTS FINI, WILSON LANDING RD ® WOOD FRAMING ® SUPPLY AIR DIFFUSER a = 4933 A N I TA ROAD W000 BLOCKING RETURN AIR REGISTER z CHICO, CALIFORNIA © ROOM NUMBER 11�1 GLASS !�1 DOOR NUMBER NORD HWY {1� START ppt� FOR CONSTRUCTION . Oi KEY NOTE NEW DENOTES CONTRACTOR PROVIDED 0 NEW DOOR AND INSTALLED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ® EXISTING DOOR ALIGN DETAIL/SECTION NUMBER A2 SHEET NUMBER NOT TO SCALE /►� t-� DETAIL/SECTION NUMBER . SHEET NUMBER NO S Y M B O L S V I C I N I T Y M A P AB ANCHOR BOLT GA GAUGE R RISER THAT PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF PROPERTY OWNER: PROJECT DATA AC ASPHALTIC CONCRETE GALV GALVANIZED READ REQUIRED SECTION 36, T.23 N., R.1 W., M.D.B. &M. IN BUTTE COUNTY, CAUFORNIA A/C AIR CONDITIONING GL GLASS RD ROOF DRAIN AND BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: MCCLINTOCK FAMILY TRUST ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 047-130-159 ACOUS. ADJ ACOUSTIC(AL) ADJUSTABLE GR GYP GRADE GYPSUM RM ROOM RD ROUGH OPENING BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHICH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 4471 NORD HWY , JURISDICTION:. BUTTE COUNTY A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR HC HOLLOW CORE RWO REDWOOD SECTION 36 BEARS NORTH 70'27'07"EAST, 2093.00 FEET; THENCE FROM CHICO, CA 95973 ARCH ARCHITECTURAL KM HOLLOW METAL SAID POINT OF BEGINNING RUN SOUTH 3'15'00'EAST, 50.00 FEET; CONTACT: BRUCE MCCLINTOCK OCCUPANCY CROUP: U (UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATIONS FAC IIIY) BD BOARD HORIZ HR HORIZONTAL H S SINK SC SOLID CORE THENCE SOUTH 86 45'00'WEST, 50.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH PHONE: (530) 895-8771 BLDG BLKG BUILDING BLOCKING. HT HEIGHT SCHED SCHEDULE 3'15'00'WEST, 50.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86'45'00'EAST, 50.00 FEET BUILDING AREA: 2500 SQUARE FEET BOT BSMT BOTTOM BASEMDIT 10 INSIDE DIMENSION SECT SECTION SHLVS SHELVES TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CURRENT ZONING: AGRICULTURE - 15 ACRE/A-15 INS INSULATION TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER EXISTING C CABs) COURSES CAIANETf S3 INT INTERIOR SHT SHEET ROADS TO THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA. APPLICANT: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN CLP pWN LINK `R J'DINT SECS SIMILAR TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS FOR UTIUTES AND COAXIAL CABLE RUNS, AS AIRTOUCH CELLULAR EXISTING USE: w ALMOND HULLING CLOS -CLOSET LAMINATED SS STAINLESS STEEL NECESSARY, FROM THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA TO THE EXISTING PROPOSED USE WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITE GLG CEIUNcLAM LAV LAVATORY STL STEEL SFOR STORAGE UTILITIES. 255 PARK SHORE DRIVE SCOPE OF WORK: CLR COL CLEAR LBS LT . POUNDS LIGHT STRUCr STRUCTURAL FOLSOM, CA 95630 SLAB CONCRETE SUSP SUSPENDED FIST UATKIN OF (9) PANELXANTENNAS. (3) PE OR CONST CONSTRUCTION MANUF MANUFACTURER OF ONE 150 SELF SUPPORT LATTICE TOWER CONT CORR CONTINUOUSNSTALLATION CORRIDOR MAXy �H MAXIMUM DISPENSER AROUND LEASED AREA INSTALLATION OF C' LINK AROUND MIN MINIMUM THK THICK AINFENCEU INSTALLATION OF (2) 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK GATES IN 10' SECTIONS (2 H DBL DOUBLE MISC MISCEUANEOUS TS TUBE STEEL DEMO DEMOLITION ML METAL LATH TYP. TYPICAL OFDRINKING DIM FOUNTAIN DIMENSION MO MASONRY OPENING LINO UNLESS 140TED ZONING DOCUMENTS � MACHINE SCREW ERWISE oR' � MET vcr VINYLSPECTRASITE DE TL COMPOSITION 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD, SUITE 440 NIC NO NOT IN CONTRACT NUMBER DIE VERT VERTICAL SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 T-1 TITLE SHEET Q(ISTING NTS NOT TO SCALE VG VERTICAL GRAIN' CONTACT: JIM SIMPSON ELEC ELECTRIC OA OVERALLTy/ W _ PHONE: 916 927-0642 ( ) A-1 SITE PLAN do ENLARGED SITE PLAN ELEV EQUIP EQUIPMENT T �G. ON CENTERwt WATER CLOSET FAX: (916) 927-2176 A-2 NORTH ELEVATION EXIST OP WPOSITE�Q�� Wppp W HEATER LS -1 SURVEY EXP EXPANSION NRH WATER RESISTANT EXT EXTERIOR PPAARTN PPAAR ITION WT WEIGHT TE SURVEYOR: FB FIAT BAR PLAS PLASTER FH RN FLAT HEAD FINISH(ED) PLASLAM PLY" PLASTIC LAMINATE PLYWOOD VON GELDERN ENGINEERING COMPANY FLOOR POC PONT OF CONNECTION 430 SECOND STREET FSS FINISH SURFS PROP PROPERTY AT YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA 95991 FT FOOT, FEET CHANNEL PHONE: (530) 673-6330 S H E E T I N D E X FIG FOOTING Q CENTERLINE FW FINISH WALL . MGUS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION PIR UK GR Demom oumm MR= lowSCM OWINITO AGRADIM ca" ABBREVIATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROJECT DIRECTORY T1 4 xL z Z W l lo �o WOO z xs N x� vi N � Y m n mo�YN N �N r� U u D O � � m8 a o� T1 4 xL z Z W l lo �o WOO z xs N x� T1 mm v s e PRE9 " faeCTl m A w t aeN1laFNl4 a O CL MOT[C OY tovlwnrt uvea I NAY NOT K WIIOOUfED N N a 01 PMT. 011 — . — NweCl. W—T INOl1D1 uMo 0 � u — ■rN.w d MOP w d exOM—m � ' I I u N O N., D U) Tm V z II ct C - - - - -'---------- _ \ \ -------------- ----------- -- I I I I I , ` I I \ \I z D G) 0 U) - m z IAN 41M NM RW ZONING DOCUMENTS Cd Nnbm -.4 — D*d Sift ASID PM Fie N. 0 Ai R T O U C H- Cellular P.0. BOX 19707 RAMC G 92713-9707 (714)222-7000 wwnecl Spect site 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD. SURE 440 SKRA18M G 95M Am. (918)w -m2 FAIL (918)927-2170 F,gneer/camYtue KK IIFRD OAE ME RE ,NT EE QPS CX (3) PROPOSED PROPOSED EQUIPMENT (TESCO 24-200) PROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/3 STRANDS PROPOSED GPS ANTENNA BARBED WIRE PROPOSED 10'-0* X 10' -6 - SLAB FOR EQUIPMENT RIS 96119IND LEVEL NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8' m 1'-O' MERIDIAN 4WAaMWD Ow NORTH ELEVATION ZONING DOCUMENTS XX X AS X Cd w", k.4 S+BrA w9w sma Sl*SPFD Pmft GRAPHIC SCALE 0 8 18 24 1 A i a T o u c H Cellular MWE rA 99271}9707 (714)222_7000 Nchld A . ' spect site 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD. SUITE "0 S1CPAW) , G ow - ROE (916)927-08.2 FAR (918)927-2178 F+gnes�CainitoN �r _ N%� WE RE E INT EE OPS CX SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD— SUITE 440 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CT INFORMATION. MERIDIAN 4933 ANITA ROAD CHICO. CA 95973 CURRENT ISSUE DATE F7JAN. 10, 20M 0 FOR: SITE SURVEY KV --'DA= DFSCRff7101F EIV s4a 111a0191®HOA A,A,� DI9IAIDO�6Y0I10®F ur,wa®�o•Dr9 }M Df81 AES o A E1>BNI A W"M II[ 0 00 = Aa" o A IiA01 PREPARED Bl: PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING DESIGN LAND SURVEYING wn GeldBm 430 SWWW ShM, Yt" CN% OditMIo95991 PH IN30-873-8330 - FA% 530-E7�9087 CONSULTANT: WN BY: CHK:=ITAPV. ' I 1 CENSURE EET nnE SITE SURVEY GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET NUMBER: •A^90w LS 1 MBlaNB9096 ------------- All 1 NBIg . I\\ ---- I \\ ----------- 11 \SO \ 1 1- I 047-130-159 I' 047.1130-11591 HOE® U 111111121 rA1aDD IeMMf $ TE 1 HIalFR 1 1 1 O SET NAL! SIEDH 11 I SOUM ff BLCO - �i.t6rsm • , � I i} I � 1 EPI IFlo— I Q. AMSL Ras 7TEE � EL -15627 I I I I I I Immwt • I �i19�•" F. At " S UR116 FASOEIIT r '' MOO SLY I ORIONAL PONB SET 1 — — — — — DETi1BER 4 1989 Y8S0 It 1. S9O06O7; � fw NOTE ZwX , PROD. LINE LEASE AREA HAS EDI RR PlCEBET 11E NOTE ORIGINAL sp BOUNDARY SHOWN IS BASED ON RECORDED INFORNATON . �gp 8,Im THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OVERALL SITE PLAN F. oo ® 1 ENLARGED SITE SCALE ® 2 1 1.- 30' 0 15 30 THAT PARCEL OF LAND LYING WMRM THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31L ATE OF SURVEY: DECEMBER 8 1999 THE LAND RETERRED TO HUM B SIM7ED IN THE STATE OF CA N=& T21 N. R1 L UK A M. N BITE WARY CNH1f8M AND ENO CESSDiH® AS FOULM , CON11Y OF BSM OESCREED AS MLOM B E 0 1 N N I N 0 AT A PONT FROM WHICH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SURVEYED BY OR UNDER THE DIRECTION OR BOL A WWUER, LS 3751 PARCEL 1. AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP DMTLED, 'BEIN0 SEOIION 35 EARS NORTH 73IOTJ8'FAST, 213654 FTiR THENCE FROM SAID POSIT OF PQRIIW OF THE TLE 1 4 SECIOI 34 TDW P 23 KM RANGE I ESR, MOB t Y. BRE UITI SAD PARRCELL MAP 1LL5 FIID N THE WIDE W TE EEMND RML SWIM, SMO FEST THENCE WEK 5600 IMP, THENCE AWOL BLOD FEEL TIENCE EAST, SOHO FEET 70 THE POR OF BE67MI4 LOCATED M THE COUNTY OF BUTTE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA _ RDAiEH ff THE C0WIY OF BRIE, STATE ff CAlEUSAq W OEEAIEER 24 1984 N DOW IM ff PARCEL MAP% AT PACES 46 AID 47. STE NAME MERIDIAN. . THE a". POINT WITH LATITUDE 3994833' AND LONGITUDE 121753'29' AND ELEVATION 165 FIST WAS ESTABLISHED BY GPS BY SPECT ASITE STE NUMBER: ' STE ADDRESS: 4933 ANITA ROAD CHICO, CA 95973 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHOWN IS BASED ON RECORDED INFORMATION . OWNER'S NAME McC.INTCH FAMILY TRUST LOCATION THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OWNER'S ADDRESS 4471 NOW HWY CHICO, CA 95973 OWN PROJECT AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION LATITUDE & LONGITUDE PARCEL NUMBER: 047-130-159 NET AREA OF B®ERLYNO PARL9(S) 15 ACRES AREAOF PRQECT AREA 25O SO. FT. 7JIDASSESSCR'S _NEI TOGETHEDESCRIBED WITH AID ETJESS OHET FTOSIIAIB ROADS ` TO THE ABOVE DES RBED LEASE AREAN9ES5 D SET 1/iRfBAR I CHICO T 0 6 E T N E R W I T H EASi10NS FOR VWTERUNS. AS AND 00" CABLE RUAS o HUB h TACK GROUND E EVA71ON: 185' IECISSAR1: FROM 7HE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA TO THE EGSTW UMES. 0 BENCHMARK BENCHMARK BM NAIL & SHINER NOTE 0 CAL: POOR. NOTHING FD OR SET 1' SOUTH OF WALL BLDG EL -16&86 THE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITY FACILITIES HAS NOT BEEN RESEARCHED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE RESPECTIVE POWER NOTES: ' UTILITY COMPANIES TO OBTAIN INFORMATION REGARDING EXACT DEPTHJOINT OF BURIAL AND HORIZONTAL LOCATION OF UTILITY LINES PRIOR TO f UP- POLE SP- SINCE POLE1. LATITUDE, LONdTUOE AND GROUND f]EVATON WAS ' CONSTRUCTION. THE SURVEYOR ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ESTABLISHED BY CPS BY SPECTRASTE DELIMEA71ON OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOR FOR THE ENSTENCE 2-0--a- FENCE 2. CONTOURS ARE AT 0.5' INTERVAL OF BURIED OBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT(S) LEGEND SITE DATA VICINITY MAP ISLE` N.T.S SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD— SUITE 440 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CT INFORMATION. MERIDIAN 4933 ANITA ROAD CHICO. CA 95973 CURRENT ISSUE DATE F7JAN. 10, 20M 0 FOR: SITE SURVEY KV --'DA= DFSCRff7101F EIV s4a 111a0191®HOA A,A,� DI9IAIDO�6Y0I10®F ur,wa®�o•Dr9 }M Df81 AES o A E1>BNI A W"M II[ 0 00 = Aa" o A IiA01 PREPARED Bl: PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING DESIGN LAND SURVEYING wn GeldBm 430 SWWW ShM, Yt" CN% OditMIo95991 PH IN30-873-8330 - FA% 530-E7�9087 CONSULTANT: WN BY: CHK:=ITAPV. ' I 1 CENSURE EET nnE SITE SURVEY GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET NUMBER: •A^90w LS 1 MBlaNB9096 r a- "vaf August 10, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 77, Butte. 16ount d " LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND. BEAUTY DIRECTOR'S OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-33E,7 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 www.buttecounty.net RE: Minor Use Permit, File No. MUP 00-08 Dear Mr. Simpson: The total costfor the processing of the above -referenced application which has been withdrawn, per your request, is $1,453.50. On January 7, 2000, a deposit was made in the amount of $350.00. The cost exceeded the deposit by $1,103.50. Below is a breakdown: . Deposit on 1-7-00, Receipt No. 18120 $ 350.00 Professional Planner $ 1,091.50 Mapping $ 88.50 Clerical S 273.50 Total $ 1,453.50 Total Amount Due & Payable $1,103.50 Please make a check payable to the Butte County Treasurer in the amount of $1,103.50 and remit it to the Department of Development Services, Planning Division at 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 within 30 calendar days. Should you have any questions, please contact Brian Larsen in this office Monday thru Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., at 538-7601. Sincerely, Thomas A. Parilo Director of Development Services TAP:jb LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DIVISION F'. wMV -DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 July 26, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Re: Minor Use Permit, AP 047-130-159, MUP 00-08 Dear James Simpson: At the regular meeting of the Planning representative on July 26, 2000, your request for withdrawal of your application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna. was accepted and approved. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Betts at this office between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Lynn Richardson Planning/Administrative Support Service Assistant Ir BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING MANAGER AGENDA REPORT - March 22, 2000 Applicant: AirTouch Cellular (c/o Zone date: June 5, 1985 SpectraSite) File #: MUP 00-08 Request: Minor Use Permit for a 150 - foot tall lattice tower, with nine attached panel antennas, one 6 -foot diameter microwave dish, and two equipment cabinets. G.P.: OFC (Orchard and Field Crops) Zoning: A-15 (Agricultural, 15 -acre minimum parcel size) APN: 047-130-159 Location: On the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. Parcel Size: 15 acres STAFF COMMENT: Project Planner: Stephen Betts Supervisor District: 4 Attachments: A. Conditions of Approval B. Vicinity Map C. General Plan/Zoning Map D. Memorandum from the Agricultural Commissioner, dated February 23, 2000 E. Letters/Petitions F. Radio -Frequency Analysis Report G. Photosimulations (three pages) H. Site Coverage Map without site I. Site Coverage Map with site J. Proposed Cellular Towers Map K. Initial Study L. Site Plan Staff recommends approval of the Minor Use Permit with conditions and findings. Residents in the area have submitted letters and petitions against the proposed communication facility. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SITE CHARACTERISTICS: This is an application for a Minor Use Permit to erect a 150 -foot high self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along. the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico. Nine (9) panel antennas will be mounted on the top of the tower and will extend two (2) feet above the tower, for an overall height of 152.17 feet above ground level. Each panel antenna is 17.3 inches x 52 inches (6.2 sq. ft.) in size. One six (6) foot diameter microwave dish,'facing northwards, will be mounted on the tower at the 120 -foot height. Two 32 inch x 34.5 inch (7.�5 sq. ft.) equipment cabinets will be installed at the base of the tower. One cabinet will contain ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 0 PAGE 1 ■ communications equipment and the other cabinet will contain gel -type batteries to provide emergency backup power. A small global positioning satellite antenna will be mounted on top of one of the cabinets. The cabinets will sit on top of a 9 -foot x 12.5 -foot (112.5 sq. ft.) concrete slab. The applicant does not propose to paint the tower or to place a light on the tower unless required by the County. The tower and cabinets will be located within a 50 -foot x 50 -foot (2,500 sq. ft.) lease area, which will be surrounded by a 6 -foot tall chain-link fence with three strands of barbed wire. The lease area will be covered with crushed rock. Access to the lease area will be via the existing driveway from Anita Road. The proposed communication facilitywill be unmanned, and does not require a water source or a sewage disposal system. Maintenance technicians will visit the site one to two times per month for inspection and preventative maintenance. The panel antennas mounted on the tower are highly directional, and will be aimed toward Highway 99. The total amount of power that could be emitted by the antennas on the tower will be 570 watts. According to the radio-frequency analysis on the proposed communication facility, the power density will be 2.1 UW/CM2 (microWatts/centimeter squared) at the base of the tower, 1.5 UW/CM2 100 feet from the tower, .047 uW/cm2 1,000 feet from the tower, and .0017 UW/CM2 one mile from the tower. These power densities are well within the maximum power density allowed by the FCC for cellular communication facilities. The six-foot diameter microwave dish mounted on the tower is very directional, and will emit approximately .25 watts. A FAA Obstacle Evaluation (O/E) analysis is not required for this project because the proposed monopole does not exceed 200 feet above ground level and is not within any protected airspace. The project site is located approximately 2.75 miles northwest of the nearest runway at the Chico Municipal Airport. Review of the project by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) is not necessary because the project site is not located within the adopted Chico Municipal Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The project site is zoned A-15 ( Agricultural, 15 -acre minimum parcel size) and has a General Plan Land Use designation of Orchard and Field Crops. Surrounding parcels range in size from 143 to 150 acres. Land uses on surrounding and nearby parcels include almond orchards, row crops, a small PG&E electrical substation, and dwellings at rural residential densities. Highway 99 is located approximately .3 miles east of the site. The 15 -acre project site is developed with a large almond hulling operation (Shasta Vista Huller), a small orchard, and fallow fields. Sewage disposal is handled by an on-site septic system, and domestic water is supplied by an on-site well. The project parcel is level. Keefer Slough is located on the south property line. The area immediately adjacent to Keefer Slough is within an "A" flood zone. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 2 ■ ANALYSIS: The project site is designated as Orchard and Field Crops by the Land Use Element Map of the General Plan, which allows public uses as secondary uses (note: cellular phone service providers are considered a public utility). Section 24-91 of Butte County Code states that wireless communication facilities are not permitted in the A-15 zone unless a Minor Use Permit is obtained, subject to the requirements of Section 24-262. The newly adopted Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance (Butte County Code Section 24- 262) allows a communication facility in the A-15 zone with approval of a Minor Use Permit, subject to numerous requirements. The project has been conditioned to meet the requirements of Section 24-262, including: • Submittal of bonds to cover the costs of a radio-frequency analysis and removal of the tower. • Radio-frequency emissions in excess of FCC standards are not allowed. • Facilities that are not in continual use for a period of six (6) months shall be considered to be abandoned. • Verification submitted annually attesting that the radio frequency radiation/electromagnetic frequency (RF/EMF) emitted by the facility conforms to safety standards set forth in FCC OET 65. Wireless communication facilities and towers can present a negative aesthetic impact due to their high visibility and metal construction. Approval of the communication facility, which includes a 150 -foot tall lattice tower, may result in a significant impact to scenic vistas and to the area's visual aesthetics. Many residents in the project area will be able to see the proposed tower. Residents of the area have already signed petitions protesting the tower, citing aesthetic impacts. The project site is located in an agricultural area that.consists mostly of large parcels developed with almond orchards and one dwelling unit per parcel. The area on the east side of Highway 99, approximately .3 miles from the site, consists of small residential parcels (Carriage Estates, Watson, Quail Run, and Keefer Ranch subdivisions), most of which are developed with a dwelling unit. Other than the almond hulling operation on the site, and 30 to 40 -foot tall power poles along roads, there are no other tall structures in the project area. The project area has very good and unobstructed views of the foothills and the Cascade mountain range to the east, including a view of Mt. Lassen. The residential parcels to the east of the proposed tower have unobstructed views to the west. The proposed 150 -foot tall tower may significantly affect these views. The project site itself is already aesthetically impacted by the existing almond hulling operation, which includes elevators that are approximately 70 feet tall, and a large building that is approximately 50 feet tall. The mature orchards located in the project area will help to screen the tower from some areas. The proposed tower will be visible from areas that lack mature orchards or tall vegetation. Photosimulations of the proposed tower, as viewed from Anita Road and from 0 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 3 ■ Highway 99, show that the tower will be a prominent feature of the landscape. The Butte County Fire Department/CDF recommends that the tower be painted alternating aviation red and white stripes and a red light installed on the top to make the tower more visible to low-flying CDF aircraft. The painting and the light will result in the tower being more visible to people on the ground, thus increasing the aesthetic impact. Ideally, the tower should be camouflaged to help it blend in with the background. Due to the height and shape of the proposed tower, this may not feasible. Painting the tower a color that blends in better with the background, such as a light white color, may result in the tower being less conspicuous, but the painting conflicts with the Fire Department/CDF request for red and white striping. In urban areas, cellular towers and monopoles are normally short because they provide phone service to a small area. These short towers can be camouflaged to help prevent aesthetic impacts. In urban areas, cellular antennas can be mounted on any number of existing structures, such as power poles, buildings, and billboard signs, which helps hide them from view. In rural areas, cellular towers and monopoles tend to be very tall to provide coverage to large areas. The only way to camouflage the proposed tower would be to design it as an agricultural structure, such as a silo. In addition to the present project, the County is also processing two other Minor Use Permit applications for tall cellular towers located north of the project site, one at 1.6 miles and the other at 3.3 miles. Both of the other sites are located adjacent to Highway 99. Both of these sites are located in a more rural area of the County than the present project, and there are also no residential subdivisions near these two sites. The site 3.3 miles from the project site has already received the support from the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner. The aesthetic impacts at the other two sites are believed to be less than the present project because there are fewer residents in these areas. Three tall cellular towers within a limited area may lead to significant cumulative aesthetic impacts to the area. Staff prefers only one tower be allowed in the area to prevent these aesthetic impacts. The applicant of the present project is currently working with the other applicants to determine if one tower is feasible to meet their needs. If another location is feasible, then the project will not be necessary. Staff recognizes that a new tower is needed in the area in order to provide digital cellular phone service to the Highway 99 corridor. In order to prevent the proposed tower from creating a significant aesthetic impact, several mitigation measures are recommended. One mitigation measure requires that the tower, including attached antennas, not be taller than the existing structures on the site. The tallest structure is approximately 70 feet above ground level. The mitigation measure requires the applicant to submit documentation to the Planning Division verifying the exact height of the tallest structure on the site, and submit revised site plans and building and tower elevations, verifying that the tower does not exceed the maximum allowable height. Another mitigation measure requires that the tower be located adjacent to the existing structures so that it appears to be a part of the structures. The last mitigation measure requires that the tower have a "stealth" design so that it looks similar to the existing structures. The applicant must submit revised elevations of the tower showing the new design to the Planning Division for review and approval. It should be noted that the limitation on the height of the tower may substantially decrease the applicant's intended service area. a BUTTE COUNT,,' PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 0 PAGE 4 ■ 0 • As already mentioned, residents in the project area have written letters and/or signed petitions opposing the placement of the tower on the project site. The area residents cite aesthetic impacts, the lowering of property values, and impacts to aerial applicators as the reason for their opposition. The recommended mitigation measures will prevent significant aesthetic and agricultural impacts, and may help to alleviate the concerns of the residents of the area. Agricultural uses established on the project site include a large almond hulling operation, a small orchard, and fallow fields. The soils on the project have a Soil Conservation Service land capability classification of II, which are considered prime agricultural soils (Butte County Master Environmental Assessment, Table LU -4). There is no Williamson Act contract affecting the property. The 2,500 sq. ft. lease area will be located in an area of the property that is not under agricultural production, and is located adjacent to the almond hulling operation. It is not anticipated that the project will have an impact on the almond hulling operation. Comments were received from the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner's Office regarding this project and it's potential impact to agricultural operations. According to the Agricultural Commissioner, the proposed 150 -foot tall tower presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices. The Commissioner points out that aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths and that the proposed tower could reduce the ability of aerial applicators to have flexibility in making applications. The Agricultural Commissioner does not support the proposed tower because it will adversely effect normal agricultural practices, create safety concerns, and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight required by aerial applicators. Several mitigation measures require that the proposed tower, and attached antennas, not exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the site (approximately 70 feet above ground level), and that the proposed tower be located adjacent to the existing structures. Implementation of these mitigation measures will prevent the tower from impacting agricultural resources because the tower will not be taller than the existing structures and the tower will be located adjacent to the structures. A radio-frequency analysis, signed by a radio-frequency engineer, states that the radio emissions from the proposed antennas will not exceed FCC standards. A structural analysis of the proposed tower, certified by a civil engineer, shows that the tower meets Uniform Building Code requirements and is capable of withstanding a 100 -MPH wind. The Butte County Environmental Health Department did not recommend any conditions because the communication facility does not require a water source or a sewage disposal system. The Public Works Department requires that an encroachment permit be obtained for all new or existing driveway approaches onto public roads, and that they be constructed to County standards. No new driveways onto public roads are proposed, but the applicant may be required to improve the existing site driveway road approach at Anita Road if that road approach does not meet the current County standard. The Butte County Building Division states that building permits are required for the ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 5 ■ 0 • communication facility. The Butte County Fire Department/CDF requests that the project comply with Public Resources Code 4290. The Butte County Fire Department/CDF also requests that the tower be painted alternating red and while stripes, and be lighted, to make the tower more visible to low-flying CDF aircraft. Staff is not recommending that the tower be striped or lighted because mitigation measures limit the height of the towerto that of the existing structures on the site and for the tower to be located directly adjacent to the existing buildings. With the inclusion of these mitigation measures, the proposed tower will not represent a hazard to low-flying aircraft. The Butte County Air Quality Management District requests that the applicant prevent fugitive dust emissions during construction activities. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Manager continue this project open for one month. The applicant should know by then if it will be feasible to colocate their antennas on one of the other two proposed towers in the project area. A one-month continuance is acceptable to the applicant. Should the applicant determine that colocation is not possible, the one month postponement will give the applicant time to revise the site plan and the tower elevation as required by Conditions 1, 2 and 3. Should the Planning Manager recommend approval at this time, the appropriate findings and conditions are found below. Should the Planning Manager recommend denial of this project at this time, staff recommends that the project be placed on the regular agenda of the Planning Commission, and not as a consent item, in order to prevent further delays in the decision making process. The findings for project denial are found below. ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Manager take one of the following actions: Continue the project open for one month which will allow the applicant to determine the feasibility of placing their antennas on one of the other proposed towers in the project area. Should the applicant determine that colocation is not possible, the one month continuance will give the applicant time to revise the site plans and the tower elevation as required by Conditions 1, 2 and 3. Project Approval Adopt a Negative Declaration with the following findings: A. Find that an Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Said study identified potential significant environmental effects and includes mitigation measures that would mitigate such effects below significant levels. B. The Planning Manager has independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to making its decision on ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 0 PAGE 6 0 0 the project, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgement of Butte County. II. The design of the proposed project improvements will not cause environmental damage to fish and wildlife or their habitat, and a "de minimus" exemption regarding impact to fish and wildlife or their habitat is recommended. The collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) and 14 CCR 753.5. is not recommended. III. Recommend approval to the Planning Commission of Minor Use Permit 00-08 for AirTouch Cellular, subject to the conditions found in Exhibit A and subject to the following findings: A. That the proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use is in accordance with the purpose of this Ordinance, the purpose of the zone in which the site is located, the Butte County General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the County because: Project conditions of approval have been applied to this project pursuant to the applicable requirements of Section 24-262 (Wireless Communication Facilities), the Butte County Public Works Department, and the Butte County Fire Department. The project is in accordance with the purpose of the zone in which the land lies and the Butte County General Plan because the project site is designated Agricultural Residential and is zoned A-15. The Agricultural Residential land use designation allows public utilities as Secondary Uses. The A-15 zone allows communication facilities with approval of a Minor Use Permit. B. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be compatible with, and will not adversely affect, or be detrimental to adjacent uses, residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources, with consideration given to: 1. Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density: Mitigation measures do not allow the tower to exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the property (approximately 70 feel tall), requires the tower to be located directly adjacent to an existing structure, and to be designed so that it fits in with the other structures on the site. 2. The availability of public facilities, services and utilities: Electrical power service is already established to the property and no additional services or utilities are required. 3. The harmful effect, if any, upon desirable neighborhood character: ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 0 PAGE 7 0 Mitigation measures do not allow the tower to exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the property (approximately 70 feet tall), require the tower to be located directly adjacent to an existing structure, and to be designed so that it fits in with the other structures on the site. The radio-frequency emissions from the proposed communication facility must meet FCC standards. 4. The generation of traffic and the capacity and physical character of surrounding streets: A very small amount of vehicle traffic will be generated during construction of the communication facility. The communications facility will be unmanned and only one to two site visits per month will be required after construction. 5. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of use or development which is proposed: The project site is 15 acres in size and is adequate in area for the proposed communication facility. The proposed communication facility will not significantly increase the amount of stormwater runoff from the site. 6. Any other relevant impact of the proposed use: The Planning Division has circulated the proposed communication facility application to County Agencies. Mitigation measures will prevent the proposed communication facility from having an impact to agricultural aerial operations and to low-flying CDF aircraft. C. The proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to properties oz improvements in the vicinity. D. The proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Chapter 24, Section 262, of the Butte County Code. or Project Denial Recommend denial to the Planning Commission of Minor Use Permit 00-08 for AirTouch Cellular, subject to the following findings: ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 8 ■ A. The proposed tower will create a significant aesthetic impact in the project area. B. The proposed tower will create a significant hazard to agricultural aerial applicators by extending into the airspace used by agricultural aircraft. C. The proposed tower has the potential to decrease agricultural production in the project area by limiting aerial spraying on the adjacent parcels. D. The proposed tower is not consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Butte County Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance (Butte County Code Section 24- 262.A) which states that the number of new towers in the County should be minimized, that new towers should be located so at to prevent adverse impacts to agriculture operations, and that Wireless Communication Facilities shall be designed and configured in a way that minimizes adverse visual impacts. K:\PROJECTS\UPM\M ERIDIAN.MUP\M ERI DIAN.RPT ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 9 ■ EXHIBIT A MINOR USE PERMIT BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: (Certified Mail Rec.) MUP 00-08 PERMIT NO. 047-130-159 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. Pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Butte andthe special conditions set forth below: AirTouch Cellular is hereby granted a Minor Use Permit in accordance with application filed: Minor Use Permit for a 150 -foot high lattice tower with nine (9) 6.2 sq. ft. panel antennas, one six (6) foot diameter microwave dish, two 7.5 sq. ft equipment cabinets, and a GPS antenna mounted on one of the cabinets. Failure to comply with the conditions specified herein as the basis for approval of application and issuance of Permit, constitutes cause for the revocation of said permit in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Butte County Zoning Ordinance, including Butte County Code Sec. 24-45.65. 2. Unless otherwise provided for in a special condition to this use permit, all conditions must be completed prior to or concurrently with the establishment of the granted use. The use granted by this permit must be established within 12 months of the date of approval. 3. Minor changes may be approved administratively by the Directors of Development Services, Environmental Health, or Public Works upon receipt of a substantiated written request by the applicant, or their respective designee. Prior to such approval, verification shall be made by each Department or Division that the modification is consistent with the application, fees paid and environmental determination as conditionally approved. Changes deemed to be major or significant in nature shall require a formal application for amendment. 4. If any use for which a Minor Use Permit has been granted is not established within one year of the date of approval, the permit shall become null and void and reapplication and a new permit shall be required to establish the use. A Minor Use Permit subject to lapse may be renewed for an additional period of up to one year, provided that sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration date, an application for renewal of the Minor Use Permit is filed with the Planning Division on the prescribed form and accompanied by the necessary data and fees. 5. The terms and conditions of this permit shall run with the land and shall be binding upon and be to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the Permittee. 0 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 10 0 6. Neither the applicant, nor any agent nor representative of the applicant shall intentionally omit or misrepresent any material fact in connection with the application. Any alleged material misrepresentation shall constitute grounds for the Director of Development Services to commence a revocation hearing, and, if proven to exist, shall constitute sufficient grounds to revoke a permit. Conditions of Approval: 1. The height of the tower, including attached antennas, shall not exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the site, which is approximately 70 feet above ground level. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit the applicant shall submit documentation to the Planning Division verifying the exact height of the tallest structure on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans and building and tower elevations, verifying that the tower does not exceed the maximum allowable height, to the Planning Division for review and approval. (Mitigation Measure) 2. The base of the tower shall be located adjacent to the existing structures on the site so that it appears to be a part of those structures. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans showing the location of the tower to the Planning Division for review and approval. (Mitigation Measure) 3. The tower shall incorporate a stealth design such that it fits in with the existing structures on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised elevations of the stealth design to the Planning Division for review and approval. (Mitigation Measure) 4. The Facility must meet or fall within current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, the County and any other agency of the Federal or State government with the authority to regulate such Facilities. The installation of the Facility shall comply with all applicable building and electrical codes. The Facility operator shall submit certification from a registered structural engineer to the Building Division, that all associated monopoles and towers in excess of thirty (30) feet in height will withstand sustained winds as required by the Uniform Building Code. 6. No advertising or display shall be permitted on the Facility. 7. The placement of any antenna shall not adversely affect any on-site sewage disposal system or its repair area without written approval from the Division of Environmental Health. 8. The installation of the Facility shall not violate any existing deed restrictions. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 0 PAGE I I ■ 9. The Facility shall have a twelve (12) foot wide all-weather access to a publicly maintained road capable of supporting a forty thousand (40,000) pound fire apparatus with fifteen (15) feet of vertical clearance. 10. There shall be no outdoor vehicle or equipment storage except for emergency purposes. 11. The Facility shall fall within current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, and any other State and/or Federal agency with the authority to regulate such Facility. If such standards and regulations are changed, the property owner or responsible party shall bring the Facility into compliance with such revised standards and regulations within ninety (90) days of the effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a more stringent compliance schedule is mandated by the controlling agency. 12. The Facility or combination of the Facilities on the site shall generate, at any time, electromagnetic frequency radiation (EMF) or radio frequency radiation (RF) in excess of the FCC adopted standards for human exposure, as amended over time. 13. If it is found that the Facility is or will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of persons working or residing near such facility, then the service provider(s) and property owner shall be jointly and solely responsible for the removal, adjustment, or replacement of the Facility. In no case shall the Facility remain in operation if it is found to create a hazard to health, safety, and welfare. The Facility shall not be found to create a hazard to health, safety, or welfare as a result of EMF or RF emissions from the Facility so long as it meets all current standards established by the FCC, pursuant to FCC OET 65. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the installation of the Facility, the applicant shall post a performance security in an amount and form determined by the Director of Development Services that is sufficient to cover the cost of a one-time test by a radio frequency consultant selected by the County, sufficient to determine whether the Facility's RF/EMF emissions comply with FCC standards. If the Facility's emissions are determined to exceed FCC standards, the applicant is required to pay for such other tests and other corrective measures as are necessary to establish compliance with FCC OET 65 and its successors and such noncompliance shall constitute sufficient grounds to commence a permit revocation hearing which may lead to permit revocation. The applicant shall cooperate in all respects with the County's consultant to assist the consultant to reach his/her conclusion. 14. All Facilities that are not in continual use for a period of six (6) months shall be considered abandoned. Abandoned Facilities are hereby designated as unlawful and as public nuisances, requiring no amortization period. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Facility, the applicant shall obtain a detailed estimate from an appropriate building industry business or contractor for the removal of the Facility, including the proper disposal of all removed materials and the return of site to its original condition. A copy of the estimate shall be submitted to the Building Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the installation of the Facility, the applicant shall post a performance security in an amount and form determined by the Director of Development Services that is sufficient to cover the cost of removal of the ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANN[NG COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 12 ■ Facility, proper disposal of all removed materials, and return of the site to its original condition in the event that such Facility is abandoned, or if the permit has been terminated for violation of its conditions by the County after hearing, or has expired, and after notice has been given to the owner/operator by the County, no application for renewal has been filed. If the Director of Development Services determines that the Facility is abandoned, the applicant may be required to remove all equipment belonging to the applicant from the premises and return the site to its original condition within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of notice to abate. If such Facility is not removed and the site returned to its original condition within thirty (30) days, the County may remove the Facility at the applicant's and/or land owner's joint and several expense. 15. All ground level support Facilities shall be painted and/or screened from view with adequate landscaping appropriate to the surrounding environment. All aesthetic treatments, including landscaping shall be maintained as approved for the life of the Facility. 16. The Facility may not encroach into, under, over, above, or upon any public street in the unincorporated area of the County in the absence of a valid encroachment permit from the County. 17. The owner/operator of the Facility shall annually submit a written verification, attested to under penalty of perjury, signed by both the owner/operator and an FCC licensee in the employ of or retained by the owner/operator, that the radio frequency radiation/electromagnetic frequency (RF/EMF) emitted by the facility conforms to safety standards set forth in FCC OET 65. The reports prepared for the Facility shall conform to reporting requirements set by the FCC and the County. The reports shall be submitted to the Planning Division and the Building Division no later than January 31 of each year. 18. The Facility shall be secured at all times to prevent access by the public. 19. Applicant shall implement measures to prevent fugitive dust emissions during all construction activities. 20. Prior to use of this project, the applicant shall contact the Planning Division for a field inspection to verify all conditions of approval and ordinance requirements have been met. 21. Applicant must also comply with all other applicable State and local statutes, ordinances and regulations. 10-IMPI I• •l 22. Obtain the necessary building permits from the Building Division. 23. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall contact the Public Works Department to determine if an encroachment permit is required for the existing site driveway ■ BL:TTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 13 ■ 0 0 approach onto Anita Road, and obtain an encroachment permit if required. The Public Works Department shall also determine if the driveway approach to Anita Road meets current County standards. The applicant shall construct a standard County road approach, as specified in County Improvement Standards, for the driveway road approach onto Anita Road prior to issuance of building permits if that road approach does, not meet current County standard. Any new driveway approaches onto Anita Road will require encroachment permits to be obtained and all new driveway approaches constructed to County standards, as specified in County Improvement Standards. Fire Department/CDF: 26. Construction, installation or development of structures or facilities on the parcel, including as a minimum, driveway standards, building setbacks, and addressing, shall comply with the latest Fire Safe Regulations of Butte County, Public Resources Code 4290, and all other applicable State and County codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of application for improvement permits. I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I have read the foregoing conditions, that they are in fact the conditions which were imposed upon the granting of this use permit, and that I agree to abide fully by said conditions. Dated: Applicant NOTE: Issuance of this Use Permit does not waive requirement of obtaining Building and Health Department permits before starting construction, nor does it waive any other requirements. Butte County Planning Commission Chairman CC: Land Development Division Building Division . Environmental Health Department Butte County Fire Department/CDF Assessor's Office ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ■ PAGE 14 ■ L & m I I IkA Ke A- . .00 :N a A-40 m " R-1 Project Location -" A-10 A-40 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Feec BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING MANAGER N; Applicant: AirTouch Cellelar/SpectraSite Owner: Shasta Vista Orchards, Inc. Hearing Date: March 22, 2000 @ 9:30 a.m Existing Zone: A-40 (Agricultural, 40 acre min.) Supervisorial Request: Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel District: # 4 antennas, a 9 sq. & equipment cabint, and GPS antenna Assessor Parcel No: 047-130-159 File: 00-08 r r March 21, 2000,y 3 x 1sn -.: � ..x.r x,... t.l� t,. ? ..,.-;•Butte CountyTlannM& -om msston �,_->i 25 County Center Drive Oroville, California 95965 Ladies and Gentlemen: L • 4933 Anita Road Chico, California 95973 l tt ^• 9 ...'�...7 t:h '. � Asn �l�..ik x��ty rh..t'.�tiN�.>tt �.i 7 Subject Airtouch Cellular c/o Spectrasite communications tower at 4933 Mita Road APN 047-130-159 The purpose of this letter is to recommend approval of this project. My family owns and operates the almond hulling complex ( Shasta Vista Almond Huller) at the site of the proposed project. We have been doing business at this site since 1977. We have been living and farming in this area north of Chico since 1956. We do business with some of the people and are acquainted with most of the people in the project area. Last summer when Spectrasite contacted us about leasing a small portion of our property for a cellular tower, we told them that we were interested. When the representative came to look at our property I suggested to him that the best place to put the tower was in the north east corner of the property, next to Anita road because it was close to the power lines and the phone lines. He said that because some people did not like to look at the towers so close to the road he would prefer to put it behind our buildings So we selected a spot behind one of our buildings that is approximately 40 feet tall. By puttug tt in this location it will be, at least partially concealed from view. This seemed like a good plan After life left I talked to a couple of the neighbors about the tower and at the time they didn't seem'to haven problem with it. I even called the owner of the company that does most of the aerial spraying of the orchards in the area and he said that he did not have a problem with the tower. r Between last summer and the present, a couple of our neighbors have decided they are opposed to the 'p, acement of the tower at this site for various reasons. There seems to be 3 main reasons that they are concerned with. 1. Health risk. Now, it would seem to me that if there were a health risk from these towers, they would not be allowed to be placed anywhere. I have done quite a bit of research and have not found anything indicating that there is a health risk form the antennas on these towers, unless one was to go up on the tower and stand right in front of the antenna. I for one would be the first one to object to the tower if there was a risk because I spend most of my time on the property! 2. A loss of property value. I have talked to a loan officer and an appraiser at the local Farm Credit agency in Chico and they indicated that when farm property is appraised, the appraisal is based on the income that the property produces. Therefore the parcels near the site would not be impacted. In fact the appraiser said that the property�at the site would be worth more because of the income. from the tower. 3. Having to look at the tower. In our daily travels we all have to put up with things such as power poles, endless miles of wir< s hanging from these poles, billboards, road signs, and the list goes on and on. This tower will be behind some existing buildings and equipment that will, at least, block the lower portion from view. And from the road one will hardly notice it, that is unless they take their eyes off of the road to look at it! Placing the tower at this site makes a lot more sense than putting them right along the highway. The county has sent notices of the hearing on this project to 37 parcels around the project site, so that any concerns by these owners may be addressed at the scheduled hearing. The attached map of the project area ( exhibit A ) along with the map legend ( exhibit B ) shows the project area inside the black circle. This circle has a radius of .8 miles from the tower site and includes most of the 37 parcels that notices were sent to. It would seem to me that any person outside this circle could certainly comment on the project but their comments should not carry much weight because they are not really 6se enough for it matter to them. . - % 2 1 2000 .. '........................ . BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION v • w • March 21, 2000 Page 2 The project area is zoned A40 and is comprised mainly of orchard properties, a few parcels of open land and there are approximately 28 dwellings. Most of these dwellings are on the outer rim of the project area to the east. There are 2 dwellings that are approximately 1100 to the north west and 1300 feet east form the site respectively. The next closest dwelling is approximately'' V2 mile west from the site. My two closest neighbors have deemed it necessary to circulate a petition against the proposed project, which is unfortunate. Their concerns are mainly emotional and are not based on facts. Because of this petition against the project, it has been necessary for me to circulate a petition for people that are not opposed to the project to sign. I have a fairly recent copy of the petition that is against this project and there are 28 signatures on my copy. There may be a few more by the date of the hearing. Fourteen of the 28 signatures represent 9 of the 37 parcels in the project area. The people that own 2 of these 9 parcels have recently told me that they really don't care and would rather remain neutral. Of the remaining 14 signatures, 1 is a resident of Idaho, 1 told me recently that he would like his name removed from the petition and some of the remaining 12 have told me that they really don't care and that they are far enough away that it doesn't matter to them. In fact 2 of these remaining 12 have recently signed my petition saying they are not opposed to the project. In the past several days I have been circulating a petition that says, we the undersigned are not opposed to the placement of the tower. I have tried to make contact with as many of the property owners as possible. The petition, which is attached to this letter, has 26 signatures. Twenty of the 26 signatures represent 16 of the 28 parcels that did not sign the opposition's petition. Of the remaining 6 signatures, 2 are a couple of miles west of the project and just wanted to help, 2 wanted to show that they would like to remain neutral ( these people also signed the other petition ), 1 is a employee that works for the business at the project site and 1 is the owner of the company that does quite a bit of aerial spraying in the area of the project. Of the remainder of the 28 parcels, there are 7 that I have been unable to contact, 4 either were not opposed to or had no opinion of the project and just didn't sign petitions and the last one of the parcel owners told me that they had sent a letter to the county stating that they were opposed because they thought the tower was going to be right up next to hwy 99 and would be blocking the view of a nice sign that a local 4H club had erected. I think that these people were misinformed as to where the tower was going to be placed. The above two paragraphs have a lot of numbers and may be rather confusing. The following breakdown shows the percentages. Of the 37 parcels: 1. 54.05% are not opposed to the project. 2. 24.33% are opposed to the project. 3. 18.92% were not contacted. 4. 2.7% was opposed but I believe was misinformed. Richard Price, the Butte County Ag Commissioner, came out to the project site recently, at my request. I wanted to show him that by placing the tower up close to our buildings it should mitigate the concerns about hindering aerial spraying in the area. I think that he is satisfied that these operations will not be hindered, especially in light of the fact that a major aerial applicator does not object to the project. Up until December of 1999 Butte County had a moratorium in place as to the construction of new towers so that an ordinance could be put in place that regulated where these towers could be placed. On December 7, 2000 the Butte County Board of Supervisors'passed and adopted an ordinance amending chapter 24 of the Butte County Code adding section 24-262 WIRELESS E March 21, 2000 Page 3 COMMUNICATION FACILITIES that would become effective in 30 days. The board passed this by a unanimous vote. This ordinance has some very strict guidelines that must be adhered to and it appears to me that this project conforms to all of the guidelines of this ordinance. We are all exposed to events and things that we may not like or agree with but the fact of the matter is, life must go on. Wireless communication is becoming very popular. Some of the people that I talked to said that we needed a tower in the area so that they would have a better signal. I'm sure that some of, if not most of the people in the project area have cellular phones. These phones are used in various ways, to conduct business, to use in case of emergency or just to call a friend. Being able to make a call to 911 from the site of a vehicle accident or a farm accident could possibly save the life of someone. Without a strong signal in the area, this might not be possible! It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me that some people who oppose these towers are the same people who expect their cellular phones to work without interruption! Based on the facts that: 1. The majority of the parcels in the project area are Not opposed to it, 2. The aerial applications will Not be hindered because of the close proximity to existing buildings and equipment that has to be avoided anyway, 3. The tower will be partially hidden from view by the existing buildings and equipment and will not be seen by very many people, especially when the trees just planted near the site reach maturity, 4. Some areas around and extending from the project site have dead spots and need a better signal, 5. There seem to be no known health risks associated with these towers, 6. There will be no apparent loss of agricultural property values around the site, I urge you to approve this permit application. The enclosures with this letter include a map of the project area, a legend for the map, a petition signed by people who are not opposed to the project and some recently taken photographs of the site area to hopefully put things in perspective for you. Sincerely,. McClintock Family Trust/Shasta Vista Orchards Inc. Enclosures (4) RECEIVED MAR 11 2000 We the undersigned are not opposed to the placement of a cellular telephone t , � I N at 4933 Anita Road, Chico, California 95973 Butte County AP # 047-1 1 Name Address '-�X73 -23 ;I ,. 9q 9 1)1u. X59"� j We the undersigned are not opposed to the placement of a cellular telephone transmission tower at 4933 Anita Road, Chico, California 95973 Butte County AP # 047-130-159 Name 9Address / 1. �� �,CC• � I � v C-� 4. �1�Gt,1.�..Ci,� l �✓,C�� `� -3 3 n %i+ 1M L A L -d ;n d r 2c'7 C C aa - 73 3 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. s 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. ,1 William Hauselt 5104476214 P.01 We the undersigned are not opposed to the placement of a cellular telephone tra�ismissiotl tower at 4933 Anita Road, Chico, California 95973 Butte �`0urity AP # 047-130-159. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 12. 13. , 14. 25. 16. 19. 20. TO MnHJ (TAU -dal -[H H I L T A H I cHuc T J /ore OAC'n n : •nT nfin7 r.T /C11 Proposed Cellular Towers , in the North County Area `o 2 Mees N Project Location 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Fed BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING MANAGER Applicant: AirTouch Cellelar/SpectraSite Owner: Shasta Vista Orchards, Inc. Hearing Date: March 22, 2000 @ 9:30 a.m Existing Zone: A-40 (Agricultural, 40 acre min.) N Supervisorial Request: Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel District # 4 antennas, a 9 sq. ft. equipment cabint, and GPS antennaAssessor Parcel No: 047-130-159 File: 00-08 . j February 27, 2000 Mary Anne Houx Butte County Supervisor 196 Memorial Way Chico, CA 95926 Dear Mary Anne: MAJOR PROBLEM #1: MARY ANNE HOUX l ow\ r Supervisor - District 3 RE C° a � o MAR 0 196 MEMORIAL WAY o 0 CHICO, CALIFORNIA 95926 �O (530) 891-2800 BUTTE CO (530) 891-2877 FAX PLANNING DIVISION We are writing this letter because we are extremely concerned about the possible placement of an AirTouch Cellular tower near our home and ranch on Anita Road, north of Chico. The tower is proposed at 4933 Anita Road, APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08). We live at 5032 Anita (about a thousand feet or so away). We believe that we would be the closest residents to the tower. Contrary to the findings developed by the AirTouch Cellular Site Analysis Paper, we feel that a tower of this nature and size will seriously infract our viewshed.. We will have to look at it through our front -window for the remainder of our lives since this is our family farm and moving away isn't an option. We feel that our property values will be damaged. A project of this type can't help but to negatively impact these values and our property's desirability. We are concerned about health hazards. They are unknown at this time but pose a possible threat. One more issue is that of the safety and availability of aerial applicators that we and our neighbors use to spray our orchards. They have already told us of the tower's hazards to their planes and pilots. This interferes with the husbandry of our orchards (conversation with Dutch Wall, Chico Aerial Applicators 2/27/00). This is a residential as well as an agricultural' area. The property owner to whom this proposed tower is contracted' does not live in this area (he - won't have to look at it). MAR uLUUU We wish that' this 15 acre parcel had been included in the 5 or 10 acre ordinance provision making it restricted also. To allow these towers to pop- up on older remaining small parcels in agricultural zones (A-40) interferes with ag practices. For us this seems to be a double hit. If it goes through, our living room will have a blinking red light cast to it and the contractors we use to help us increase production -will be hesitant to help us. MAJOR PROBLEM #2: During the process of looking into this first cell tower, we saw a map denoting another possible cell tower. This second one is from a .different company....ATT, and is to be placed less than,a mile north of the first one. I This second tower is again located in orchard ground, is in direct line with the end of our duster strip, (same concerns about aviation), and is directly adjacent to our waterfowl preserve. This preserve has been in existence for thirty-five years, and has provided nesting habitat and a resting place. for migratory waterfowl. If this second tower goes in, the whole of this investment, and its value to wildlife will be lost. Mary Anne, we need your help. Kevin Rice has kept us up to date on your efforts to acquaint Tom Parilo and Richard Price with this situation. Anything you can do to help us with this situation will be very greatly appreciated. S' erely, Richard and Barbara Wallace 5032 Anita Rd. Chico, CA 05073 342-9038 ATC Site 8,732 foot rin ,;A rp--� E Site on A LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY 7 OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 - WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA. JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division r Water Division V Date: February 23, 2000 To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price; Agricultural Commissioner A� Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150-foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99.on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low .flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. ' In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this -tower at this, site. cc. Air Touch Cellular All of the people who appear on this list are landowners in the immediate area of the proposed cellular tower. Virtually every landow Road between Hwy 99 and Hamilner on Anita ton Nord Cana Hwy signed this. Please vote NO -on this cellular tower. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Petition Petition against the. erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please wri your Name and Address I. f7 -S 7_3 2. C4,- d.. Lf h-13 17--t+ 3.e o '5�o9 % 47— LZ 3 5. .2 0- 7. r -603Z 40�95 3 14. s. �2 Old 06 /a Z!Ez 17. 18. zov �'ettrdsc e(���d �j`i3 19.. 70 GJ &,3 0,h(c a C 20. S 7� C'� C6:�S773 a Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico CalHornia) Please write your Name and Address 1 f� l �' �2��a do 02 /�lY/7 .21 c y-3 —1 -5 -an 1A o 271 C le 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. s Legend For Map of Airtouch Tower Site AP#047-130-159 4933 Anita Road The black circle has a radius of .8 miles from the proposed project and has a area of 2.01 sq miles. The majority of the parcels that were sent notices of the public hearing are in this area. The Green Svmbols Parcels or addresses that signed the petition stating that they were not opposed to the project. . The Yellow Symbols Parcels or addresses that indicated that they had no opposition to or no opinion of the project but were not inclined to sign a petition. The Blue Symbols ; Parcels or addresses that indicated that -they really didn't care and would just as soon remain neutral. ( Some of these people may have signed the petition in opposition to the project because of extenuating circumstances and would really like to remain neutral The Red Symbols Parcels or addresses that are opposed to the project. The Three Blue Lines are an indication of the approximate distance to the'nearest dwellings. RECEIVED MAR 21 2000 PLANNING DIIVISION Looking south east from Anita Road Ls L< 1clo� J } j l orcry 5 tal a RECEIVED - MAR 2120 T; e'BiATE COUNTY ISIN "LANNING �` i U z• . t� _n CrySta�10(follco Another'shot looking south east from Anita Road 'r1've ,tRECEIVED MAR 7212000 u 11t . %/�•BU, TE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION C(YS ., tof ful'c� //") �Alf � Recently planted almond trees. When these trees reach maturity they will block the view of the complex. crysta, Nc h'Ye f U�4L0`0P/ ill�ilil%� i r. 01 C �i til F (✓��s .RECEIVED MAR t1�;ru� BUTTS COUNTY PT ANNING DIVISION t' t I o � � a � x t? "4 r a'Aj i • • gat � O )or ND tT� RECEDE- These 3 .views are the rear of the hulling BUTTE COUNTY complex pLONINO DIVISION pal �d r•:i �rG 01 .4 Rrnl'+ z --- 01 L�? ON A W� W CWA v� N) c,,, ©4 22 -1 O �1 O v NNANN —7AU 542 os �r � ,��'�+ ,�r n�.i �' �;-� -_ � ; 7 � � ��: __ fs �� t s ,� ',� .. r' � 1 ��,,�. — � �i � r :: � � r _ .� _ �e '. � b�%% "� i�� - �� r r 1, v `S ,�, I .� __ -_ ;�' ..t:� i� � .��+ 3��• a ii _. f , 4 � 'i %a S — � '� � _ � .1 _ _� �� .. —_�i �> � .. r � ��, �'� �— _, I,k � Ili �P ,i:�� li � � •, ��5� f Gblvw ry SRCEIVED fico. r '' �o MAR 2 1 200 $UTTE COUNTY + PLANNING DIVISION r�y�V L �rY� ,�o. �` .� Eli �16 ir.. 0 dorr' RECEIVED Two views of hulling complex looking to MAR 2 12-000 ..the south west. �A *BUTTE COUNTY ' PLANNING DIVISION W I F-� C t•J A OP / MI: , � 4� \, }\ (� � 4� \, }\ (� %%10 rc ove Stoll �tjrot 9� i(AEGEIVED + MAR 12000 z z BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION s�a� rC(� � l C: CO �� fn �Cc �. staff '�zf//` Front entrance to Hulling Complex looking south east with House and out buildings at 4873 Anita Road which is approx 1300 ft 'from tower site, in the background `v. i Z Cq 4 P:l RECEIVED MAR 21 2000 l BUTTE COUNTY- PLANNINGDIVIBION� )` ., V rk t. GolofT V PG&E Sub Station approx 2000 ft east of project site House in background is 4873 "Anita Road approx 1300 ft east of project site de ASLI y :CJ U t••? I �Y) �- tl RECEIVED MAR 21 200 3 (Y a BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION "��O �.y �))).'r1 .il .. 4� }L i:'�i e� 5� i_�::� �' , CVI-( RECEIVED Going west on Anita Road �QuC MAR 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION q CV �t i r'_� f4 -W*11 Shasta Vista Almond Huller Complex at 4933 Anita Road BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION s, 1 tr01jcoy RECEIVED EIVED MAR 2.1 2MO RECP41 ED MAP, 0 6- 20001 BUTTE PLANNING DIVISION On the petition The people who have signed this petition, are land owners who live on Anita Road; -and surrounding areas. All of the people who I have talked with in getting these signatures are against this placement. They too are concerned that the location of this tower will preclude their ability to manage their land. It. is the buzz of the neighborhood. Please ' consider this when you make the decision on this issue. • February 29, 2000 Tom Parilo Director of Development Services #7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Parilo: • r. We are writing this .letter because of our. concerns with the placement of an AirTouch Cellular (150 foot high tower), .3 miles west ,of Highway 99 at 4933 Anita Road, Chico APN 047-130-159) (SB) (MUP 00-08). The tower would be a little over 1,100 feet from my house at 4873 Anita Road, Chico. We own and farm 140 acres of almonds. Our property borders all three sides of this .15 acre parcel at 4933 Anita Road. We feel the safety of aerial applicators is a big concern. Their ability to make an efficient spray application on our little trees with a 150 foot tower in the flight path is not possible. Everyone who lives between Hamilton Nord Cana Highway and Highway 99 on Anita Road has signed a petition against this proposed cell tower site. We all feel that this is a residential as well as agricultural area. We are concerned there will be a negative impact on our property values. The property owner of this proposed cell tower site lives in another area where his property won't be affected by these issues. Please vote no on this tower proposal. Sincerely, Kevin Rice Cindy Villa 4873 Anita Road Chico, CA 95973 893-0167 .DECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUTTECOUNTY PLANNING DIVISION ECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUTTE COUNTY Petition PLANNING DIVISION, ' Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Pleasewrit� your Name and Address S. S. 14.� ,D- 15. /1) u,�1111&116� 1 S'77- `ly -13 c -t', C-- 5-;� O` o°� .90 C�hc-e, q0(73 0 7A (I./P C7 �5W 1 2 �Z5� � �. %��. ��c'� OW, 1r----973 18Z 2/ 7e, C' 73 • 0 Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address -, Ai ).( D2laa -do hLILA, b Y 4. b. 6. 7. 8. - 9. 15. 16. 18. 20 > Mox-m-1 .21 23.E 24.� 25. V N c ��- �"�2 q 44 C44% 4 i [ Gti4�6 flu. AO- AutrA. Rtl, y T3 r 27. 28. 29. 30. TT Site Nl— I AirTouch Site Room. "J'A e r LL: Date: February 23, 2000 F '6.tte nwa LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES a WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA. JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division Water Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99 on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular Y ' ._... )Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) COUNTY OF BUTTE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND: 1. Name of Proponent: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite) 2. Address: 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440, Sacramento, CA 95825 Phone: (916) 927- 0642 3. Name of Proposal: N/A 4. Type of Project: Minor Use Permit 5. Project Description: This is an application for a Minor Use Permit to erect a 150 -foot high self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico. Nine (9) panel antennas will be mounted on the top of the tower and will extend two (2) feet above the tower, for an overall height of 152.17 feet above ground level. Each antenna is 17.3" x 52" (6.2 sq. ft.) in size. One six (6) foot diameter microwave dish, facing northwards, will be mounted at the 120 - foot height. Two 32" X 34.5" (7.5 sq. ft.) equipment cabinets will be installed at the base of the tower. One cabinet will contain communications equipment and the other cabinet will contain gel -type batteries to provide emergency backup power. A small global positioning satellite antenna will be mounted on top of one of the cabinets. The cabinets will sit on top of a 9'x 12.5'(112.5 sq. ft.) concrete slab. The applicant does not propose to paint the tower or to place a light on the tower unless required. to do so by the County. The tower and cabinets will be located within a 50'x 50'(2,500 sq. ft.) lease area, which will be surrounded by a 6 -foot tall chain-link fence with three strands of barbed wire. The lease area will be covered with crushed rock. Access to the lease area will be via the existing driveway from Anita Road. The proposed communication facility will be unmanned, and does not require a water source or a sewage disposal system. Maintenance technicians will visit the site one to two times per month for inspection and preventative maintenance. The tower and all ancillary equipment are hereafter referred to as the "communication facility." I 6. Location of property: On the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anita Road, north of Chico. 7. Setting: The project site is zoned A-15 ( Agricultural, 15 -acre minimum parcel size) and has a General Plan Land Use designation of Orchard and Field Crops. Surrounding parcels range in size from 143 to 150 acres. Land uses on surrounding and nearby parcels include almond ti ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 1 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) i orchards, row crops, a small PG&E electrical substation, and dwellings at rural residential densities. The 15 -acre project site is developed with a large almond hulling operation (Shasta Vista Huller), a small orchard, and fallow fields. Sewage disposal is handled by an on-site septic system, and domestic water is supplied by an on-site well. The project parcel is level. Keefer Slough is located on the south property line. The area immediately adjacent to Keefer Slough is within an "A" flood zone. 8. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 047-130-159 9. Date Checklist Submitted: March 1, 2000 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Butte County Building Division, Butte County Public Works Department, Butte County Fire Department/CDF. II. 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. 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 revisions have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant -impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been ❑ adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,' and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 2 • ! Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Prepared by: Stephen Betts, Associate Planner vi wed by: dy Wilson, Principal Planner 3-1-00 ' Date 3-�-�� Date. III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ® Aesthetics ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ® Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Noise ❑ Population VHousing ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on -project -specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants based on a project -specific screening analysis.) 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially, significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ M r' ,Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. C) Mitigation Measures: For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any,. to reduce the impact to less than significant. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 4 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic'resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building`s within a state scenic highway? X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? �t d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Response: a. - d. Wireless communication facilities and towers can present a negative aesthetic impact due to their high visibility and metal construction. Approval of the communication facility, which includes a 150 -foot tall lattice tower, may result in a significant impact to scenic vistas and to the area's visual aesthetics. Many residents in the project area may be able to see the proposed tower. Residents of the area have already signed petitions protesting the tower, citing aesthetic impacts. The project site is located in an agricultural area that consists mostly of large parcels developed with almond orchards and one dwelling unit per parcel. The area on the east side of Highway 99, approximately .3 miles from the site, consists of small residential parcels (Carriage Estates, Watson, Quail Run, and Keefer Ranch subdivisions), most of which are developed with a dwelling unit. Other than,the almond hulling operation on the site, and 30 to 40 -foot tall power poles along roads, there are no other tall structures in the project area. The project area has very good and unobstructed views of the foothills and the Cascade mountain range to the east, including a nice view of Mt. Lassen. The residential parcels to the east of the proposed tower have unobstructed views to the west. The proposed 150 -foot tall tower may significantly affect these views. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 5 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The project site itself is already aesthetically impacted by the existing almond hulling operation, which includes elevators that,are approximately 70 feet tall, and a large building that is approximately 50 feet tall. The mature orchards located in the project area will help to screen the tower from some areas. The proposed tower will be visible from areas that lack mature orchards or other vegetation. Photosimulations of the proposed tower, as viewed from Anita Road and from Highway 99, show that the tower will be a prominent feature of the landscape. The Butte County Fire Department/CDF recommends that the tower be painted alternating aviation red and white stripes and a red light installed on the top to make the tower more visible to low-flying CDF aircraft. The painting and the light will result in the tower being' more visible to people on the ground, thus increasing the aesthetic impact. Ideally, the tower should be camouflaged to help it blend in with the background. Due to the height and shape of the proposed tower, this may not feasible. Painting the tower a color that blends in better with the background, such as a light white color, may result in the tower being less conspicuous, but the painting conflicts with the Fire Department/CDF requirement for red and white striping. The large buildings on the site help to lessen the visual impact of the proposed tower. In urban areas, cellular towers and monopoles are normally short because they provide phone service to a small area. These short towers can usually be camouflaged to help prevent aesthetic impacts. In urban areas, cellular antennas can be mounted on any number of existing structures, such as power poles, buildings, and billboard signs, which helps hide them from view. In rural areas, cellular towers and monopoles tend to be very tall to provide coverage to large areas. The only way to camouflage the proposed tower would be to design it as an agricultural structure, such as a silo. In addition to the present project, the County is also processing two other Minor Use Permit applications for tall cellular towers located north of the project site, one at 1.6 miles and the other at 3.3 miles.' Both of the other sites are located adjacent to Highway 99. Allowing three tall cellular towers within a limited area may lead to a significant cumulative impact to the aesthetics of the area. Both of these sites are located in a more rural area of the County then the present project, and there are also no residential subdivisions near these two sites. The site 3.3 miles from the project site has already received the approval of the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner. The aesthetic impacts at the other two sites are believed to be less than the present project because there are fewer residents in these areas. The applicant of the present project may be able to colocate on one of these two other towers. 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 0 ''1 , , Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact In order to prevent the proposed tower from creating a significant aesthetic impact, several mitigation measures are recommended. One mitigation measure requires that the tower not be taller than the existing structures on the site. The tallest structure is approximately 70 feet above ground level. The mitigation measure requires the applicant to submit documentation to the Planning Division verifying the exact height of the tallest structure on the site, and submit revised site plans and building and tower elevations, verifying that the tower does not exceed the maximum allowable height. Another mitigation measure requires that the tower be located adjacent to the existing structures so that it appears to be a part of the structures. The last mitigation measure requires that the tower have a "stealth" design so that it looks similar to the existing structures. The applicant must submit revised elevations of the tower showing the new design to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation # 1: The height of the tower shall not exceed the height of the tallest'existing structure on the site, which is approximately 70 feet above ground level. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit the applicant shall submit documentation to the Planning Division verifying the exact height of the tallest structure on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans and building and tower elevations, verifying that the tower does not exceed the maximum allowable height, to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation # 2: The base of the tower shall be located adjacent to the existing structures on the site so that it appears to be a part of those structures. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans showing the location of the tower to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation # 3: The tower shall incorporate a stealth design such that it fits in with the existing structures on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised elevations of the stealth design to the Planning Division for review and approval. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 0 1 • Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? �t c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X a. - c. Agricultural uses established on the project site include a large almond hulling operation, a small orchard, and fallow fields. The soils on the project have a Soil Conservation Service land capability classification of II, which are considered prime agricultural soils (Butte County Master Environmental Assessment, Table LU -4). There is no Williamson Act contract affecting the property. The 2,500 sq. ft. lease area will be located in an area of the property that is not under agricultural production, and is located adjacent to the almond hulling operation. It is not, anticipated that the project will have an impact on the almond hulling operation Comments were received from the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner's Office regarding this project and it's potential impact to agricultural operations. According to the Agricultural Commissioner, the proposed, 150 -foot tall tower presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices. The Commissioner points out that aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight -paths and that the proposed tower could reduce the ability of aerial applicators to have flexibility in making applications.. The Agricultural Commissioner does not ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ E:3 ' Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact C1 Less Than Significant Less With Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact support the proposed tower because it will adversely effect normal agricultural practices, create safety concerns, and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight required by aerial applicators. Mitigation measures 1 through 2 in item 1 (Aesthetics) require that the proposed tower not exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the site (approximately 70 feet above ground level), and that the proposed tower be located adjacent to the existing structures. Implementation of these mitigation measures will prevent the tower from impacting agricultural resources because the tower will not be taller than the existing structures and the tower will be located adjacent to the structures. Mitigation: See Mitigation Measures 1 through 2 in item 1 above. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in'a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? , _ ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 4 Y X Y X K Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact Response: • Less Than Significant Less With Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact a. - c. According to the Butte County Air Quality Management District, Butte County and all northern Sacramento Valley Air Districts have been designated as "moderate" nonattainment areas for the state standards for ozone (03) and fine particulate matter (PM 10). Currently, Butte County is in attainment for all the federal (less stringent) air quality standards. According to the applicant, approximately four to six vehicles will enter the project site during construction of the communication facility. Two additional vehicles will enter the site • during drilling of the footings for the tower. Construction of the communication facility will take approximately two weeks. The project will generate a small amount of exhaust emissions from vehicles and construction equipment during site development activities. Due to the limited number of vehicle trips that will be generated during construction of project, and the limited use of heavy construction equipment, these exhaust emissions will not create a significant impact. The site access road is a gravel road, and vehicles entering and exiting the site have the potential to create fugitive dust emissions. This is not expected to be significant due to the limited number of vehicle trips that will be generated during installation of the tower. Additional fugitive dust emissions may occur during soil disturbance activities. The only soil disturbance to occur will be the excavation, approximately one foot deep, for the 10' x 10' (100 sq. ft.) concrete slab, and drilling the supports for the tower. The Butte County Air Quality Management District commented on this project and recommends that the applicant control fugitive dust emission during site development activities to prevent creating a public nuisance and causing violations of particulate air quality standards. The project will be conditioned to require that measures be taken to prevent fugitive dust emissions. d. No sensitive receptors, such as schools or.hospitals, are located near the project site. e. The project will not create any odors. Mitigation Measure: None required. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 10 • • 'Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? �t b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? K c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? x e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division • ■ 11 . 'Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated ' Impact . Impact Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? x Response: a. - d. Very little native vegetation remains on the site due to the agricultural operations established on the property. Some minor amounts of riparian vegetation are located along Keefer Slough, but the communication facility will not be located near this area. No wetlands or vernal pools are located on the site. The project is not known to be inhabited or provide habitat for any rare, endangered animal or plant species (Butte County Master Environmental Assessment, Figure Bio -2). { This project will'not have an impact to fish and/or wildlife and the payment of fees under Public Resources Code Section 21089 and as defined by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 is not required. e. The proposal will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance. f. The proposal will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Mitigation Measure: None required. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? x b) Cause a substantial adverse change in - the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? x c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site • or unique geologic feature? x ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 12 ' Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) i Potentially Significant Impact d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Response: • Less Than . Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact r a. - d. According to Butte County constraints mapping, the project site is located in an area considered to have a high archeological sensitivity due to the property's location on Keefer Slough. The lease area is located approximately 130 feet from Keefer Slough. The project site has undergone extensive agricultural operations over the years, and it is unlikely that any intact cultural resources are located on the site. The project will only require a very minimal amount of soil disturbance. No impacts are expected to occur to any cultural resources. Mitigation Measure: None required. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or. structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1) Rupture of a known earth- quake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other sub- stantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 2) Strong seismic ground shaking? 3) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? r ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 13 X 0 'Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact 4) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? _ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating sub- stantial risks to life or property? _ e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal or waste water? Response: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact X X X X Y a.1. The Seismic Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that all of Butte County is in Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. One earthquake epicenter that had an earthquake of 0.1 to 3.9 magnitude on the Richter Scale is located approximately 1.4 to the southeast of the site. Another earthquake epicenter that had an earthquake of 4.0 to 4.9 magnitude on the Richter Scale is located approximately 1.9 miles to the northeast of the site (Butte County GIS seismic constraints mapping). A structural analysis of the tower, certified by a registered civil engineer, states that the tower complies with the 1997 Uniform Building Code and the 1998 California Building Code. The Butte County Building Division will ensure that the proposed tower meets Uniform Building Code standards for structural integrity during seismic events. No impact is expected to occur. The proposed tower is 150 feet tall, and will be located approximately 30 feet from the closest property line. In the unlikely event of structural failure, such as from a seismic event, the potential exists that the tower may fall onto the adjacent parcel. The structural analysis on the tower states that in the unlikely event that the tower ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 14 0 'Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) • Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact fails the failure will be in a telescopic (vertical) direction at least at the first stages, approximately 50 feet. This will still allow approximately 70 feet of the tower to fall onto the adjacent parcel. The area that the tower could fall onto contains a,newly planted almond orchard. A house already exists on the adjacent parcel, and which is located over 1,000 to the east of the tower site. In the event of structural failure, the tower will not fall on any existing off-site structures. a.2. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific site depends on the characteristics of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake, and on the local geologic soils and conditions. At present, there is insufficient data to predict accurately the expected ground motions at various locations in Butte County. a.3. The Butte County Seismic Safety Element's Liquefaction Potential Map indicates . that the site has a low potential for liquefaction. No impact is anticipated. a.4. The Subsidence and Landslide Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that there is a moderate potential for landslides in this area. No impact is anticipated. b. The Erosion Potential Map of the Safety Element of the Butte County General Plan indicates that there is no soil erosion potential on the site. No,soil erosion impacts are anticipated because there will only be a very minimal amount of soil disturbance and because the area that will be disturbed is level. C. No impact is anticipated from instability, landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. d. The Conservation Element's Expansive Soils Map indicates that the project site has a moderate expansive soil designation. No impact is anticipated. e. A waste disposal system is not required. No impact will occur. Mitigation Measure: None required. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 15 r Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) �. Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact the routine transport use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or - handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed schools? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 16 No Impact x x X X 0 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (i) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving structural failure? Response: Less Than Significant Less with Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact X X a. - d. The project will not create any hazardous materials, and is not located on or near any sources of hazardous materials. The project will not use any hazardous materials. The radio emissions from the proposed communication facility are regulated by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). A radio-frequency study written by a radio-frequency engineer indicates that the power density emitted from the proposed tower will be a fraction of the radio emissions allowed by FCC standards for cellular phone facilities. e. - g. The project site is located approximately 2.75 miles northwest of the nearest runway at the Chico Municipal Airport. The property is not located within an airport land - use plan, private airstrip, or interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. A FAA Obstacle Evaluation (O/E) analysis is not required for this project because the proposed monopole does not exceed 200 feet above ground level and is not within any protected airspace. h. The project is not located within a State Response Area for wildland fres. The nearest fire station is Station # 41, located approximately 1 mile to the south of the property along Highway 99. The Butte County Fire Department/CDF does not object to this project and recommends that all new construction on the site conform to the requirements of Public Resource Code 4290. The Fire Department/CDF also recommends that the tower be painted alternating red and white stripes and a red light installed on top to make the tower more visible to low-flying CDF aircraft. These recommendation will be added as a condition of project approval. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 17 i. 0 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Less with Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact i. A structural analysis of the tower, certified. by a registered civil engineer, states that the tower is designed for a minimum loading of 100 M.P.H. winds, which complies with the 1997 Uniform Building Code and the 1998 California Building Code. In the unlikely event of structural failure, which could be caused by extremely strong winds, the potential exists that approximately 70 feet of the tower may fall onto the adjacent parcel. The area on the adjacent parcel that the tower could potentially fall on is a newly planted orchard. A house already exists on the adjacent parcel, and which is located over 1,000 to the east of the tower site. In case of structural failure, the tower will not fall on any existing off-site structures. Mitigation Measure: None required. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a nei deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course'of a stream or river, or substantially increase ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 18 X X X Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? F e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury'or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or , mudflow? Response No Impact X X K X x a. - f. This project will not have an impact to surface and ground water quality or quantity. The project will not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site because only a very small area will be disturbed. The project will not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff because only a very small area (112.5 sq. ft.) will be covered with an impermeable surface. ■ . Butte County Department of Development Services ■ . Planning Division ■ 19 FA Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact g. - i. The southern portion of the project site is located within an "A" flood zone as shown on Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map 06007C - 0320C, dated June 8, 1998. The "A" designates areas that are subject to a 100 -year flood zone and for which the base flood 'elevation has not been determined. The proposed communication facility will not be impacted by flood waters and will not cause an increase in downstream flooding because the communication facility is located approximately 130 feet from the flood zone. j. The property is not located in an area prone to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact will be incurred with respect to these natural hazards. Mitigation Measure: None required. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project? a) Physically divide an established community? 1t b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but riot limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? K ' c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Response: W a. The proposal will not physically divide an established community. b. The project site is zoned A-15 (Agricultural, 15 -acre minimum parcel size) and is designated by the Land Use Element Map of the Butte County General Plan as Orchard and Field Crops. Communication facilities are permitted in the A-15 zone ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 20 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact - Impact with a Minor Use Permit. Public uses are allowed as a Secondary Use under the Orchard and Field Crops General Plan land use designation. Cellular phone service providers are considered a public utility. Surrounding parcels are zoned A-40 and have'a General Plan land use designation of Orchard and Field Crops. Surrounding and nearby parcels range in size from approximately 5.4 to 592 acres. Land uses on these parcels include almond orchards, row crops, and dwellings at rural residential densities. A small PG&E substation is located to the east of the side. C. The property is not within a habitat conservation plan- or natural community conservation plan! No impact will be incurred. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Response: a. - b. The property is not known to contain any important mineral resources of value to the region. The project will not prevent the future extraction of any potentialmineral resources located outside of the 2,500 sq. ft. lease area. No impact will be incurred. Mitigation: None required. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards ■ Butte.County Department of Development Services ■ . Planning Division ■ 21 • Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant . Impact r established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels: c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? _ d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? _ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Response: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact Y W X K a. - d. Ambient noise on and around the project area is affected primarily by the almond hulling operation on the site, from vehicle traffic on Highway 99 and Anita Road, and from agricultural operations in the area. Noise from the hulling operation may be very significant on the site during the times hulling is in progress. However, the communication facility is unmanned and no one will be effected by this noise. Vehicle traffic on Highway 99 creates a steady background noise, but is not ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 22 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact - Impact significant. Noise from vehicles on Anita Road is intermittent and short-term in nature. It is not anticipated that the proposed communication facility will expose people to significant levels of noise. Development activities on the site will generate noise, such as the use of heavy machinery and power equipment. Additional noise will be generated by vehicles carrying workers and construction materials. Installation of the communication facility will last approximately two weeks, and construction noise is not expected to create a significant impact. e. - f. The project is not located in the -vicinity of an airstrip or within an airport land use plan. The project site is located approximately 2.75 miles from the nearest runway at the Chico Municipal Airport. No impact will be incurred. Mitigation Measure: None required. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project.- a) roject: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure? �t b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Response: a. The project will not induce any population growth nor will it create a need for any new infrastructure which could induce population growth. Electrical power lines already extend onto the project site and'no new roads need to be constructed. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ,23 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b. - c. The project will not displace individuals or housing. No impact will be incurred. Mitigation: None required. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services? x b) Fire protection? x c) Police Protection? . x d) Schools? X e) Parks? �t f) Other public services? n K Response: a. The project will not create a need for any new public services. b. The project will not create an increase in demand for fire protection services because the communication facility does not normally require such services. C. The proposal will not cause an increase in demand for police protection services because the communication facility does not normally require such services. d. The proposal will not result in a demand for school facilities in the area. e. The proposal will not result in a demand to area parks and facilities. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 24 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Inqorporated Impact Impact f. The project will not have an impact on any other public services. Mitigation Measure: None. required. 14. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? K b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Response: a. - b. The project will not increase the use of existing parks or other recreational facilities nor will the project create the need for any new parks or recreational facilities. Mitigation: None required. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of.the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? X b) Exceed, either individually or cumula- tively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management ,. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 25 r 'Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?. _ e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs supportingalternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Response: Less Than Significant Less With' Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact X a. - e. The project will generate additional vehicle trips on Anita Road and Highway 99 during site development. According to the applicant, there will be four to six vehicles arriving daily at the site during development. Two additional vehicles will arrive at the site when the footings for the tower are being drilled. The increase in vehicle trips during development will not significant impact traffic circulation on roads in the project area. The project will generate very few vehicle trips after construction because the communication facility will be unmanned and only one or two site visits per month will be required for inspection and maintenance. The sight distance of Anita Road from the site's access road is excellent in both directions. f. There is adequate area on the parcel to handle the parking needs of vehicles during development activities. The existing parking area on the site will not be impacted by the project. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 26 ' Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o Spectrasite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Potentially Significant Impact f`_ J Less Than Significant Less With Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact g. The project will not conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. Mitigation: None required. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental, effects? X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to'the provider's existing commitments? X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? X ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 27 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 1t Response: a. - e. The communication facility does not require a source of water or a sewage disposal system. The project will not have an impact on, any water or wastewater treatment facilities. No additional storm water facilities will be necessary as a result of this project. f. The project will not increase the stream of waste being deposited in the Neal Road Landfill because the project will not generate any solid wastes. g. No impact will be incurred to federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Mitigation: None required. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife ► species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare •or _ endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 1t b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively consider- able" means that the incremental effects ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 28 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 1t c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ Response: X The project does have the potential to cause significant impacts to the visual aesthetics of the project area, checklist item La. and l.c., and to create significant impacts to agricultural resources, checklist item 2.c. The significant impact to these areas will be mitigated due to the inclusion of Mitigation Measures # 1 - 3 as itemized under Section V. - Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Requirements. V. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: Mitigation Measure # 1 The height of the tower shall not exceed the height of the tallest existing structure on the site, which is approximately 70 feet above ground level. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit the applicant shall submit documentation to the Planning Division verifying the exact height of the tallest structure on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans and building and tower elevations, verifying that the tower does not exceed the maximum allowable height, to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation Measure # 2 The base of the tower shall be located adjacent to the existing structures on the site so that it appears to be a part of those structures. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans showing the location of the tower to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation Measure # 3 The tower shall incorporate a stealth design such that it fits in with the existing structures on the site. Prior to issuance of the Minor Use Permit, the applicant shall submit revised elevations of the stealth design to the Planning Division for review and approval. Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 29 . t Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) n . DATA SHEET A., Project Description 1. Type of Project: Minor Use Permit for a 150 -foot self-supporting lattice tower, 9 panel antennas, one 6 -foot diameter microwave dish, and two equipment cabinets. 2. Proposed Density of Development: N/A 3. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Minimal, approximately 114 sq. ft. 4. Access and Nearest Public Road(s): Existing driveway from lease area tb Anita Road. 5. Method of Sewage Disposal: The proposed communication facility does not generate any sewage. 6. Source of Water Supply: The proposed communication facility will not use any water. 7. Proximity of Power Lines: Electrical power is already established on the project site. 8. Potential for further land divisions and development: None under the current A-15 zoning. B. Environmental Settiniz 1. Terrain - a General Topographic Character: Level valley area. b. Slopes: 0-1 %. C. Elevation: 165 feet above sea level. d. Limiting Factors: None. 2. Soils a. Types and Characteristics: Anita Clay Loam, Reddish Phase - 2 to 8 inches thick underlaid by a compacted layer 1 to 3 inches thick, friable and granular, poor in organic material, retains moisture fairly well, surface drainage poor, subdrainage poor; Vina Loam,' Shallow Phase - 2 to 3 feet thick, friable and granular, well supplied with organic matter, retains moisture well, drainage is good. b. Limiting Factors: None. 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. b. Erosion Potential: None. C. Landslide Potential: None. d. Fire Hazard: Unclassified area - irrigated area. e. Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate. 4. Hydrology a. Surface Water: Keefer Slough traverses south portion of the project parcel. b., Ground Water: Large valley aquifers. C. Drainage Characteristics: The parcel generally drains to the south into Keefer Slough. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 30 IS 0 • Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 40 inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: Area adjacent to Keefer Slough is in an "A" flood zone. 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Generally good in project area, but project, parcel is developed with a large almond hulling operating, including a large 50 -foot tall building, which detracts from the visual quality of the site. 6. Acoustic Quality: Adequate - noise from vehicles on Highway 99. 7. Air Quality: Good, except when stagnant air conditions persist in the valley. 8. Vegetation: Fallow fields, almond trees. 9. Wildlife Habitat: Small animals and birds generally found in orchard areas 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in thet area: None known. High archaeological sensitivity area. 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Orchard and Field Crops. 12. Existing Zoning: A-15 (Agricultural, 15 -acre minimum parcel size). 13. Existing Land Use on-site: Large almond hulling operation, small orchard, fallow fields. 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Orchards, row crops, and dwellings at rural residential densities. b. Zoning: A-10, A-40. C. Gen. Plan Designation: Orchard and Field Crops. d. Parcel Sizes: 143 to 150 acres. 15. Character of Site and Area: Valley orchard area. 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 # 41, approximately 1 mile to the south on Highway 99. b. Water Availability: Fire tankers. 20. Schools: Union School District(s): Chico 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 May 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. ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 31 K:\PROJECTS\UPM\MERIDIAN.MUP\MERIDIAN.IS ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 32 Project: AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) r 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 1114, Safety Element. Oroville, CA: CH2M Hill, 1977. 9. Butte County Planning Department. Archaeological Sensitivity Map. Oroville, CA: James P. Manning, 1983. 10. Butte County Planning Department. School District Map. Oroville, CA. 11. Butte County Board of Supervisors. Agricultural Preserves Map, established by Resolution No. 67-178. Oroville, CA: Butte County Planning Department, 1987. 11. National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1989. 13. USGS Quad Maps. 14. Soil Map, Chico (1925)/Oroville (1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 15. Soil Survey of Chico (1925)/Oroville (1926) Area. United States Department of Agriculture. 16. ' Butte County Planning Department. Butte County Fire Protection Jurisdictions and Facilities Map. Butte County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry, 1989. K:\PROJECTS\UPM\MERIDIAN.MUP\MERIDIAN.IS ■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ 32 Betts, Steve From: Tom Deluca [tdeluca@mericom.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 12:16 PM To: sbefts@buttecounty.net Subject: Meridian Steve We do not want to proceed with this application. Please consider this message as a formal request to withdraw the application. Thanks, Tom 1 A V. f... aN. 71 unt L A N D O F N A T U R A L W E A L T H A N D B E h U T Y PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3337 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 June 28, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Re: Minor Use Permit, AP 047-130-159, MUP 00-08 Dear .lames Simpson: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Manager held June 28, 2000, the public hearing was continued open to July 26, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. to consider your application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna. The Planning Manager is requesting that you or your representative attend this meeting. This meeting will beheld in the Planning Division Conference Room, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Betts at this office between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, 4-;�— Lynn Richardson Planning/Administrative Support Service Assistant /Ir ka(orms�runtinue. firm FA May 24, 2000 �utie Co, LAND OF NATURAL W EA LTH AN.D BEAUTY PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Re: Minor Use Permit, AP 047-130-1599 MUP 00-08 Dear James Simpson: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Manager held May 24, 2000, the public hearing was continued open to June 28, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. to consider your application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna.. This meeting will be held in the Planning Division Conference Room, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Betts at this office between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Lynn Richardson Planning/Administrative Support Service Assistant /lr k:\formskontinue. frm Suite, C. LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAJTY March 22, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, Tom De Luca 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-339 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX:- (530) 538-7785 Re: -Minor Use Permit, AP 047-130-159, MUP 00-08 Dear Mr. De Luca: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Manager held March 22, 2000, the public hearing was continued open/closed to May 24, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. to consider your application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna.. This meeting will be held in the Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Betts at this office between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Lynn Richardson Planning/Administrative Support Service Assistant /lr k:\ form s\con i i nue. frm (SPACE FOR'FlLING STAMP ONLY) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT *OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE In the Matter of .Notice..of Public Hearing. ...................... No ............ .............. .................................................................. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATIONPUBLIC IAL IMPACTS M g M RECOMMFruncn was a citizen of the United States and not a party Notice is he to nor interested in the above entitled matter; Butte Countyry I that I am the principal clerk of the printer and er that a public State of California held on, Wedm 20 00, in tha B ss. County of Butte velopmens t s The Chico Enterprise -Record — encs Room7 Drive, Orovill The undersigned resident of the county of gIrdiTEM ON WH Butte, State of California, says: DEC RA - That I am, and at all time herein mentioned IAL IMPACTS M g M RECOMMFruncn was a citizen of the United States and not a party �-• 9:30' a.m. h to nor interested in the above entitled matter; lar, do spectrasite; to'e4d-a150 foot, self-supporting•.lattice that I am the principal clerk of the printer and tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular. phone publisherof p service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of C lco; Gon Property zoned A-15 ;(Agdcul- tural-15 acre parcels The Chico Enterprise -Record — .:.The property is located on the south sine or Anita Road Oroville Mercury Register. ..35 miles west ,of High - way s. at Anitta.Road, That said newspaper is one of general circula- $ co. north of Chico. PN 047;130 - tion as defined b Section 6000 Government y 159 (SB).(MUP 00.08)wr;t;�� The above mentianed'appfi- Code of the State of California, Case No. 26796 cation, Initial Study, and Imap are on file by the Superior Court of the State of California, and available^for publicthe viewinthe offf&6'6f in and for the County of Butte; that said newspa- tte County Development Services Department, Planning per at all times herein mentioned was printed Division, 7 County •Center Drive, Oroville, California. and published daily in the City.of Chid h y co an For information call: (530)538-7601 (Monday through Friday, •8:00 Count of Butte; that the notice of which the County a.m. to 4:00 p.m:).Comments may be submitted in writing•at annexed is a true printed copy, was published in any -time prior to the hearing or said newspaper on the following days: orally at the meeting, .fisted I above or as may be coritLr;i+ea'. to a later date. Mon action 6 - I on byy the Planning Comirilgslon on the Feb. 26, 2000. project an appeal may . be filed with the Clerk o1 the Board of Supervisors. The ap- I peal period is 10 days. If you challenge the above apphca.. I certify (or declare), under penalty of tions in court, you may be limit- perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct, at ed to raising only those Issues you or someone else raised at Chico, California. the public hearing described in this notice or in written oorre. spondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at or pn-. or to, the Rublic hearing. ' BUTTE NTM PLANNING Feb . 26 2000 • Dated.......... ..................?............................................, COMMISSION THOMAS A. PARILO, at Chico, California. ..................................� ................... ws DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES C229290 - Publish: February 26, 2000 - - . .... ..... M' V LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES fig t; 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 March 16, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd. Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Re: Minor Use Permit, AP 047-130-159, MUP 00-08 Dear James Simpson: Your request has been scheduled for hearing in front of the Planning representative on March 22, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. The meeting will be held in the Planning Division Conference Room, at 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. Enclosed is an Agenda Report. A recommendation by the Planning representative will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as a consent item for final action. Consent items are set for approval in one motion. These items are considered non- controversial. No presentations will be made, however, some questions may be asked. The Chair will ask if any Commissioner or member of the public wishes to pull a consent item for discussion. The Minor Use Permit will be issued after approval by the Planning Commission. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Stephen Betts at this office between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.,'Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Z;�O� Lynn Richardson Planning/Administrative Support Service Assistant Ir Enc. INTER -DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION To: Rob MacKenzie, County Counsel From: Steve Betts b� Subject: Minor Use Permit for AirTouch for a Communication Facility, File # MUP 00-08 Date: March 8, 2000 Randy Wilson requested that I send you a copy of the initial• study for this project for your information. Also enclosed is a site plan. The proposed mitigations will most likely make the site unusable by the applicant. However, they are currently working with two other cellular phone providers to colocate on one of the other two proposed towers in the North Chico area. We have received some letters and: petitions from area residents opposing the tower. The project is set for a Planning Manager's hearing on March 22. If you have any questions please give me or Randy a call. 0 RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUT COUNTY On the petition PLANNING DIVISION The people who have signed this petition, are land owners who live on Anita Road; -and surrounding areas. All of the people who I have talked with in getting these signatures are against this placement. They too are concerned that the location of this tower will preclude their ability to manage their land. It is the buzz of the neighborhood. Please consider this,;when you -make the decision on this 'issue. February 29, 2000 Randy Wilson Principal Planner #7 County .Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Wilson: RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION We are writing this letter because of our concerns with the placement of .an AirTouch Cellular (150 foot high tower), .3 miles west of Highway 99 at 4933 Anita Road, Chico APN 047-130-159) (SB) (MUP 00-08). The tower would be a little over 1,100 feet from my house at 4873 Anita Road, Chico. We own and farm 140 acres of almonds. Our property borders all three sides of this 15 acre parcel at 4933 Anita Road. We feel the safety of aerial applicators is a big concern. Their ability to make an efficient spray application on our little trees with a 150 foot tower in the flight path is not possible. Everyone who lives between Hamilton Nord Cana Highway and Highway 99 on Anita Road has signed a petition against this proposed 'cell tower site. We all feel that this is a residential as well as agricultural area. We are concerned there will be a negative impact on our property values. The property owner of this proposed cell tower site lives in another area where his property won't be affected by these issues. Please vote no on this tower proposal. Sincerely, Kevin Rice Cindy Villa 4873 Anita Road Chico, CA 95973 893-0167 RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUTTE COUNTY Petition PLANNING DIVISION Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please writs your Name and Address i. iC O J�1 �7j C4 s 9 73 10 19. �rI c i ` .5 y lc 1�ti)i�:� ; , ; L.rir -✓C!! v /�CC'C? I () 1'I , 0 C -A J_a Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address 7. IJ 9. 15. 18. Oe .2,. 23. S rCf�21% cl Lc- n 24. fAj / Sz err ajar- e� 25. V Z. ,1CO�A 14 CIL, 28. _G/-� Mtn SS�a AAJlral ou, J 73 27. 28. __._..._.._�.._ 29. 30. Date: February 23, 2000 OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Waler Division Wafer Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99 on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular rte: � �► - +.� . -'_ -. L A N D • Date: February 23, 2000 OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Waler Division Wafer Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99 on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular , On the petition RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION The people who have signed this petition, are land owners who live on Anita Road, and surrounding areas. All of the people who I have talked with in getting these signatures are against this placement. They too are concerned that the location of this tower will preclude their ability to manage their land. It is the buzz of the neighborhood. Please consider this when you make the decision on this issue. February 29, 2000 Steven Betts Associate Planner #7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are writing this letter because of our concerns with the placement of an AirTouch Cellular (150 foot high tower), .3 miles west of Highway 99 at 4933 Anita Road, Chico APN 047-130-159) (SB) (MUP 00-08). The tower would be a little over 1,100 feet from my house at 4873 Anita. Road, Chico. We own and farm 140 acres of almonds. Our property borders all three sides of this 15 acre parcel at 4933 Anita Road. We feel the safety of aerial applicators is a big concern. Their ability to make an efficient spray application on our little trees with a 150 foot tower in the flight path is not possible. Everyone who lives between Hamilton Nord Cana Highway and Highway 99 on Anita Road has signed a petition against this proposed cell tower site. We all feel that this is a residential -as well as agricultural area.. We are concerned there will be a negative impact on our property values. The property owner of this proposed cell tower site lives in another area where his property won't be affected by these issues. Please vote no on this tower proposal. Sincerely, Kevin Rice Cindy Villa 4873 Anita Road Chico, CA 95973 893-0167 . RECEj VE.D MAR 0 6 2000 PLBUTTE COUNTY NNING DIVISION RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2000 PetitionBUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista,Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address G % 5. )n°- 7. ln.e 8. 44& P41 a.-� r 14. W 1s. WA16. ClyU _/ 5vv CCL, �� -5k-,73' Petition , Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address (ane .21. 'Ag 23. v2n (, i .v4 a �✓�r hC Cly �c:v z6� q 24. Sz err 25.. 28. _�/l Mcu.lz�1- SS�a /Lu(�eL 2d7, 27- 28. 29. 30. LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA. JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division Waler Division Date: February 23, 2000 To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99 on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have. flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular r TRANSMITTAL SpectraSite 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Date: 'L 24 C';:'� To: Attn.: Phone: Fax: Sent Via: U.S. Postal Service ❑ Blueprinter ❑ Express Delivery X Other ❑ Courier ❑ From: COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Attn.: Jim Simpson Phone: C�L%� �� gel Fax: (lvt-� q2 7 ?Z 2, ITEMS TRANSMITTED: REMARKS: ❑ Urgent For Your �1-_ 0❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment �f Review � C ga 6z— 0� fes- (��i11(S RECE117R r 20100 BUT T NING DIVISION The above information is confidential information intended only for the viewing and use of SPECTRASITE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and their clients. Any unauthorized review, use, communication, dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. r BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION TO: LAFCo FROM: Butte County Planning Division RE: Request for Comments on a Development Application: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson, MUP 00-08 DATE: January 19, 2000 CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Betts The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental documents to prepare for this project, as well as to identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittal it should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts. This is an application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna, on property zoned A-15 (Agricultural, 15 acrean rcel) located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately -35 miles west of Highway 99, north of Chico, identified as APN 047-130-159. Supervisorial District No. -4. Q(oZ lIS THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check one) PLANNING COMMISSION - —DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON March23 , 2000. COMMENTS, IF ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER .THAN February 2, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): Z. g1j, r'. i` uclu�llu 'C. -I-1 3. C.A. 12.j?.1-> N • CU. S. D, 111O LAEC ISSUIF s S. Rugeold{q� r Cri-ll PerlaMA4111 7. Cse It.0 BUTTE GlIUNTV PLANNING DIVISION By: ."d�A/ r 4 , Date: 13� o 7 County Center Drive - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAX 530-538-7785 March 1, 2000 To: Responsible and Trustee Agencies s t suite Count LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 Re: NOTICE OF INTENT - To Adopt a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for a Minor Use Permit for AirTouch Cellular (c/o SpectraSite), File # MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site), APN 047-130-159 The Butte County Planning Division has completed an Initial Study, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), of potential environmental consequences anticipated in connection with the above-mentioned project, a copy of which is enclosed. This letter serves as a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to allow responsible and trustee agencies a 20 -day review period in accordance with Sections 15072 and 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines. Please review the enclosed Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. This review should focus on your agency's area of expertise and jurisdiction. Any comments must be sent to the above address prior to March 21, 2000. If you have any questions regarding the enclosed environmental document, please contact this office between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Sincerely, Stephen Betts Associate Planner cc: James Simpson, SpectraSite Stu Edell, Butte County Land Development Division Ted Crawford, Butte County Fire Department/CDF February 27, 2000 Tom Parilo Director of Development Services #7 County Center Dr. Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Parilo: MAJOR PROBLEM #1: 0. We are writing this letter because we are extremely concerned about the possible placement of an AirTouch Cellular tower near our home and ranch on Anita Road, north of Chico. The tower is proposed at 4933 Anita Road, APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08). We live at 5032 Anita (about a thousand feet or so away). We believe that we would be the closest residents to the tower. Contrary to the findings developed by the AirTouch Cellular Site Analysis Paper, we feel that a tower of this nature and size will seriously infract our viewshed. We will have to look at it through our front window for the remainder of our lives since this is our family farm and moving away isn't an option. We feel that our property values will be damaged. A project of this type can't help but to negatively impact these values and our property's desirability. We are concerned about health hazards. They are unknown ' at this time but pose a possible. threat. One more issue is that of the safety and availability of aerial applicators that we and* our neighbors use to spray our orchards. They, have already told us of the tower's hazards to their planes and pilots. This interferes with the husbandry of our orchards (conversation with Dutch Wall, Chico Aerial Applicators 2/27/00). This is a .residential as well as an agricultural area. The property owner to whom .this proposed tower is contracted does not live in this area (he won't have to look at it). .; • We wish that. this 15 acre parcel had been included in the 5 or 10 acre ordinance provision making it restricted also. To allow these towers to pop up on . older remaining small parcels in agricultural zones. (A-40) interferes with ag practices. For us this seems to be a double hit. If it goes through, our living room will have a blinking red light cast to it and the contractors we use to help us increase production will be hesitant to help us. MAJOR PROBLEM #2: During the process of looking into this first cell tower, we saw a map denoting another possible cell tower. This second one is from a different company.... ATT, and is to be placed less than a mile north of the first one. This second tower is again located in orchard ground,. is iri direct line with the end of our duster strip, (same concerns about aviation), and is directly adjacent to our waterfowl preserve. This preserve has been in existence for thirty-five years, and has provided nesting habitat and a resting place for migratory waterfowl. . If this second tower goes in, the whole of this investment, and. its value to wildlife will be lost. Sincerely, c � 6va., Richard and Barbara Wallace 5032 Anita Rd. Chico, CA 05073 342-9038 ATC Site 001 ffl��us �� L I on A Im L4 AirTouch Site To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99.on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular, Suite Count _ LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY t `i- y OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER ";'A �' `,'YYfTl„11 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX:' (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE ' LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Waler Division Water Division Date: February 23, 2000 To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99.on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular, All of the people who appear on this list are landowners in the immediate area of the proposed cellular tower. Virtually every landowner on Anita Road between Hwy 99 and Hamilton Nord Cana Hwy signed this. Please vote NO on this cellular tower. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 0 Petition s Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please wri your Name and Address 1. Zi 9-7 h, - cl►��o_ y s s �� 3. � � O�,44L Ad /,/1,000, -LIN Ok o � 5• 7. 14. �- 52,44 42 A' 15. 17. 18 r 19. 3� 70 koo c, CGi Ico CA- - ` �5� 3 20. 0 F-. • i Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address I. ft 4 jj — n oF (ane • .21 I 1 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. I _ (scale determined by pylons placed at site) ti imamtr:,y afR yS..',r• 'Fb .,�''. - '"� fid' :�• A ` - Q nt Meridian - 4933 Anita Way _/ --'" A I R T 0 U C H" Chico, CA Proposed proposed 150' lattice tower i proposed equipment 3 � Proposed w 3 E 0 N d 3 as c 0 0 3 as 0 0 are 3 E 0 0 s IL --Tfs..v 7-�:v .r.�.: �•� � -.-_c+n •, qtr ,rT'i'^T: .. .'. �5�' P^".T� � �,t XT; E�xstin_g _.70, fMeridian 4933 Anita Wav >•+spFT'^.: 7`y.-�N r�•s. ..�,�. .. --7 - �p•wnr •, w�i�'i^T. •-- •: ���7P �, fSl'r'�7'�SA' - ,��-S4 ..; ; 04 h i Proposed�- February 27, 2000 Randy Wilson, Planner Dept. of Development Services #7 County Center Dr. Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Wilson: MAJOR PROBLEM #1: • RECEIVED MAR 0 12000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION We are writing this letter because we are extremely concerned about the possible placement of an AirTouch Cellular tower near. our' home and ranch on Anita Road, north of Chico. The tower is proposed at 4933 Anita Road, APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08). We live at 5032 Anita (about a thousand feet or so away). We believe that we would be the closest residents to the tower. Contrary to the findings developed by the AirTouch Cellular Site Analysis Paper, we feel that a tower of this nature . and size will seriously infract our viewshed. We will have to look at it through our front window for the remainder of our lives since this is our familyfarm and moving away isn't an option. We feel that our property values will be damaged. A project of this type can't, help but to negatively impact these values and our property's desirability. We are concerned about health hazards. They are unknown at this time but pose a possible threat. One more .issue is that of the safety and availability of aerial applicators that we and our neighbors use to spray our orchards. They have already told us of the tower's hazards to their planes and pilots. This interferes with the husbandry of our orchards (conversation with Dutch Wall, Chico Aerial Applicators 2/27/00). This is a residential as well as an agricultural area. The property owner to whom this proposed tower is contracted does not live in this area (he won't have to look at it). We wish that this 15 acre parcel had been included in the 5 or 10 acre ordinance provision making it restricted also. To allow these towers to pop up on older remaining small parcels in agricultural zones (A-40) interferes with ag practices. For us this seems to be a double hit. If it goes through, our living room will have a blinking red light cast to it and the contractors we use to help us increase production will be hesitant to help us. MAJOR PROBLEM #2: During the process of looking into this first cell tower, we saw a map denoting another possible cell tower. This second one is from a different company.... ATT, and is to be placed less than a mile north of the first one. This second tower is again located in orchard ground, is in direct line with the end of our duster strip, (same concerns about aviation), and is directly adjacent to our waterfowl preserve. This preserve has been in existence for thirty-five years, and has provided nesting habitat and a resting place for migratory waterfowl. If this second tower goes in, the whole of this investment, and: its value to wildlife will be lost. Sincerely; Richard and Barbara Wallace 5032 Anita Rd. Chico, CA 05073 342-9038 I I \, I I * ATC Site 8,732 foo ring 77- aI-5—ITl: I m EAN Fo L F /AREA h I) I LID o/ go t 7 AirTouch Site i1 r ATT Site "R 3t Fo L F /AREA h I) I LID o/ go t 7 AirTouch Site i1 r i1 Date: February 23, 2000 LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 '. RICHARD B. PRICE ' LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division Water Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99,on Anita Road (A.P, 047-130-158). . This. proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. cc. Air Touch Cellular All of the people who appear on this list are landowners in the immediate area of the proposed cellular tower. Virtually every 'landowner on Anita Road between Hwy 99 and Hamilton Nord Cana Hwy signed this. Please vote NO on this cellular tower. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please wriyour Name and Address 6. 7. -�:= Kj ChXc 7 '77_3 2 x-13 0 -LINOX • 07 �, /rte,. C'�1, �'s 973 . �, 9s �5�73 U 2170 ,� C6, iv 1 17 18 19 20 W- 4 ROW. I ff/,- AN 0FIM Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address < 7. tne 18. s 9. tne 18. s 18. 19. --- 20. _ r 23. 24.- 25. 26._ 27. ' F' 28. \ 29. 30.. ' I February 27, 2000 Steven Betts, Associate Planner Dept. Development Services #7 County Center Dr. Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: MAJOR PROBLEM #1: RECEIVED MBAR 0 12000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION We are writing this letter because we are extremely concerned about the possible placement of an AirTouch Cellular tower near our home and ranch on .Anita Road, north of Chico. The tower is" proposed at 4933 Anita Road, APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08). We live at 5032 Anita (about a thousand feet or so away). We believe that we would be the closest residents to the tower. Contrary to the findings developed by the AirTouch Cellular Site Analysis Paper, we feel that a tower of this nature and size will seriously infract our viewshed. We will have to look at it through our front window for the remainder of our lives since this is our family farm and moving away isn't an option. We feel that our property values will be damaged. A project of this type can't help but to negatively impact these values and our property's desirability. We are concerned about health hazards. They are unknown at this time but pose a possible threat. One more issue is that of the safety and availability of aerial applicators that we and our neighbors use to spray our orchards. They have already told us .of the tower's hazards to their planes and pilots. This interferes with the husbandry of our orchards (conversation with Dutch Wall, Chico Aerial Applicators 2/27/00). This is a residential as well as an agricultural area. The property owner to whom this proposed tower is contracted does not live in this area (he won't have to look at it). We' 'wish that this 15 acre parcel had been included in the 5 or 10 acre ordinance provision making it restricted also. To allow these towers to pop up on older remaining small parcels in agricultural zones (A-40) interferes with ag practices. For us this seems to be a double hit. If it goes through, our living room, will have a- blinking red light cast to it and the contractors we use to help us increase production will be hesitant to help us. MAJOR PROBLEM #2: During the process of looking into this first cell tower, we saw a map denoting another possible cell tower. This second one is from a different company.... ATT, and is to be placed less than a mile north of the first one. This second tower is again located in orchard ground, is in direct line with the end of our duster strip, (same concerns about aviation), and is directly adjacent to our waterfowl preserve. This preserve has been in existence for thirty-five years, and has provided nesting habitat and a resting place for migratory waterfowl. If this second tower goes in, the whole of this investment, and. its value to wildlife will be lost. Sincerely, I � Z 1, 0" Richard and Barbara Wallace 5032 Anita Rd. Chico, CA 05073 342-9038 L- P�ieT r'•r -- ~MF6 W L /AREA i - AirTouch Date: February 23, 2000 • ,butte Count, LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES - WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: (530) 538-7381 - WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division Water Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner A� Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99.on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial, applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to, the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support -the placement of this tower at this site. All of the people who appear on this list are landowners in the immediate area of the proposed cellular tower. Virtually every landowner on Anita Road between Hwy 99 and Hamilton Nord Cana Hwy signed this. Please vote NO on this cellular tower. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please wrl your Name and Address 2. ,..0 ��.e �l 3 I /lei. 3: �0 0 44L -"42 5. 1;- 6. S�,/,qV'J- R/9 &4'/C& 5-73 7. r 1�U44,4&9'S�7 � 3 Z 3 8: 9. 6' 0 7A07 Lf•is0 ���/ 14. �_ ��--� �zAI AYL �etv-e5c 19. r � %D C.St�n� JG� L v kOGS Ci 01 IC O CA— q 5� -73 20. 7D C'� C") S773 • • Q Petition ° A Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta Vista Huller, Chico California) Please write your Name and Address 1 r l JDe�E1 d 1 -do �02 /�/� � , R �J• 7. a. 14. 1s. 17. 1s. zo. ane I • • ' � .1 3 24. / r 26. 26. 27. 28.- 29. 30. f � rr ' t • K ATC Site on A' AirToUj }i- Site L1 February 24, 2000 SpectraSite Attention: James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 r 'e'atte count, LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 Re: Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, APN 047-130-159, File # MUP 00-08 (Meridian Site) Dear Jim: Enclosed please find a copy of comments we recently received from the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner concerning SpectaSite's tower project on Anita Road. Please note that the Agricultural Commissioner does not support this project due to impacts to agricultural operations. Should you have any further questions regarding these comments, please contact me between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Stephen Betts Associate Planner Date: February 23, 2000 LAND ' OF utte Count : . y NATURAL WEALTH ' AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • WATER DIVISION 316 NELSON AVENUE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT: (530) 538-7381 • WATER: (530) 538-6265 FAX: (530) 538-7594 RICHARD B. PRICE LOUIE B. MENDOZA, JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures/ Weights and Measures/Water Division Water Division To: Tom Parilo, Director of Development Services From: Richard Price, Agricultural Commissioner Subject: Comments on Tower Placement at 4933 Anita Road I am commenting on a proposed 150 -foot tower to be placed at site .3 miles west of Highway 99 on Anita Road (A.P. 047-130-158). This proposal presents several concerns to normal agricultural practices in the area. This tower will be placed near orchards that receive aerial applications from low flying airplanes or helicopters. Aerial applicators have expressed serious concerns about another obstacle being placed near flight paths. Aerial applicators already have to contend with power poles and lower obstacles in the area. This tower could reduce their ability to have flexibility in making applications, especially to young orchards planted next to the proposed tower site. In conclusion, because this proposed site has the potential to create adverse effects to normal agricultural practices, creates a safety concern and could create additional pesticide drift issues due to the additional height of flight, I cannot support the placement of this tower at this site. RECEIVED FEB 2 4 2000 cc. Air Touch Cellular BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Manager that a public hearing will be held on, Wednesday, March 22, 2000, in the Butte County Development Services Conference Room, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following item: 9:30 a.m. - AirTouch Cellular, c/o SpectraSite, to erect a 150 foot, self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico, on property zoned A- 15 (Agricultural - 15 acre parcels). The property is located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately,.35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anitta Road, north of Chico. ' APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08) The above mentioned application, Initial Study, and map are on file and available for public viewing at the office of the Butte County Development Services Department, Planning Division, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. For information call: (530) 538-7601 (Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) Comments may be submitted in writing at any time prior to the hearing or orally at the meeting listed above or as may be continued to a later date. Upon action taken by the Planning Commission on the project an appeal may be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. The appeal period is 10 days. If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION THOMAS A. PARILO, DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES To be published in the Chico Enterprise Record on Saturday, February 26, 2000. Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 02/18/00 6:16PM;JetFax #106;Page 1/3 F" COVER SHEET Date: S SpectraSite Number of pages including cover sheet: 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 From: S c to Communications Phone: (916) 927-0642 Fax: (916) 927-2176 REMARKS: ❑ Urgent For Your ❑ Reply ASAP Review ❑ Please Comment Re: 4 &%6 Pf RECEIVED FEB 2 2.2000 BUTTECOUNTY PLANNING DIVISION The above information is confidential information intended only for the viewing and use of Wi=STOWER COMMUNICATIONS. INC. and their clients. Any unauthorized review, use, communication, dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 02/18/00 6:16PM;jetFaa #106;Page 2/3 a- IN -19-00 16:16 FROM=A1RTa CPLLUAR AIRToutH- Cellular Butte County planning Dept. Attn: Mr. Stephen Betts Associate Planner Butts County Planning Dept 7 County Center Drive Oroville, Ca. 95965 Dear Mr. Betts, ill aIS3S)W2 February 18, 2000 PAGE 1.,2 AirTooch Copular 255 Parksbore Dive Folcom, CA 95630 Tdep6one_ 916 357 1000 1 am the RF Engineer responsible for Network planning in ButO Cow*, and I aryl wriift in regard to our proposed 15WOOt digital Cellular Uhseau 011 at 4933 Mita Road north of Chico. I previously submitted a power density study detailing our anticipated RF eniesions flown this facility, and the results indicated that the power levels of our cellular radio tr nsrnisssions will be less than orme half of one percent of the allowable standard a� defined by the Fel Communications Commission. it was subsequently noted that our study did not include army microwave radio eniwions, and i would like to take this opportunity to explain that apparent omission. The cellutar transmissions tYom this installation are designed to reach our sub&AbeW phones anywhere they may be within an approximately five mile radius of fhe lower. The radio signals therefore reach out in all directions. and potentially reach many people within f91e desired coverage poem. These radio weaves art: on the pert of the radio frequency spectrum between 8804894 MHz. and are NOT mivo ave. They are UHF sgnals, Comparable to marry public service communications systems in operation all over the country, except that cellular tzrom typically use paAw levels greatly reduced from those em*yed by police and fire department -type base station traiwmil:rs. to contrast, microwave transmissions are tightly -focused, "point-to-point dmfflunieatfons rinks typically designed to "backhaul' information to a `hub" location such as a telephone smewbd tg offm In this case, our microwave link will connect the new Meridian facility with an existing site new Vna, a path diistanoe of approximately 9.94 mites. The radiation aperture, or "beantwidlh" of Itme miawgave "dish" is extremely narrow, in this ease 2 degrees. and the antennas are well above ground lev4 in order to dear any on -palls ohstrucdams. This will be a 6 GNz. microwave link, and the maximum transmitlar power at each end is 23 dBm, which is lass than % Waft The equipment used is approm/ed and dpe•ao0epted by the FCC, and the point-to-point trarmsmissicim path is engineered and surveyed to nriake sure that it is fm+ee of any objects, whether they be nabiral or man{nade. Due to the above cormsiderations, the rnicrowrave emissions from our proposed installation will have virtllalty no impact on the ambient'npmge floor" or overall RF environment in the vicinity of tete lower, which is why the microwave transmher was not included in my prior pow density study. If you have any furfher questions or concerns regarding our proposal, please feet free to contact we ding at 916 357.2515. * gage 1 RECEIVED FEB 2 2:2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION • f '-.! Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 02/18/00 6:17PM;jetFax #106;Page 3/3 :VI -IB -00 16:1 7 FROM = AI RTOCELLIIAR I o = 916357f02 PAGE 2.2 Siff fQ1y/. Doug Picard Senior RF Engineer e Page 2 FALLON ENGINEERING 11899 EDGEWOOD RD. SUITE P AUBURN,, CA. 95603 January 20, 2000 SPECTRASITE 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD STE 400 SACRAMENTO, CA. 95825 REF: MERIDAN SITE CHICO DEAR MR. STEINKE; 6, THIS LETTER IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE PROPOSED TOWER FOR THE REFERRED SITE. THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE LATTICE TOWER IS 150'. THE TOWER IS DESIGNED FOR A MINIMUM WIND SPEED OF 100 M.P.H. WITH AN EXPOSURE FACTOR OF " C ". THIS LOADING IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 1997 U.B.C. AND 1998 C.B.C. THE TOWER CALCULATIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN PERFORMED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS SET FORTH IN EIA/TIA-222 FOR 100 M.P.H. WINDS. THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT THE TOWER WILL SUPPORT THE DESIGN LOADS, IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT THE TOWER FAILS THE FAILURE WOULD BE IN A TELESCOPIC DIRECTION (VERTICAL) AT LEAST AT THE FIRST STAGES APPROXIMATELY 50'. THE MAXIMUM EFFECTED AREA OF ANY FAILURE WOULD OCCUR WITHIN A 150' RADIUS OF THE BASE INCLUDING ALL ANTENNAS MOUNTED ON THE TOWER. THE CHANCES OF FAILURE IS EXTREMELY REMOTE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS USED. LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED ANYTHING FURTHER. -Y Q�ofESS/ L. F4 ' l <! C") co 2 z ALLON w No.45670 rrii °G Exp. 12/31,V EXP. 12-31-02 -k ..QF CAt -� RECEIVIED JAN 21 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION A I R To U C H - Cellular ERP - sector Sector Ct: ERP - total Ht I P IPD= 4•7c •rz, x distance (ft.) x distance (cm) y distance (cm) Pt to Pt distance (cm) Power Density (UW/CM2) % of Standard RECEIVED JAN 2 5 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION 190 3 570 Watts MERIDIAN 150 ft. Base of Tower 0 0 4572 4572 2.169964096 0.3827% 100 ft. from base of tower 100 3048 4572 5494.860144 1000 ft. from base of tower 1000 30480 4572 30820.99259 AirTouch Cellular 255 Parkshore Drive Folsom, CA 95630 Telephone: 916 357 L-000 1 mile from base of tower 5280 160934.4 4572 160999.3301 1.502282836 0.047749821 0.001749915 0.2650% 0.0084% 0.0003% NOTE: This is a CDMA digital site. CDMA stands for code division multiple access. This is a "spread spectrum" technology, which means that individual calls or telephone conversations are not assigned to a dedicated channel with a fixed power output, as in an analog system. Instead, each call is digitally encrypted and distributed throughout the available bandwidth in the CDMA "carrier", which is 1.25 MHz. Therefore, the total power that the transmitter is capable of emitting is based upon the specifications of the linear power amplifier in the base station, rather than the number of "channels", or conversations taking place at any given time. The effective radiated power, or ERP, was calculated by starting with the maximum composite power that each LPA, or linear power amplifier, is capable of putting out (in this case, 20 Watts, which is the Motorola factory specification for the SC614 base station that will be installed at this site). Then the cable loss and antenna gain are factored in, which brings us to a maximum ERP of 190 Watts per sector, which is a "face", or one of the three different directional antenna arrays. There are three sectors in a standard site configuration such as this one, which makes the total possible ERP for the site 570 Watts. This figure is then factored into the standard power density formula described, and the result is a power density that is a fraction of the allowable FCC standard. I certify that this information was derived as described above and is a true and accurate representation 19 th maxim possib a total RFenergy that could be emitted by our proposed facility. Dougicard Senior RF Engineer Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 01/27/00 5:29PRRjaLNx #6A0;Page 1/5 t ' FAX COVER SHEET, (Nate: ' --2-7 c D SpectraSlte Number of pages including cover sheet: 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95625 -Phone:r�3,3 `17�1 - Fax: 3e;') 5TH r- 7557 v From: S e ite Communications Phone: (916) 927-0642 Fax: (916) 927-2176 REMARKS; ❑ Urgent For Your ❑ Reply ASAP Please Comment Review Re: RECEIVED JAN 2 7 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION The above information is confidential information intended only for the viewing and use of SPECTRASITE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and their clients. Any unauthorized review, use, communication, dissemination, distribution orcopying of this information is strictly prohibited. Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 01/27/00 5:3OPM;jgjEm #680;Page 2/5 JAN -27-00 14:21 FROM:AIRT0 CELLUAR ID,916357(W2 PACE 2/5 GOMNV,y United States- of America to Federal Communications Commission RADIO STATION AUTHORIZATION Cellular Radiotelephone Service SACRAM NTO- VALLEY Li*DTED PARTNERSHIP 2150 RIVER PLAZA DR,, SUIiYlE 400 SACRAMUENTO. CA 95833 Call Sign_ KN"63 Market: 0215 Channel Block: 8-1 SID: 02% Market Name: CSICO, CALIFORNIA The Licensee hereof is authorized, for the period indicated„ to operate a radio transmiftg'station in accordapcc with the scans and conditions hrreiaafter described. This wAhOrizarion is •s*ecx to the provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, subsequent Acts of Congress, iateniatioaal treaties and agmments to which the United States is a signatory, and all pertinent rules and regulmions of the Federal Communications Commission, contained in Title 47 of die Code of Federal Regulations. InitialGrant Date.............................................................................June 17,1988 Expiration Date.......................................................... January 22, 2008 m1mg I CONDII10 : pursuant to Section 309(b) of the Cotnnuulications Act 1934, as am=dedi (47 U.S-C. § 309(h)l this am hodzarioa is subject to the following conditions_ (1) This authorization does not vest in the licensee toy rig}rt to operate a station noir any right in the use of the elactrmnapetic spamum designated herein beyond the terns dtereof nor in aqy outer maturer than authorized herein.. (2) Neither this license nos the tight granied Mwounderr shat! M assigned or otherwise transferred in violation of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. § 151, et se4). (3) This authorizzion is subject in teens to the right of use or control conferred by Section 906 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. § 606). This authorization does not convey to the licensee the tight to receive protection from the capture of subscriber traffic, co-clwauel it Unference of first-a4iscent_channel interference is any AM outside of the ataborized cellular geographic service area (CGSA) of the system. Moreover, any facility andumi2rd herein with a service area boundary (SAB) extending into the CGSA of any otter operating cellular system on the same charnel block regardless of when such other cellular system was authorized, is subject to the following condition: 16 the event that dee licau t of the other cellular system requests that the SAD of the facilities authorized herein be removed from its CGSA, the licensee herein must reduce wassminiag power or antenna height (or both) as necessary to remove the SAS from the CGSA. unless written consent from the licensee of the odwr celhdw system, allowing tiro SAS extension to remain, is obtained. Issued by 1FG an Wednesday February 18, 1998 FCC Forfar 4163A Page: 1 of 4 Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 01/27/00 5:30PM;jgffA #680;Page 3/5_ IAN -27-00 11 14_22FRam:AIRTo& CELLUAR ID•916357�2 PAGE :✓5 ' )18i13h��i A}(de�rec .. ScIISYam Picone Nlitnbj:r I 2150 RIVER PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 SACRAhM Tl O CA () - STRUCTURES AND AMNNAS. L.at atiou Latitude Longitude Tower# Fide Number bWldag8 001 39044'00"N• 121'47*10"W ' 03820-CL-ML,94 1,3,12 & 21 tAc-Atios Description, QM CAMM State KHSL 1700 BRUCE ROAD, CHICO, BUT -11, CA Antenna: A A$orpth o � �sp (degrees tmm'uw Nwgh) 4 22.L" 2700 agl� Antenna Height AAT (m) -112.70 -227.70 -180.40 34.80 90.00 94.80 93.00 .77.80 Transmitter F" (w) 100.00 t00.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 10040 Location Latitude Longitude Towa* Me Number MarMnp 002 39044'50"14 121s38'lA"W 01168-CL-MI,93 NONE I.Axatt48. !1!)? h'�.Ctmufl. State PG&E PRISE RADIO VAULT SKYWAY AT VISTA VIES/ RD PARADISE, BUTIT, CA Antenna: A Azimuth Q_ ; 135 ° .l$4.° 2251 (leve m 11om true North) Antenna Height AAT (m) 31.20 -296.10 -83.90 186.40 338.20 352.40 Transmitter ERP (w) 100.00. 100.00 100.00 63.00 20.00 7.00 222° 338.00 20.00 SACRAMENTO- VALLEY LIMI1'LD PARTNERSHD► KNKA463 Page: 2 of 4 143.60 63.00 Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176,• 01/27/00 5:30PM;jetFax #660; Page 4!5 YAN-27-00 14:22 !SROM=AIRTOSr CELLUAR 1D=916357SP2 PAGE 4/5 - Location Latitude Longitude Towed! FTIe.Number Mwidnp 003 39'28'42"N 121'3254"W 06754-CL-MLr95 NONE 5646 LINCOLN BLVD., OROM IX, BUTIE, CA AnteApa: A Azimuth Dft (at�ces fan Rut Norah) 20.tl Jim!! 2Z 2700 31 g o Antenna sleight AAT (m) -708.00 -93.90 -205.50 i-10 103.60 103.90 100-10 82.20 Trausu fitter ERP (W) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.30 Locatioa Latitude lAmotude Tower# FUg Number Mariattgs 004 390391031N 121 02T42"W 01394 -CL -ML -97 LOtatlen bes A1P NONE BLOOMER HILL, BERRY CREM BUTTE, CA -Utetlna: A Azimuth 450; (demos 5osn.sruo Noro>> L;5` 1gDo 22 2ZLO 23SL! Antenna Height AAT (fn) 342.60 347.50 182.50 387.50 606.20 623.20 703.90 486,71 Transmitter ERP (w) 22.08 22.08 22A8 22.08 22.08 22.09 22.08 22.03 Location Latitude Longitude Tower# Fti7e Plumber Marldngs 005 . 3933'04"N 121°46'54'W 01168 -CL -ML -93 Lasocifin icon. OM county, Sutt, NONE WATER DISTRICT ON NELSON ROAD, NELSON, BU'T'TE, CA Antenna: A Azimuth Be Alk! 20i (dee-,arses fpm orae North) , = = ZZO 315 Antenna Height AAT (in) 19.00 7.80 15.70 30.90 39.80 41.30 37.10 30.70 Transmitter ERP (w) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 SACRAMENTO- VALLEY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP KNKA463 Page_ 3 of Sent by: CORD SACRAMENTO 916 927 2176; 01/27/00 5:31PM;jetFax #680; Page 5/5 iAfJ-27-00 14=22 FROM:AIRTOOF CELLUAR ID=9163672 PAGE E/5 ' L.orition LSfztnde Longitnde Tower#i File Number Marking 007 390'25'04-N 12I041'15'W 01168 -CL -ML. -93 NONE Ldmlion Description, Cid- Gonnty_ S to 0.25 MILE NORTHWEST OF UNION HIGH SCHOOL, BIGGS, BUTTE, CA Antenna: A Azimuth (dcgmes from Uue Nonb) 4;L 1 �� 2240- 2706 22#_ Antenna Height AskT (ar) 39.80 32.80 35.So 51.44 52.70 54.00 54.40 49,40 TraosmiRerERP(w) 100.00 100.00. 100.00 100.00 '100.00 100.00 100.00 100,E Location Latitude. Longitude Tower#e File Number Markings 008 39044v4"N 12165Y37"W 03395-CL-ML.95 none Chico lroa Works I300 Nord Ave., Chico, BUTTE, CA Antenna: A Azimuth SZ 450 225- (deZocs from trot Nom) Z25— Antenna Height AAT (m) 7.50 -127.80 -46.20 45.00 57.30 62,50 S6.90 SIAQ Transmitter ERP (w) 100-00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 WAIVE, R(Sl: Tfd FOLLOWING CELLULAR GEOGRAPMC SERVICE AREAS HAVE BEEN COMBINED (LISTED BY CALM, SIGN. -MARKET NUMBER AND BLOCIC, AND MARKET NAME): XNKN227, 3378 CA 2, KNKA751254B - RBDDING AND ICNKN229 3438 - CA 8 SACRAMENTO- VA -LEY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP KNKA463 Page: 4 of 4 0 Suite Count LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY February 16, 2000 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 RE: Minor Use Permit, File No. MUP 00-08 Dear Mr. Simpson: PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 On January 7, 2000, our office received an application for a Minor Use Permit accompanied by a deposit in the amount of $350.00. Your project is being processed by our staff on a "real time" billing basis. To date your project has incurred charges totaling $565.50. Butte County Code, Sec. 3-44(c) states, in part, "When the initial deposited funds are depleted to an amount equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the original deposit, no additional processing of the application will occur until the applicant deposits with Butte County sufficient funds to restore a balance equal to the amount of the initial deposit". Due to the complexity of your project, processing to date has exceeded your initial deposit by $215.50. To continue the processing of your project we will require that a check in the amount of $565.50 be mailed or delivered to our office on or before Friday, March 3, 2000. This will cover the charges over the initial deposit and the amount equal to your original deposit. If you have any questions, please contact Brian Larsen Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Thomas A. Parilo Director of Development Services TAP:jb j:\docs\refunds\exceeded:wpd Date 02/08/00 DeVelopment Services Departmet Time 1:59 pm Applicant Billing Worksheet MUP 00-08 AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Ste. 440 Sacramento, CA.95825 In reference to MUP 00-08 Rounding, None Full Precision No Last bill Last charge 02/04/00 Last payment / / 1 Amount $0.00 Date/Slip# Description 01/10/00 Paula A. / C #27606 Clerical _ 01/10/00 Larry P. / P #27694 Processing 1.50 01/10/00 Steve B. / P #27771 Processing 59.00 01/24/00 Steve B. / P #28112 Processing 0.25 01/24/00 Teri B. / C #28126 Clerical 01/24/00 Steve L. / LR 428174 LAFCo Review Page 5 HOURS/RATE AMOUNT TOTAL 2.25 76.50 34.00 1.50 88.50 59.00 1.50 88.50 59.00 4.75 280.25 59.00 0.50 17.00 34.00 0.25 14.75 59.00 TOTAL BILLABLE TIME.CHARGES 10.75 TOTAL BILLABLE COSTS TOTAL NEW CHARGES PAYMENTS/REFUNDS/CREDITS t 01/07/00 Deposit - Receipt #18120 (350.00) TOTAL PAYMENTS/REFUNDS/CREDITS 19 .$565.50 $0.00 $565.50 ($350.00) Date 02/08/00 Defelopment Services Departmet Time 1:59 pm Applicant Billing Worksheet Page o MUP 00-08 :AirTouch Cellular (continued) NEW BALANCE New Current period TOTAL NEW BALANCE 215.50 $215.50 Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Manager that a public hearing will be held on, Wednesday, March 22, 2000, in the Butte County Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following item: 9:30 a.m. - AirTouch Cellular, c/o SpectraSite, to erect a 150 foot, self-supporting lattice tower to provide digital wireless communications (cellular phone service) along the Highway 99 corridor north of Chico, on property zoned A- 15 (Agricultural - 15 acre parcels).- The property is located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, at 4933 Anitta Road, north of Chico. APN 047-130-159 (SB) (MUP 00-08) The above mentioned application, Initial Study, and map are on file and available for public viewing at the office of the Butte County Development Services Department, Planning Division, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. For information call: (530) 538-7601 (Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) Comments may be submitted in writing at any time prior to the hearing or orally at the meeting listed above or as may be continued to a later date. Upon action taken by the Planning Commission on the project an appeal may be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. The appeal period is 10 days. If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission, at or prior to, the public hearing. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION THOMAS A. PARILO, DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES To be published in the Chico Enterprise Record on Friday, February 18, 2000. SpectraSite 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Date: -00 To: S Coy -e Attn.: 7 Svc Phone: r 760 ) Fax: - 7785 TRAVSMITTAL Sent Via: U.S. Postal Service ❑ Blueprinter ❑ Express Delivery 9' Other ❑ Courier ❑ From: SPECTRASITE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Attn.: Jim Simpson Phone: IW�O Z 7 - 107 ( ► Fax: �r) of V ^ Z Ze ITEMS TRANSMITTED: FF- 9 2000 BUTTE COUNTY JL AJA-Uq L11 LIN %X "I V 101ull REMARKS: Urgent • For Your ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment 0 The above information is confidential informaticCintended only for the viewino and use of SPECTRASITE COMMUNICATIONS: INC. and teir clients. Any unauthorized review, use, communication, dissemination, distribution. or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. 0 on !® �Lf ll V `` Char Am% ■ Flood 06007CO320 C X U Subsidence 25 1 30 'ii r J w I 3 4.0 to 4.9 ►, s� BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION TO: CDF FROM: Butte County Planning Division RE: Request for Comments on a Development Application: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson, MUP 00-08 DATE: January 19, 2000 CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Betts The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental documents to prepare for this project; as well as to identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittal it should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts. This is an application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility,., which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna, on property zoned A-15 ( Agricultural, 15 acre parcel) located on the south side of Anita Road approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, north of Chico, identified as APN 047-130-159. Supervisorial District No. —4. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check one) _X_ PLANNING COMMISSION - _ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON March23 , 2000. COMMENTS, IF 'ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER THAN February 2, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): Ax� "�GF,P E �.p 2-- � -0-6 BiTT County Center Drive - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAX 530-538-7785 PLANNING DIVISION BUTTE COUNTY . STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR MINOR USE PERMIT APPLICANT: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson DATE: January 10, 2000 AGENT: APN: 047-130-159 FILE #: MUP 00-08 - , PLANNER: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna. PLEASE CONTACT THE BUTTE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS H. FIRE PROTECTION —•1. Construction, installation or development of structures or facilities on the parcels/lots shall comply with the latest California Fire Safe Regulations, (Public Resources Code 4290), and all other applicable State and County codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of application for improvement permits. Building identification and/or addresses shall be installed in conformance with Public Resources Code 4290 and shall be.posted at the beginning of building construction and maintained continuously , thereafter. —3. Fire hydrant identification, reflector or post reflectors shall be installed acceptable to the County Fire Warden. —4. In lieu of a pressurized water system or water storage tank, payment of $200.00 per created parcel into the Battalion . water tend fund, is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. —5. A pressurized community water system for fire protection is required. The specific locations and fire flow requirements shall be in accordance with the Fire Department specifications and to the satisfaction of the County Fire Warden. Average required hydrant spacing — feet, hydrant size _ inches, and residual fire flow gpm. Submit plans to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to construction of facilities. —6. In lieu of hydrant installation, payment may be made into the hydrant fund at a cost of $1.72 per lineal foot of street frontage. The estimated fee amount is $ —7. Prior, to recordation of the Map or application for a building permit, the applicant shall pay the then current fee for the West Chico Fire Station Fund. t 8. Provide an all weather access of at least 10 foot wide and with a vertical clearance of 15 feet that will accommodate a 40,000 pound fire apparatus to all structures. LA. February 7, 2000 1;utteo Count LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY i�PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-33917 TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601 FAX: (530) 538-7785 SpectraSite Attention: James Simpson 2277 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Suite 440 Sacramento, CA 95825 Re: Applications for Minor Use Permits and for a Use Permit for Wireless Communication Facilities, Files MUP 00-07 (Skyway), MUP 00-08 (Meridian), and UP 00-06 (Forebay) Dear Mr. Simpson: Thank you for the submittal of the above referenced applications. Your project applications, maps and related items have been reviewed by County Agencies in order to determine the completeness of your application. Enclosed please find copies of the comment's we have received from agencies regarding your project. These comments have been received as part of the initial thirty (30) day review of your project. Please review these comments and the conditions that are requested as part of the project's approval. Should you have any further questions regarding these comments, please contact me between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Stephen Betts Associate Planner Enc. K:\PROJECTS\UPM\SKYW AY.MUP\COMMENTS.LET 0 BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Planning Division 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 to: Jim Simpson, SpectraSite fax #: (530) 927-2176 from: Stephen Betts, Associate Planner date: January 28, 2000 subject: Meridian Tower Site pages: 3 NOTES: The following is the petition against the tower site. I believe it was given to us by one of the County Supervisors. Also attached is a map that shows the location of the ATC site. I can't remember if you already knew where this site is located. I still don't know where the ATT site is and as of today they haven't submitted an application. Thank you for faxing the "Radio Station Authorization" document. This is sufficient "proof," and it appears that we have received all the required submittal materials. will discuss with my supervisor the timing issue you referred to in your fax to me yesterday (1/27). Hopefully we can set up a meeting for late next week. 0 ATC Site Air Touch Site Petition Petition against the erection of a cellular phone tower at 4933 Anita Road (Shasta - Vista Huller, Chico California) Please wri your Name and Address Owl -)-I 3o - 11.0 N 6)- s II n j -I -_: - l Sq k,30Ja. N�sa�3 GoLiI - 1"3O- i?2 Al-�°lA- OLi7-130- 11io v� V, (�.,� 953 ��1'> - i 3 c�— ► 4 b y 7 ��• �o �S"9r Owl?- I'3O - 'Z c/, �6 d ice 17. 18, 'em 19. 20. RECEIVED NOV 2 21999 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION _� r �`,, �-� 'tom 6preiic UP 00-08 Mailing List Map AP# 047-130-159 AirTouch sop J4, I -. o Z N r7> DA N U z Hz Z M� a P4 //(scale determined by pylons placed at site) Jg ' � _ .� - : L. _ kms. ! -..ti J...r .. d � • y.h�. ..tet%. .ay_ __^ . _.�„ .fig �.iy� 9- ✓,� _ Meridian 4933 Anita Way A I RTO U CH- Chico, CA proposed 150' lattice tower proposed equipment trz .4+ � ,��'� � 'y 't'. b �, .. a �y `..� ✓` '•�+w. '1qu�y hw' 1 ddS - _ ..�•.` .a: _ ?.�y �. .:meq.• -- 8 z H N �� OQ Aqz N U C7 Q Fz �Dz Po �4 a a 3 E 0 H 3 as 0 0 3 as 0 0 ea 3 E 0 0 s IL C=2 F" OA N U Wz a O O cc m a C" c O O E O i y d 3 s 0 0 N c O 3 d O c O 3 E 0 0 s IL z C= Hm N ;Z)0-4 OA U AQ Z Q EE -F z M .C4 a a cc M f+ a E O L am 0 H Im ._ 0 O 3 d .:0 0 0 3 O 0 a d 1 � .: r ,y/1iYY:v � ' '�.�,1St-•yp �y . �1.' _'. ..iT+�'}`C�"'y�.�.+1. � `� ,w•. yYh sy '4'-:7�CS }y'x�"Y, r�. .:'s :L; Ex�i�st�i�ngMeridian 14933 Anita Way i Proposed - "r....•79w n`Y-.vim proposed 150' lattice tower / f f}: i f' proposed equipment ji x . Proposed - "r....•79w n`Y-.vim LEAD IN SHEET FILE NO: NIUP 00-08 AP# 047-130-159 R Sacramento, CA 95825 OWNER: REPRESENTATIVE: 1194 U 1• '"•11 • •111•.1 •• . 1 �- 1 •• •.- 1 1" 1e1" 1 "1l• -.i 1 _w- NEW. 10011-0 •. • - •• -� 111"1 m I ol I s f .74 a F10 01 ' .1 -11 SIZE: 15 acres 11 i SUPERVISORAL DISTRICT #A -EXISTING ZONING: A-15 ( Agricultural, 15 acrean rcell ZONING HISTORY: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: SITE HISTORY: T i E'u GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Don APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Date Rec'd 1-7-00 Sewer Butte Water District Skansen Subdivision (CSA 21) Fire Protection _X V//California Department of Forestry Recreation Districts _ Chico Area Recreation _ Paradise Recreation & Park Utilities Themalito Irrigation _ Sterling City Sewer Main L.O.A. PUD EI Medio Fire Protection District Durham Area Recreation _ Feather River Rec. & Park Richvale Recreation & Parks PG&E North - Chico _ COMMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST APPLICATION: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson DATE: January 10, 2000 " 'County Offices and Cities: _ Chitf Administrative Officer _X_`Develop. Services Director X Public Works Director _X_ Environmental Health✓ _X_J Assessor v/ Building Manager Sheriff ✓ _ BCAG _ ALUC . X LAFCo = Air Quality Mgmt. _ Butte Co. Farm Bureau Biggs _ Gridley _ Chico _ Oroville _ Paradise _ / Chico Airport Commission US Bureau of Land Management Animal Control _X_/ Agricultural Commission Irrigation District: Other Districts, *Agencies, Committees, etc. Butte Water _ Biggs/W. Gridley Water _ Durham Irrigation OWID _ Paradise Irrigation _ Richvale Irrigation Table Mountain Irrigation _ Thermalito Irrigation _ Other Domestic Water Butte Co. Mining Committee" _ _ Butte Water District _ California Water Service Co. _ Del Oro Water Co. OWID Thermalito Irrigation District Other Sewer Butte Water District Skansen Subdivision (CSA 21) Fire Protection _X V//California Department of Forestry Recreation Districts _ Chico Area Recreation _ Paradise Recreation & Park Utilities Themalito Irrigation _ Sterling City Sewer Main L.O.A. PUD EI Medio Fire Protection District Durham Area Recreation _ Feather River Rec. & Park Richvale Recreation & Parks PG&E North - Chico _ Chambers Cable TV _ Pacific Bell PG&E South - Oroville Viacom Cable TV State Agencies CalTrans (Traffic) _ Dept. of Water Resources _ Dept. of Fish and Game Forestry (Attn: Craig Carter) Dept of Parks and Rec. _ Highway Patrol _ _ Central Reg. Water Quality Cont _ Caltrans, Aeronautics Program Department of Conservation _ Off. of Mining Reclamation _ Off. of Governmental & Env. Relations _ Dept.Social Services, Comm.Care Licensing Federal Agencies _ US Forest Service _ US Bureau of Land Management _ US Fish & Wildlife Service _ Army Corps of Engineers Other Districts, *Agencies, Committees, etc. Lime Saddle Dist _ Community Association _ Mosq. Abatement. Oroville/Butte Co Drainage _ Butte Env.l Council _ Paradise Pines Com. Assoc. Reclamation _ Cal Native Plant Society Butte Co. Mining Committee" _ Forest Ranch'Community Assoc. Butte Ck. Watershed Conservancy_ School Districts V RECEIVED BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES JAN 3 12000 PLANNING DIVISION BUTTE COUNTY TO: Building Dept. PLANNING DIVISION FROM: Butte County Planning Division RE: Request for Comments on a Development Application: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson, MUP 00-08 DATE: January 19, 2000 CONTACT PERSON:'Stephen Betts The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental documents to prepare for this project, as well as to identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittal it should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts. This is an application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, nine panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna, on property zoned A-15 ( Agricultural, 15 acre parcel) located on the south side of Anita Road, Tapproximately .35 miles west of Highway 99, north of Chico, identified as APN 047-130-159. Supervisorial District No. -4. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check one) _X_ PLANNING COMMISSION - —DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON March23,2000. COMMENTS, IF ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER THAN February 2, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): LE Date: 3/ 1411 fAwd 7 County Center Drive - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAX 530-538-7785 PLEASE CONTACT THE BUILDING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS E. BUILDING PERMITS = 1. Prior to building pe it iss nce for anew residential dwelling unit(s), the .' applicant shall pay all pli able development fees'at the rate in effect at the time of acceptance of th application. Such fees, shall include, but not be limited to: Park Fee, S o Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Water and Sewe Service ees, and Fire Protection Fees. 2. Prior to building permit issuance for a new commercial ,or industrial e development, or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay all applicable development fees at the rate in effect at the time of acceptance of the application. Such fees shall include, but not be limited to: School Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, and Fire Protection Fees. F. 'EXISTING STRUCTURES 1. Comply with the Uniform Building Code for property line clearances considering use, area and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. 2. Existing buildin 6eemolished. all be made to comply with current Building and Zoning regulatio e intended new use of the building(s) or the existing building(s) shal a 1 The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental. documents to prepare for this project, as well as to'identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittal it should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts: This is an application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tow r, pin panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna, on property zoned A-15 ( Agricultural 15 acrean rcel) located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99. north of Chico, identified as APN 047-130-159. Supervisorial District No. -4. 4V133 4U i7?q )e -V THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check one) PLANNING COMMISSION - _ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON March 23, 2000. COMMENTS, IF ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER THAN January 24, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): 7 County Center Drive - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAX 530-538-7785 R JAN 1 g 2000 OMMMENTAL HEALTH COUNTY BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES NI ) !►� i 0 2000 G DIVISION pI$�NU PLANNING DIVISION Chimp Cal'domia TO: Environmental Health, Chico FROM: Butte County Planning Division RE: Request for Comments on a Development Application: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson, MUP 00-08 DATE: January 10, 2000 CONTACT PERSON: The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental. documents to prepare for this project, as well as to'identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittal it should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts: This is an application for a Minor Use Permit for a Cellular Communications Facility, which includes a 150 foot tall tow r, pin panel antennas which extend 2 feet above the tower, a 9 square foot equipment cabinet, and GPS antenna, on property zoned A-15 ( Agricultural 15 acrean rcel) located on the south side of Anita Road, approximately .35 miles west of Highway 99. north of Chico, identified as APN 047-130-159. Supervisorial District No. -4. 4V133 4U i7?q )e -V THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check one) PLANNING COMMISSION - _ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON March 23, 2000. COMMENTS, IF ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER THAN January 24, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): 7 County Center Drive - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAX 530-538-7785 i r e Ax BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION TO: Public Works FROM: Butte County Planning Division RE Request for Comments on a Development Application: AirTouch Cellular c/o SpectraSite, James Simpson; MUP 00-08 DATE: January 10, 2000 CONTACT PERSON: The Planning Division has received a project application for the property described below. The purpose of this comment sheet is to: 1. Determine if the information contained in the application is adequate to allow your jurisdiction to review the project and submit conditions, if any; and to 2. Determine the appropriate environmental documents to prepare for this project, as well as to identify particular environmental concerns to be addressed or mitigation measures your agency/department may want incorporated. If the application is determined to be complete within 30 days of its submittatit should be heard at the estimated hearing date indicated below. If a response cannot be submitted within the time frame given, or if additional information is needed, please call 538-7601. Thank you in advance for your time and efforts. This is an application forai� Tmor u Permit er**�it for a CPttuiar : �*nmunicationt Facilit\+, which includes a 150 foot tall tower, -nine P wel antennas yhich extend 2 feet above the toy=ger a 9 square foot eauinment cah�nP+ and C;P__ Santenna, on property zoned15 ( Agricultural, 1 a .r ap rce11 located on the south gide of Anrta Roark} znrox. .1 miles wts of Hip �� ay 9Q, north of Chico, identified as 59 APN 047-130-1. Supervisorial District No. A. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE (check . 20 0. PLANNING COMMISSION - _ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON Mardila, , COMMENTS, IF ANY, ARE REQUESTED BY NO LATER THAN Tanuary 24, 2000. If no comments or communications are received by the above date, the assumption will be made that your agency has no comment. COMMENTS (Attach additional pages if necessary): oe � r Z Dwy I�AP.� L0 Date: Z� R �, y� RECEtFA oun e t e - Oroville, California 95965 - 530-538-7601 - FAR30-,538-7785 JAN 1 2 2000 J A 1� 1 0 2000 COUNTY OF BUTTE BUTTE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT DN. PLANNING DIVISION I I f j and i una mom mj wtw Irnosm�m:. _ ------- --7 P60lD f 1pl OWI nnm ux � lu�ac Imlm amo SITE PLAN 1 Ll I� - I•d I�flOI aW u! lo¢ • av® w[ N mrm W � uro Ir x—X—x—x x' -'I I J X X X X X X X raor® Im mr aaxlw una ma X movaa rd. rd w m. tumor and I � X x dm X 1' ❑ r X }} fd X ` rd X r -r rd x X --i LXX WOOm IDm�9%p -X-I-X-X- X -X -•x-_ ENLARGED SITE PLAN a I, Kwwcu I• l �I I I I I " I I ILI > I I ' I 1 1 17 M11°' I I f j and i una mom mj wtw Irnosm�m:. _ ------- --7 P60lD f 1pl OWI nnm ux � lu�ac Imlm amo SITE PLAN 1 Ll I� - I•d I�flOI aW u! lo¢ • av® w[ N mrm W � uro Ir x—X—x—x x' -'I I J X X X X X X X raor® Im mr aaxlw una ma X movaa rd. rd w m. tumor and I � X x dm X 1' ❑ r X }} fd X ` rd X r -r rd x X --i LXX WOOm IDm�9%p -X-I-X-X- X -X -•x-_ ENLARGED SITE PLAN a I, Kwwcu I• l �I Al ;c -_ Qm1c mewmw q laq ® aoo gnxo �\ -_ oms amuml D c IePm � � Imao / tl Ai R T O U CH" Cellular e � moal em �' ma a "•`' �••� L um .255 PARKSHORE DRIVE �, _ aqi d0 nem FOLSOM, CA. 95630 { MERIDIAN # X41 #yam -ZONING DOCUMENTS 2z �� a ��� ,� a 4933 ANITA ROAD III! m CHICO, CALIFORNIA I e� ® a $ �v�•pa;�a CD o m� o wa® CD n CD rl �Iql � �\ •m ro ala 'i rpl� ; V (C/��•�=m 1�'alla � I b a SYMBOLS VICINITY MAP woe ev aux 1 i vNea a W+q Igao was M gwniur auulm n PROPERTY OWNER: ;a q.�e k° uew LL ar m�qx a r.0 K. ci x, ans ax w artrt aum. cvrmel wm ado oox� �s rwwa WLMOfX fN1LY TR14 �1 ram Ime ar"to�a ?� A ,�oisiMi" mean m mia xos Yl. qdE 1181 rLLa1 IO>Igm •gemm gym¢ g ae�wro itA-'.Mo. awxw ru q�noi r�wu aw vnrt n elaamq qM sww itaYDLVT. aom rm: {17l'� Npm I7i7 CHM CA 939" CCMMI: BRUCE YCMNW MRRiMI M¢mlm ,Ia icy Ij �}I l6¢ m® Nq MM noct mm� mam'am. mm rm: nm�cc rank i10'WllOf ! R[I� TIO4 MPRM aPMEOTA G0.00 I[[! ro M MOA O KOoaArc ) ��71 aNa •R q!I[ 1� egaf mac ut-rf .gUMLt e p R x01A1 A all 1WleIG11R111 M ImIR n aq•In Qo twm awl tmloo OgrOf ro M AaPt o00Mm uAla Nxw L 1011Ma 1p1 NNO IOq aOAAe11 CMl cM �q ' mw ml Aiort aaalam uis ,aw m M OmNN Aoo, i.AO,,. A1LLLmm•Y16]LWm" �pO m6nOGx! q •,� i,,,c " { qom mmauoum xrt ,' I ,�1 • u m�°i i. 253 PM 9170.E MA 7R3RA CA V" �® �� �� rA/ ZONING DOCUME a Q II; 1277 M1 0" 95IA SUITE 110 2W FAME SICAP1Q G Wa13 T -f TRIE 9Q7 " m alq gg� tw JU CO m. (is Se1P5011 FAX (ole) VD -2174 FAX M) QT1 2174 A -I WU 7W1 a BI.VA'ID 9lE fl/11 A-1 SBIIIN EIIYAI9N plm p�p� n my C-ISURVSUMET 1 E 0..e fiaFa MR �la[1p M I.eVW 6;� Bd �a IRI Ca" D WIMM CDMW 1 1 Pat i8 i6iom{{ �l� f�i • q 1.78 SECSND $FM N& tl1Y. C4dRBM 039Q7 - 1 PI (570) 673-= SHEET INDEX ty T1 MUM 'm'®� ABBREVIATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION I PRtOJECT DIRECTORY gi 1, pi �eR pl 1tC i 9 p11 i A•d 1R O�A� �1°�vR ` n 1� � �iA �� � � 9 9 •� � g n m TOPOGRAPHY MERIDIAN ERIDAN IRD04CA' SDtro a.maicat 4933 NIT ROAD. CHIC 22P7 Fdr ok717S.It.k Hb SamntoCA95825 m TOPOGRAPHY MERIDIAN ERIDAN IRD04CA' SDtro a.maicat 4933 NIT ROAD. CHIC 22P7 Fdr ok717S.It.k Hb SamntoCA95825 a a ' NO�2TH ELEVATION � fGYL � Y4 D t m v MERIDIAN �� •` ..o® N mjmm AItTOtCt- Cellular specvnsite ml aw o•o an . SpectraSite January 7, 1999 Mr. Stephen Betts Associate Planner Butte County 7 County Center Dr. Oroville, CA 95965 Re: AirTouch Cellular Site "Meridian" MUP Application Dear Mr. Betts, SpectraSite, on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, respectfully submits this Minor Use Permit application for a proposed AirTouch facility to be located 4933 Anita Road, Chico. We are pleased to provide the following information in support of the request. 1. County Application, with LOA. 2. Check in the amount of $350.00 payable to the County of Butte, 3. Plan sets thirty-five (3 5) 11" x 17" and one (1) 24" x 26", 4. Vicinity Map, 5. Project Description/Justification Statement, 6. Radio Engineering Coverage Plots, and; 7. RF Report on Effective Radiate Power (ERP) for the site. 8. Copy of notification letter sent to Agricultural Commissioner and aerial applicators. 9. Copy of notification letter sent to other carriers operating within Butte County. We are confident that the information submitted will allow the Staff and Planning Commission to support the requested use permit. Photo simulations of the existing and proposed facility will be forthcoming as will a tower failure analysis report. Due to the holidays and other scheduling conflicts it was not possible to complete those items prior to filing. We believe that the 150 -foot height when placed adjacent to the 70'+ almond hulling structures works to reduce the potential visibility of the proposed telecommunications facility. Setting the site back from Highway 99, placing it adjacent to existing structures and providing a height that may allow other carriers to collocate in the future meets the implied intent of the ordinance. That is, to minimize new telecommunications towers. The proposed request will not result in any change to the existing use of the site or adjacent properties. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Ve y yours, ames N. Simpson, Land Use Planner G:\Projects\Airtouch\Planning\Meridian\Cover Ltr.doc RECEIVED JAN 01 2000 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION SpectmSlte Communications, Inc. www.SpectraSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramento, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 • Fax 916.927.2176 O� SpectraSite December 30, 1999 Mr. Richard B. Price Agricultural Commissioner 316 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Price, SpectraSite Communications, Inc., on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, is hereby providing notification that they intend to permit the development of the following wireless telecommunications sites in Butte County, California. This notification is made pursuant to Section 24-262 of the Butte County Code requiring notification of the Agricultural Commissioner and aerial applicators operating within the County. The proposed sites include: 1. Skyway, 4842 Media Way, Paradise, CA LAT. 39-43-47 LONG. 121-40-50 2.. Forebay, Table Mountain Boulevard, Oroville, CA LAT. 39-32-38.29 LONG. 121-35-38.29 3. Meridian, 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA LAT. 39-48-33 LONG. 121-55-29 4. Honcut, 1908 Highway 70, Oroville, CA LAT. 39-22-26 LONG. 121-36-15 All locations will be new towers and telecommunications facilities with the exception of the Forebay site which will be a collocation on an existing SpectraSite/NEXTEL facility. Please review and make comments to the Butte County Planning Department or feel free to contact me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Veryyours, mes N. Simpson, Land Use Planner G:�Pr�j�g�QI�dKgb�y�AG Commissioner Ltr.doc - wwwSpectraSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramento, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 • Fax 916.927.2176 s Aerial Applicators & others operating Win Butte County Letter sent to each and Ag. Commissioner per County Code Section 24-262. AVAG, Inc. P.O.Box 156 PM Dusters, Inc. Richvale, CA 95974-0156 P.O. Box 1534/8562 Aquas Frias Road Chico, CA 95927-1534 Attn: Craig Compton Attn: Rick W. Peterson Chico Aerial Applicators RPI Helicopters P.O. Box 3549 94 Second Street Chico, CA 95927-3549 Yuba City, CA 95993 Attn: Darrell E. Wahl Attn: Rick Patterson Dibble, Inc. Sutter Butte Dusters P.O.Box 2361 P.O. Box 213 Marysville, CA 95901-2361 Live Oak, CA 95953 Attn: Gary Dibble Attn: Frank "Wayne" Sue Jones Aviation, Inc. Western Helicopter Services, Inc. 5664 Hankins P.O. Box 369 Williams, CA 95987 Newberg, OR 97132-0369 ' Attn: Gene Muir Attn: Norman S. Parker Jones Flying Service Williams Ag Service P.O. Box 497 P.O. Box 474 Biggs, CA 95917 Biggs, CA 95917-0474 Attn: Dale A. Jones Attn: Clarence Williams Mann & Sons Ag Aviation 175 County Road G Butte County Sheriff/Aerial Unit Willows, CA 95988 33 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Attn: Jean K. Mann Michaud Aviation California Highway Patrol P.O. Box 1279 Air Operations Unit Willows, CA 95988-1279 2390 Lindenbergh Street Attn: Frank Michaud Auburn, CA 95602 Moore Aviation, Inc. P.O. Box 185 Colusa, CA 95932-0185 Attn: Larry Roady- Onstott Dusters, Inc. P.O. Box 709 Yuba City, CA 95992-0709 Attn: Charles Onstott Enlowe Flight Care 1531 Esplanade Avenue Chico, CA 95926 Attn: Marty Marshall Agricultural Commissioner 316 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 Attn: Mr. Richard B. Price SpectraSite December 30, 1999 Ms. Holly Bender SpectraSite Communications, Inc. 100 Regency Forest Dr., Ste. 400 Cary, NC 27511 Dear Ms. Bender, SpectraSite Communications, Inc., on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, is hereby providing notification to SpectraSite Communications, Inc. that they intend to permit the development of the following wireless telecommunications sites in Butte County, California. This notification is made pursuant to Section 24-262 of the Butte County Code requiring notification of all FCC licensed common carriers operating within the County. The proposed sites include: 1. Skyway, 4842 Media Way, Paradise, CA 2. Forebay, Lower Table Mountain Boulevard, Oroville, CA 3. Meridian, 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA 4. Honcut, 1908 Highway 70, Oroville, CA All locations will be new towers and telecommunications facilities with the exception of the Forebay site which will be a collocation on an existing SpectraSite/NEXTEL facility. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Very y yours, aures N. Simpson, Land Use Planner C.zI-V-TA �� 000 JAN 2 0 gU NI DIVISION p� G:\PrS�gLqA�W& jMWMSbpy�;SpectraSite Ltr.doc www.SpectraSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramento, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 -� Fax 916.927.2176 December 30, 1999 Ms. Sue Copeland NEXTEL 3180 Harvard St. Sacramento, CA 95815 Dear Ms. Copeland, SpectraSite Communications, Inc., on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, is hereby providing notification to NEXTEL that they intend to permit the development of the following wireless telecommunications sites in Butte County, California. This notification is made pursuant to Section 24-262 of the Butte County Code requiring notification of all FCC licensed common carriers operating within the County. The proposed sites include: 1. Skyway, 4842 Media Way, Paradise, CA 2. Forebay, Lower Table Mountain Boulevard, Oroville, CA 3. Meridian, 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA 4. Honcut, 1908 Highway 70, Oroville, CA All locations will be new towers and telecommunications facilities with the exception of the Forebay site which will be a collocation on an existing SpectraSite/NEXTEL facility. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Very yours, J es N. Simpson, Land Use Planner G:\Pr%�&JaAiFWL%W,WpRMW%ibfW�NEXTEL Ltr.doc www.SpectraSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramento, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 • Fax 916.927.2176 l • • SpectraSite December 30, 1999 Mr. Reed Wilson AT&T Wireless Service 10030 Goethe Road Sacramento, CA 95827 Dear Mr. Wilson, SpectraSite Communications, Inc., on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, is hereby providing notification to AT&T Wireless Service that they intend to permit the development of the following wireless telecommunications sites in Butte County, California. This notification is made pursuant to Section 24-262 of the Butte County Code requiring notification of all FCC licensed common carriers operating within the County. The proposed sites include: 1. Skyway, 4842 Media Way, Paradise, CA 2. Forebay, Lower Table Mountain Boulevard, Oroville, CA 3. Meridian, 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA 4. Honcut, 1908 Highway 70, Oroville, CA All locations will be new towers and telecommunications facilities with the exception of the Forebay site which will be a collocation on an existing SpectraSite/NEXTEL facility. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Very, yours, J7 es N. Simpson, Land Use Planner SpectraSite Communications, Inc. www.SpectroSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramento, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 • Fax 916.927.2176 SpectraSite December 30, 1999 Ms. ,Sandy Rugroden Planning Manager Pacific Bell Wireless 3851 N. Freeway Blvd. Sacramento, CA 95838 Dear Ms. Rugroden, SpectraSite Communications, Inc., on behalf of AirTouch Cellular, is hereby providing notification to Pacific Bell. Wireless that they intend to permit the development of the following wireless telecommunications sites in Butte County, California. This notification is made pursuant to Section 24-262 of the Butte County Code requiring notification of all FCC licensed common carriers operating within the County. The proposed sites include: 1. Skyway, 4842 Media Way, Paradise, CA 2. Forebay, Lower Table Mountain Boulevard, Oroville, CA 3. Meridian, 4933 Anita Road, Chico, CA 4. Honcut, 1908 Highway 70, Oroville, CA All locations will be new towers and telecommunications facilities with the exception of the Forebay site which will be a collocation on an existing SpectraSite/NEXTEL facility. Please feel free to contact. me at (916) 717-3107 mobile or (916) 286-7407 direct if you have any questions. Very yours, J res N. Simpson, Land Use Planner G:\Prwogt�v & w6wi hhy PacBe11 Wireless.doc www.SpectraSite.com 2277 Fair Oaks Blvd., Suite 440 • Sacramenco, CA 95825 • Tel 916.927.0642 • Fax 916.927.2176 02:58 PM MC Cor T0CK.`'Ko14APiCfx"`..' 808 3864 P-01 A 'r C.: t-- 11 u.1 a. r LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO: COUNTY OF BUTTE APPLICATION FOR ZONING/USE/BUILDING PERMIT SHASTA VISTA ORCHARDS, INC., as to an undivided 2 interest; and Donald Richard McClintock and Margean R. McClintock, Trustees of the McClintock Family Trust of 1998, established October 23, 1998, as owner of the below -described property, does/do hereby appoint AirTouch Cellwlar as agent for the purpose of consummating any application necessary to ensure their ability to use and/or construct improvements to the property leased, or licensed, to them for the purpose of constructing a communications site. We/1 understand that the application may be denied, modified or approved with conditions and that such conditions or modifications must be complied with prior to issuance of building.permits. We/I hereby authorize employees of the County of Butte. to enter upon the subject property during normal business hours as necessary to inspect the property for the purpose of processing this application. Located at: 4933 Anita Road Chico, CA 95973. Assessor's Parcel Number: 047-130-159.000 Signature of Property Owner: LESSOR: By: y: Jez Title: - Tit1c�N� ��r� c S/lAg -� y„L>���it% w Date: P Date: / y/ J_0� Title: i Date: Vicinity Map AirTouch Meridian Site 0 mi 2 4 Streets98 Copyright ©1988-1997, Microsoft Corporation and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved. Please visit our web site at http://maps.expedia.com. A ve 6 Page 1 t t:. CD— CV Y : • `.: Ir 'J • :. cr, \ ina o : .............. g 'lesssen'R d. : AirTouchlVina 99' . �- uaw Hill _...... ` +. r; + - me Ns di g et / Goran ' Richardson Springs � - - ...o......... _. J \ to AirTouchiMiddian... /, A-15 Zoning•i Almond Hulling Operation t r_Rd .- \Anita o _ E _ -... {= =,Cutler Av ....�' _' Nord .....� ---- -• Qa'cBelltTower'� - T' - NEXTE L�EspIanada �aton.R �-BIDWELL i ER PARK � � ( East Ave y Air.ToucnlNord 32� / ``—'—Mills Hami on City \ - -- -Orchard- Ve �...^...- 45 - 't W"Sacra a ntbvr�C�� St John Rd Chico Landing i '"- . Barber �,� Junction is `. c _ 0 mi 2 4 Streets98 Copyright ©1988-1997, Microsoft Corporation and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved. Please visit our web site at http://maps.expedia.com. A ve 6 Page 1 View of proposed site looking SW along _mita Road from.Highway 99. View of subject property looking SE from Anita Road. Meridian Site AirTouch Cellular View of proposed site looking west from Highway 99 south of Keefer Rd. View of subject property looking SW along Arita Road. Meridian Site AirTouch Cellular 17 " .r., - � .��.• ..'�•+�. a �^� (' •r �•e,t�1 t�•h1 �4 "Y!' '"ti'IMf?to 7i �TT�i •ii " t1{' rYa [ ..,, ter. i •� .I r - YY t • t { .i- T o Altercate tower loeatiofi. . a S - 1 J View of alternate site north of Search Ring l Aoki% ME fr. m 1 .igh way 99.1 Out of Search Ring Viev' of alternate NEXTEL site looking S ftc m Highway; 19. Out of ;earth y _ng Meridian Site AirTouch Cellular J t: c J View of alternate site north of Search Ring l Aoki% ME fr. m 1 .igh way 99.1 Out of Search Ring Viev' of alternate NEXTEL site looking S ftc m Highway; 19. Out of ;earth y _ng Meridian Site AirTouch Cellular too•' 19 ... - .Be OEL°]0 - x� 11 x � , (S, llular SitesAirTouch Ce ffillllt WAW ��j` ed BI L[aH, - Existing Fork - .flD. •umar A & azraf Lrors `�r`� r _�C� '`. e � c � 7j. �ai'7iaMc - ;rNtEREz. rb. fxpEL r\a?n, �f`'*P�� L�eMxLEv'rnmt 3� p n- . rr d •a lzoar`x.+AREA` .±xt., Af ra''�ISHIb *z••,r�'O Fl�ir�, Pronosed - Wa Rmptt. Dai 'Ile As•.t _ '4'Lcc----reit , Y .® R9'Cr. < • (EL za r cnmr� "°°'g apNa°'� �'�«x� Future Search Ring Locations B°"A oar ,m vl Ae J - Cr. �.r .:•1 r BAL°y Z RaPER.r�gr, Gry W 3Y - a Probe• Map excerpt from the AAA Northern California WILDE NESS §� Y Idl; c. er zt a++u and Bay & Mountain Maps s„• Los Molinos sv �i,vAaD. C Tehama Aei .,, EL. zzo c.r sr+ u ; I .SCALE: 1” = 9 MII.ES . QD ..AcClure. RD: 11 0.D.. b Qf Q Z �-EL X60 GY? EL 1n EL:as g Ri hfiet� s ELI _ rM Cris: J 8 "1 m ,;Fft acv y e<so •f-. B-zsSi r1iQ1 - Henleyville CORac noao•c 8 eer EL via vav Cr. CG. p?1 ut a a ��� \ y BUCKS r _kELtn •Le"'aD. ,zn .�n�,.. ev±roRr f3 r. t' 56 3i L h El Evw• _ 9 ; n Coming a, �;;'• / �a u 2 �.. �' a RD �C ` <irr . 3 WILDERI9PS IIDNG / RD.. g HOAG RD. _ 31 Pa. $° . C�,1f_ COflh85�5aet `0 EL a• ora o 1 L� D'�!], Lnssfv/ ,� Stirlin vr. G ELI ai�-1 TObinir a°mis0 ew scum I2 to # 8 n s /� r Forest /Lovelock r� e9 ti 49 lEHM1A / i � � h aro r•°' R � DIN 17. _ a - RUTTF, H2 ° xDrL � � 191oG�>`yZ tBoc1.. rwr o r+Fwvp� wood cn - tau i ..Rxr.v �c w.rg� �1E n�+vn. Haar c v. `.Y j ,� .Ik E■ a . �`a' EL zm aau � av � a4".9• �'" EL aoo � o y t i �I'fi2 lz.+ '' na®.YDj- J. :' e' 18 YLERA //� Richardson.y P ne r co. tT > If \"a Springs u Center- rines, ` ga Pyu� �Y� ' "@ $ U(IGDMUVL Maga I �' �" �.r r Lt wawalLu:DwG ARlORr ville - Oi• t Run o + � ^ � a. eo P° R"LL< Conco `k �r .�.f r�h�� NOrd �noRD rNm •acm..v P' �: s. R c4. es rr+ .`` I'3yti /4>y'� .. ��1 0 ^,`°1b/ � $ � ,e, � c a %� 8 1 rte'°" G � � . ` �> .: 46 "® :PLU X15' �p'� , •>r"a `'}♦? P?i• (( '� � flD. �0. EL ti Y150 SSS Ii ^}a •frT � 5 kytz �' ov Orland m s. lD a- Iz o x:n. Yank'e 1'�r� pro} d Hamilton � "Dj ;Euro . ., .D�sip L;Ldo �� t Hgl. � 1•fi oRowtie. �'rb.. .IMtn�a � 1 c� jPN z R. za t City ` Ci u` as sa wm sr REC AREA sr - Z ..<>.cruo,oT V• ivD 19 avaoa $ � eL� � ,mta v Etz �Furr ��N�. ' x'25 nD. 75 ^ atm•Eit � /_,ra��a,r �.a9 pv �P'\ eg' k °Lro sBrus�. - L - , � � RD. ZI S sacro •` :8 ^ {y,'i� e�• .'"" � I • •� � e� �, 1 > \o aaa $V �'�` EL °4Ayr, `5'i 15- v rm 1. ✓aQS � s <4s/y 6 ♦o♦vsav .e��. RD. ZB �vaDUfE 0. ras a ftp, 0.W .�, "a ,s h iz ♦ dl R. RD. 3' Da on• olawLw• swiRRow Y< Ce - 16 o l6 S101,GN Q9' EL reg �i _.,W - r! x FFAnrER ` O (;ol"EDurham Dnn°N xyrc rDrrt eye ..i fALLS DPD Cj ✓ �p C 2 ke SEE REVERSE SIDE iOR ,1 1, ti Artois Or be 5 xaAu m 0< a y��p� �a Cherokee I DETAILED rroN� o rNu 1� <U6^6 _ �j aP � � g GRAw1AND Im: 2 ` 21 - RD. TY BAYL15S filUF GUTA flD. \' _ r>dy yJ \ r1v' g�- D+p% C (RD. 3e) EL rro �\t< p0/ - rn?'a- s aR.1S��y3 /PO Ee Ne Horse as ' 'Bayliss T� 0 d7� s�ao ` ° s wE ga\` Feather F MUSON l / _eoRoILLE $ Falls A i �� • - Edd - 19 pRpy� �-Orowrle < ST REC ARD edc ° ,.e y • G y ELea CO. ELurN _ ✓ vn�..lm`rx' 2 i ouC/e AT ti Glenn — T; z S Cl�tjperq�l ,rp, II rRD. ae CO. LD35°v v ta�.mv ,Jv�42e{' r � , s�• j BUTTE, -w' ✓ ✓< 4 �owNForbestown tlMill 1 rxuows oleo+* w,y ff g GQ A/RFDAI �IIIaOWS Riovale a\ ,:7f1erma11T0�- ® R RO E 9t a °uvE MA. eEsrDw tT I' t7 i eD E�i�. I �aR m 5 tte eastr 2 RwY F) D�OVIIIe ` tt rots 1 �. R¢ RD. 2 a ra < oq Y� 5 c r° Challen e ItY RD. BO L.�xi� 18 IUTTE CNY MW, vERe. O � I g I _° GD) EDI ,'� RIZ RD. / Thrsm• awn z yt ve 1. �J • - YdA:ll � I Arl rh'Y 7' { � oubOriE /b A Cs 9.'1 5a <. t a c 3 d > pro. E,I r. itY) 6 m :Ro Fcuhy`c I �•:ra,,, .* ack- " BrownSVl EL 75 riRLOLIFE a e0tte cSwEDES�taj rear •erbyy S -,.. iRAr'raR•) RD.rAe �� Afton RD: l n % v arrox :RD: j. D uo s vEu _ �' '. �0. RD. `E ` a• c a Lonow RIDae. 8 AD. BB � s '4 NORMSRAII- L RD.— wmcE'rw' ^' r'"- tumtorm• wd Biggs a� Pdl@Rt10 +¢ R4 4�• .{� P:l,. ¢ f�.. �rL 17 ��.ji - �R'aMl!£ C IPrIttCBto�tl• $w ?nLLEERfi• � craxu+r Ssp ELw " �� I� � ��aad E 3`l. Bang f" �) �-� D n�•% ti . ' rsm A EL ram Dins.17 J� .• Soft .'. ¢ 25 1 -a32. ✓CAWSA HWY. E OIFY a. ,o RA- �l Stan•r Olegon I- _ r. 1'96 . DI3EVAn :.,.. o RD.. Gridley fl0. • Fast asLrmnL laausE a Q C(F'r meld Hmasezo q� C q . s k Dele�vant�r - cwDLEY L EL az Gridley RD: EL ras d' g��/\ HIII MgRI$YIIIE EL (Som-'. . Sites 3 l-YenYiEFF1ri i 'o il.. EYNIS RBMEA R0, lion ND•• \\.. Collins - .sweeuan narL.S c: are maREA \s- o $ LDwDIagR kn ,yO '✓RR L°ke sire wll�le'� f axio�4 •55- - -� i LIIDIaQ1E 3 /1 i _�-o �.SN .or B0. ., EL I'm EL. IM . E<ao $ > 6 ER euRE. ... —n9.— * / Loma RI DEL arz Yo Maxwell. wt`fL,vE 'CT .x. CO..- 2U W 21 F Ifi v •$ GIG wCrrrtarE:' •C. .SITES RU. rAA%wEl1 � �r RD. - Jy Pennin Dal �� PE1WJxa0n RD - � > o REG MEA S %%%f a' ' s Live RNnmez RD. a9' a s 3 Bddgepr Oak = 3 $ Err ,Ie 4h EL rxo Q�j q rase rsnraiw�irrE o �. 18 = o ,,,EEL,,,4 Browns - R'eseruolc Lake LURUNEAV. s.0 SCDaC mroRrv. SUTTER �. 1 ' VaBe�r J ELss. ddv !k°F.c W'ldmr 6 dWUf RD. _ EL 36 El. taa ;il_ sr. _ aa_rme a rrm s tvDOOR(/,DI Tiopuct0o" o yfLATRD. Rough a �COIU. - BUtiEC, BUTTES - - ul I VALLEY O.R r •f fleg I 0.81 EL rear. 0 mod F EL.BO v 0.r ° NA#?` Rv� t s°Unr eurtE RD. Hallvsod Smartvitle 35 . FRESya, RD. coLuSaitJ -t 5 0.zrn PEASE PD U. ¢. yq Velli ✓AIEfl • Ott . BILRE W Tieme EL LE i Q9 ^7 - EU M nAra i AwroRr / 'z RD. S. Bum Suner Baena as Yu a Yfilliam wnaw `'w, M n ` Et. es D.6 RD ritY a aa" ELm s t 1 I 15 —_ _ arySVllle .. eEALE i WALNUT Dfl.. � R�je�.'�+r Q EL .a • FRAtaNL1N AD. �.._. : ' 5 Y`N jg y Zi = Sycamore "�q SVrrER m � ��- nda I, ss N. BEALE RD aR' ✓� } M9Ras RD. `; 'W m ry'�0'�`"�L BOGUE R°.livehurst. FRiEaD :cE �a1 ,1y1 (D > o w El 45 y ¢ 2s Grimes osvatD ALo Ro IO cau'UBti ,• / ROM fl0 HAHN RR W&BUCMKLE t2 RD _��ia-_y""'��i i � y� "E � T8i1 .. `i�4 e.� t\ _.-•=• c 5.:.�� ra� .•.� x �-S r� `�e�' :,s. � ��; -�� � �:;q 'h3t�i>��►Ol:$' SPO - 1 � • _ 'r. HIl1.GATE RD.. 1 TOLE RD -. RWoffE• m. •T1 09aDON n <s RD. <7' �I •1 .....Y •2 n ` aQ'' �P�'� l9 �G� . AirTouch Sites Scale: 11'= 9 Miles ERP - sector Sector Ct. ERP - total Ht. PD = x distance (ft.) x distance (cm) y. distance (cm) Pt to Pt distance (cm) Power Density (uW/CM2) % of Standard Sheetl 190 3 570 Watts 150 ft. 100 ft. from Base of Tower base of tower 0 100 0 3048 4572 .4572 4572 5494.860144 • MERIDIAN 1000 ft. from base of tower 1000 30480 4572 30820.99259 1 mile from base of tower 5280 160934.4 4572 160999.3301 2.169964096 1.502282836 0.047749821 0.001749915 0.3827% 0.2650% 0.0084% 0.0003% NOTE: This is a CDMA digital site. CDMA stands for code division multiple access. This is a "spread spectrum" technology, which means that individual. calls or telephone conversations are not assigned to a dedicated channel with a fixed power output, as in an analog system. Instead, each call is digitally encrypted and distributed throughout the available bandwidth in the CDMA "carrier", which is 1.25 MHz. Therefore, the total power that the transmitter is capable of emitting is based upon the specifications of the linear power amplifier in the base station, rather than the number of "channels", or conversations taking place at any given time. The effective radiated power, or ERP, was calculated by starting with the maximum composite power that each LPA, or linear power amplifier, is capable of putting out (in this case, 20 Watts, which is the Motorola factory specification for the SC614 base station that will be installed at this site). Then the cable loss and antenna gain are factored in, which brings us to a maximum ERP of 190 Watts per sector, which is a "face", or one of the three different directional antenna arrays. There are three sectors in a standard site configuration such as this one, which makes the total possible ERP for the site 570 Watts. This figure is then factored into the standard power density formula described, and the result is a power density that is a fraction of the allowable FCC standard. (567--q LVICM2) Doug Picard Senior RF Engineer AI R T O U C H TM AirTouch Cellular 255 Parkshore Drive Folsom, CA 95630 Cellular Telephone: 916 357 2515 Facsimile: 916 357 2502 Cellular: 916 539 2022 E -Mail: doug.picard@airtouch.com AAA o id Dr n�i Ip m 4 m - C Reese Rd i Z Y' i R i �0 1 �l � MERID 4WNMRAN ZONING D`O CUM DOCUMENTS XCd K tw k." wuh 1>*d67d.h * PM F& N. A I R T O U C H" Cellular P.O. BOR 19707 WK G 92713-9707 (714)222-7MO SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD SUITE 440 SACRAMEHIO, CA 95625 PHONE (916)927-0642 FM (916)927-2176 MR XTWO WE E Wit RF Nr EE oP$ CX -7771 Ll ps 6Z� 2� =•'/i�,=„m}� f�zQ�Bc�inra� 22�5=Fn 1� Z wiN !� 7C [Z�lg 2 2547 �J ZS ooC27 a�$ lV�l1 t/1 g pp fel!!- y CO Z fQ c ITI �"�N��� `•��� ��n ��NOC�j Zt7�C ~�ZZ � �N8 ZZZ S -i���� �Of'�Y � y� � CC's � 2 O O <D C mO HPIA1 111,29 9 �IMA Bee o CD z N ^ n 0 sss�� "� SYY � NN1(� ZO x 9�Nt�7C V1�j Cm�' �tA � Dop {_� E9 9� sZ Z = P 8_ -milli Q�Q7 �I u1 Oy� WPM WArINZx �m <i{ z O rjm HMO A ���m� OA x C y�y� r� Z !� 7059 ili Bigg $� 2SSS3 ySp� :tl o m z z CZE A� -_1m0 00 Fm01� D0 •�G -1 tAm DU1� O�S�mm Zmx 1-io�Z p1� zo S to m m o m O z 0° 0 O z z m z Nz(a z1,� 11) HAMILT N N RD HWY D Z rn _ p _ G'f o m> v CARMEN LN Z ��om )> im -i 1Z z o z -4 r,4 g mo x v 22 o o cu umi c �4 M czi m=1z2� Z — MERIDIAN RD 1 r11 • m, oz tnC G7 A.ln�= o; m0000x z ID C7 29 c cn "' to y A 0 m v =i 'x" m S O D Z �2 O ?m 9U�NZzZ =o"0 o .A K: 0 �m LN z� — moA ��c NZ o cS omo� m D m o� 0000 Cc o " m rm� m _ i HICKS LN O z Xc 9 O mzo oA 0o O ., g m in z C) i '00 S ; D x cwo O pp o z x oaNv C O z c7 m ocn D O r Cr+ x C. Acs O z n C 7:7 PZ*1 N G7 c�rm5m rzT1 D -70-1 Z p C -D r+z'1 D O z O rn �c n� D o r w �v7z Z7 c ` ♦ T+ ,1 p '1�z wOmc3 1.Z M z NNDNcn 1 1 N cn r mc C O p �mV tr r O I w -� O O L f�'1 rri O O Oo K3 - '�_ A -0 Z m n tLn 0 G7C Ln N -0 \ /■ Co On zv O> C 3 < 0 zo OD _ rn nv z 0 cf, r O D= n n o m� OO� �O z 0m � I--. a0 z � � w z � n C L11 -13 Q pZ pZ p2o p2 C = O (.%) C Oy a�mv4 i m m _R IA rm< OOO� O= Zy N Cm B V1 Crn V m 2 c s" c € z m a I RECEIVED �A FEB Z 5 2000 BUTTE COUNTY DIVISION PLANNINia MERID 4WNMRAN ZONING D`O CUM DOCUMENTS XCd K tw k." wuh 1>*d67d.h * PM F& N. A I R T O U C H" Cellular P.O. BOR 19707 WK G 92713-9707 (714)222-7MO SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD SUITE 440 SACRAMEHIO, CA 95625 PHONE (916)927-0642 FM (916)927-2176 MR XTWO WE E R RE RF Nr EE oP$ CX -7771 ri L A PROPERTY UNE I I I I II l II I I I / I I i Ii I / i I PROPOSED UNLTTY EASEMENT I i i 5'-0' — II / PROPOSED 150' SELF SUPPORT LATTICE TOWER PROPOSED 10'-0' X 10'-I SLAB FOR EOUIPNENi i A9N4LT \\ \ GRAVEL. \ PP \ is GRAVEL r;w . SHOP T• \ \ •L r r 1 —1 ----------- - — 15'-0. 122' I PROPOSED ASPHALT I I ACCESS ROAD t i I I --- i ROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN JNK FENCE W/3 STRANDS BARBED WIRE PROPERTY UNE SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/32' = 1'-0' GRAPHIC SCALE 1'-32' 0 32 64 96 L J L J I J PROPOSED 07SS R(M I / � (2) PROPOSED GATES i PROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/3 STRANDS BARBED WARE I x __ x x x x x x I I x x I x I x (2) PROPOSED ANTENNAS I PER SECTOR (3) SECTORS x PROPOSED 150' SELF PROPOSEDI SUPPORTING LATTICE TOWER x 10'-0' X 10'-6' ° I SLAB FOR EOUIPMENT 3'-9' 1._3. 6. x ❑ i AZIMUT a 9y 1 1 50•_0• I�-.�-- 2'-6' 4'-0J 1 10'-6_ j2'-0' 9'-0' x l X PROPOSED CABLE TRAY 6' 6' 10'-0' 10'-7' ti,5 XI x x X J ��f--max x x x . 5'-0' 501_0. ENLARGED SITE PLAN SCALE: 3/16' = 1'-0' GRAPHIC SCALE 1' - 5'-4- 0 5'-4' 10--6' 16'-0' PROPRIETARY INFORMATION lar MR USEagar Ulm mm #BRI w cum se Z� W Q1ij IQ Woo \1 \ BARN f J g ¢� V �:2. 1 —1 ----------- - — 15'-0. 122' I PROPOSED ASPHALT I I ACCESS ROAD t i I I --- i ROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN JNK FENCE W/3 STRANDS BARBED WIRE PROPERTY UNE SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/32' = 1'-0' GRAPHIC SCALE 1'-32' 0 32 64 96 L J L J I J PROPOSED 07SS R(M I / � (2) PROPOSED GATES i PROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/3 STRANDS BARBED WARE I x __ x x x x x x I I x x I x I x (2) PROPOSED ANTENNAS I PER SECTOR (3) SECTORS x PROPOSED 150' SELF PROPOSEDI SUPPORTING LATTICE TOWER x 10'-0' X 10'-6' ° I SLAB FOR EOUIPMENT 3'-9' 1._3. 6. x ❑ i AZIMUT a 9y 1 1 50•_0• I�-.�-- 2'-6' 4'-0J 1 10'-6_ j2'-0' 9'-0' x l X PROPOSED CABLE TRAY 6' 6' 10'-0' 10'-7' ti,5 XI x x X J ��f--max x x x . 5'-0' 501_0. ENLARGED SITE PLAN SCALE: 3/16' = 1'-0' GRAPHIC SCALE 1' - 5'-4- 0 5'-4' 10--6' 16'-0' PROPRIETARY INFORMATION lar MR USEagar Ulm mm #BRI w cum 9.1 Al se Z� W Q1ij IQ Woo � z zo " g ¢� V �:2. [/1 n 4) V S u O S 9.1 Al se Z� W Q1ij IQ Woo � z zo " N >K 9.1 Al TIKBCB VIAIIB Bml WlfyMm BY �CCmP9i NIB M[ T! NlTRWpITB O YAMQ aWBI[Clm BY WPYWOIi {AWS TM[Y WY Iqi BC BD'BBDIIGLD N WMQL OA W PMT, M USm W MY WINO1, WITMWf \IBiTM N+i11WN p SDCC1BA91C AW 9ulL ROINV TK MBGpITY P 59(CIBA9TL (3) PROPOSED ANTENNAS PER SECTOR (3) SECTORS TOP OF ANTENNAS PROPOSED 6' MICROWAVE DISH %,W FAD CLNILK PROPOSED 150'-0' SELF SUPPORT TOWER PROPOSED EQUIPMENT •(TESCO 24-200) PROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN UNK FENCE W/3 STRANDS PROPOSED GPS ANTENNA BARBED WIRE PROPOSED 10'-0' X 10' -6 - SLAB FOR EQUIPMENT �T��IEVATIO�NEm GRAPHIC SZALE 1'.8' + ZZ 9p O� 0 B 18 24 YsaB Z MERIDIAN a4W a WD ese NORTH ELEVATION ZONING DOCUMENTS W Ub. 1-10 S19d� Wd Ix 9d1 * PFD F% Ha A I R T O U C H- Cellular P.0. BOIL 19707 9MNF G 9n13 9ro7 (711)222-7000 SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD. SUITE 440 SACPAIEIIT0, G 95875 HX9E: (916)92'7-0812 FAX: (916)927-2176 INK 49FWO WE RE RF INT EE OPS CX s SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD- SUITE 440 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CT INFORMATION• MERIDIAN 4933 ANITA ROAD ' CHICO, CA 95973 11 OUfw4w ISSUE DATE JAN. 10. 2000 SITE SURVEY REVe-DA71'_ 009211`7I0N• BY• !*� DUIgHMNtl W6W Fi-O lNB El Al�9fOF1O®1 W1E Ai110® At®o � aNr t-Wa 1we®� b � FADNN A 116@N � o•oa �NANa o PREPARED BY: PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING DESIGN LAND SURVEYING Man . 430 &..w ft -t Yuba Cft Ov mle 16001 PH 030-873-/3,70 FAX 630-873-9017 SULTANT: AWN BY: CHK:=APV: IB BARE CENSURE TIDE— SITE SURVEY GENERAL INFORMATION SEEE'f NUMBER ==REVISI p LSI IE731ANN098 1 MCI=1 UWMM E.Mi W~ 047-130-159 I 047130-1�9I �'!`• I' I �\ I I 1 1 �..:, pmm r mm maw '' I _ TIE ow I 1 j I 11AM! File ,�X''� I Huun 1 1 1 faMa� 11 I I EMS �ND�BLDD I 1 nnftn rte AlmMEMO a 1� I II I Wmww= I � �y1oE�i ,.'' � nay r y 4t //'� PIGPOgD 6 uM6 EASDEIff r— ��� �' IDIE / II EAST �� MDWI SL FRAM ORIGINAL PONS SEF DEriMER 41991 I ' —_---- 1 1 seamrm't \ t'FF NOT- 22DW . PROP. ENE MSE AREA WAS EDI NOTE WOAD f OFF F1081I1 LIE BOUNDARY SHOWN IS BASED ON RECORDED INFORMATION . cook I a. 1m50 THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OVERALL SITE PLAN ® 1 ENLARGED SITE PLAN LE 2 I'- locySCALE ,SC D® THAT PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THE NORDEAr'T QUARTER OF SECTION 35. ATE OF SURVEY: DECEMBER 8 1999 THE LAW REFERRED TO HEREIN .6 SITUATED N THE STATE OF CAtF1I611A TM K. R1 R M= A IL N BUTTE CONN, GALLIUM AND ENO CESOt® AS FOLLOW& , COUNTY OF WM DESCRIBED AS FOUM B E 0 1 N N I N 0 AT A PONT FROM WWW THE NOITFEAST COIBER OF SAID SURVEYED BY OR UNDER THE DIRECTION OR BILL dL WALKER LS 3751 PARCEL 1. AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PARO). MAP EN IT= 'BEING) SIMM N 35 WARS NORM 7310,T36TAST, 2136.54 FEET, INDRCE FROM SAID PONT OF . FORIIOI OF THE NE 1 4 SEC" 314 7OMW 23 NWTK RAVE 1 I = MAL 0 M BUTS COIIIY, SAD PMOL WP IFAS FLED N DE WRE O THE E9AlEO RUN SOUTH, MOD FELT WIDE IM MIKI R MICE NM 5080 FEET, LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF BUTTE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 11DICF EAST, MOD FEET TO THE PONT OF MOA RELODER W THE CONN OF BUTTE STATE W CALSODIA d DECEMBER IA 19% ' N BOOK 1@ OF PAROL MAK AT PAGES M AND 47. SITE NAME MERIDIAN - - - THE ELEV. PONT WITH LATITUDE 3994933' AND LONGITUDE 121155'49' _ AND ELEVATION 155 FEET WAS ESTABLISHED BY GPS BY SPECTRASTE STE NUMBER SITE ADDRESS: 4933 ANITA ROAD CHICO, CA 95973 BOUNDARY SHOWN IS BASED ON RECORDED INFORMATION . OWNEWS NAME McC.INT= FAMILY TRUST PROJECT • THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OWNER'S ADDRESS: 4471 NORD HWY CHICO. CA 95973 LOCATION PROJECT AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION LATITUDE &LONGITUDE ,MT.� ASS SSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 047-130-159 . NET AREA O UFIDERL11NK0 PARCEL(S) 15 ACMES e • NET AREA OF PROECT AREA 2500 SQL FT. Umm LqM I& TOGETHER WITH IHE RI4D DF Nle AND EDRFSS OVER 0051810 ROADS FCHICO TO THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA ! SIT 1/2-RMAR TOGETHER WITH EASOENTS FOR UTUTIES AW COLA AL CABLE RIM AS 0 HUB R TACK GROUND ELEVATION: 198' . NEfE.4SARY, FROM THE ABO£ DESCR@D ERASE AREA 70 THE EASTIII UBLFIES. 0 BENCHMARK BENCHMARK BM NAIL & SHINER NOTE O CALL PONT, NOTHING FD OR SET t' SOUTH OF WALL BLDG EL -10&86 IIUm Im THE LOCATION OF DaMa UTILITY F S HAS NOT BEEN RESEARCHED. THE CONTRACTOR SMALL CONTACT THE RESPECTIVE POWER , JOINT POLE NOTES: UTILITY COMPANIES M OBTAIN ON REGARDING EXACT DEPTH OF BURIAL AND HORIZONTAL LOCATION OF UTILITY LINESPRIOR TO ,P SP- SEANCE POE 1. LATITUDE, LONdTUDE AND GROUND ELEVATION WAS CONSTRUCTKCN. THE SURVEYOR ASSUMES NO RESPONSBIU7Y FOR ESTABLISHED BY CPS BY SPECTRA37E DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOR FOR THE COSTENCE FENCE 2. CONTOURS ARE AT 0.5' INTERVAL OF BURIED 08=M WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. . PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT(S) LEGEND SITE DATA VICINITY MAP SCALE T. s SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD- SUITE 440 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CT INFORMATION• MERIDIAN 4933 ANITA ROAD ' CHICO, CA 95973 11 OUfw4w ISSUE DATE JAN. 10. 2000 SITE SURVEY REVe-DA71'_ 009211`7I0N• BY• !*� DUIgHMNtl W6W Fi-O lNB El Al�9fOF1O®1 W1E Ai110® At®o � aNr t-Wa 1we®� b � FADNN A 116@N � o•oa �NANa o PREPARED BY: PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING DESIGN LAND SURVEYING Man . 430 &..w ft -t Yuba Cft Ov mle 16001 PH 030-873-/3,70 FAX 630-873-9017 SULTANT: AWN BY: CHK:=APV: IB BARE CENSURE TIDE— SITE SURVEY GENERAL INFORMATION SEEE'f NUMBER ==REVISI p LSI IE731ANN098 C EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN 6 TAPERED INSULATION Z. s Z w TQ of tLigg C,Z as1 K O N - EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED HE RIGID INSULATION Cellular - NEW PARTITION (SEE PLAN) ZZ2 INSULATION - Al R T o U C H u CONCRETE BLOCK' o z � mM GRAVEL BASE CANA HWY STONIEWLA. EAR"' - 255 PARKSHORE DRIVE CRETE - GAUGE METAL PKIECT FO LSOM CA. 95630 LOCATION o GYPSUM BOARD STEEL KEEFER RD 7ff= ACOUSTIC CEILING PANEL z Z AN ITA RD MERIDIAN PLYWOOD OASIS J ' FIN tSH WOOD k 3 ZONING DOCUMENTS WILSON LANDING RD 3 ® WOOD FRAYING ® SUPPLY AIR DIFFUSER y U 3 � 4933 ANITA ROAD z wm RETURN O �GISTER � CHICO - CALIFORNIA tt��� ® z.. GLASS 7 i® Tee p H� DOOR NUMBER MORD HWY H �; pAC START POINT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPIP OR P.O.C. 0 iii 0 KEY NOTE NEW DENOTES CONTRACTOR PROVIDED © NEW DOOR Q E 7-. 10 EO OTHERRWISER1 ® EXISTING DOOR It ALIGN DETAIL/SECTION NUMBER 0. SHEET NUMBER NOT TO SCALE 1 DETAIL/SECTION NUMBER ' AZ SHEET NUMBER NORTH S Y M B O L S V I C I N I'T Y M A P AB ANCHOR BOLT AC ASPHALTIC CONH�TE GA GALV GAUGE GALVANIZED R RISER REOD REQUIRED THAT PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF PROPERTY OWNER: PROJECT DATA A/C AIR CONDITIONING CL GLASS RD ROOF DRAIN SECTION 36, T.23 N., R-1 W., M.D.B. &M. IN BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACOUS. • ACOUSTIC(AL) GR GRADE RM ROOM AND BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: MCCUNTOCK FAMILY TRUST ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 047-130-159 ADJ ADJUSTABLE A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR GYP GYPSUM RD ROUGH OPENING RWD REDWOOD BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHICH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 4471 NORDHWY JURISDICTION: BUTTE COUNTY HC HOLLOW CORE SECTION 36 BEARS NORTH 70'27'07"EAST, 2093.00 FEET; THENCE FROM CHICO, CA. 95973 (� ARCH ARCHITECTURAL 8D BOARD HM HOW HOLLOW METAL HORIZONTAL S SINK SAID POINT OF BEGINNING RUN SOUTH 3.15'00"EAST, 50.00 FEET; CONTACT: BRUCE MCCLINTOCK ,r( BLDG BUILDING HR HOUR SC SOLID CORE THENCE SOUTH 86.45'00"WEST, 50.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH PHONE: (530) 895-8771 (UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATIONS F ocaIPAI+CY GROUP: u ,, , ! BLKG BLOCKING NT HEIGHT SCHED SCHEDULE 3.15'00"WEST, 50.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86'45'00"EAST, 50.00 FEET W BOT BOTTOM SECT SECTION TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. BURRING AREA 2500 SQUARE FEET BSMT BASEMENT ID ASIDE DIMENSION SHLVS SHELVES 1\` C COURSES INS INSULATION TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER EXISTING CURRENT ZONING: AGRICULTURE - 15 ACRE/A-15 CABS) CABINET 5 � GEMENT INT INTERIOR SNT SHEET 'ROADS TO THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA APPLICANT: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN' �� CL CHAIN LINK COS R SIM SIMILAR SPECS SPECIFICATIONS TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS FOR UTILITES AND COAXIAL CABLE RUNS, AS EXISTING USE: RAND HULLING D CLOSET ac CEILING LAM LAMINATED SS STAINLESS STEEL NECESSARY, FROM THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LEASE AREA TO THE EXISTING AIRTOUCH CELLULAR f CLRCLEAR LAVATORY STI. STEEL STOR STORAGE UTIUTIES. 255 PARK SHORE DRIVE PROPOSED USE: WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITE V COR COLUMN CONC CONCRETE LEIS LT POUNDS LIGHT STIw STRUCTURAL SUSp SUSPENDEp FOLSOM, CA 95630. SCOPE OF WORK: ' LU CONT CONTINUCONST CONSTRUCTION MANUF MANUFACTURERINSTALLATION INSTALLATION OFA 9'-Oi112'-6" EQUIPMENT SLAB OF (9) PANEL ANTENNAS, (3) PER SECTOR ly CORRIDOR MAX MAXIMUM 1D TISSUE INSTALLATION OF ONE 150' SELF SUPPORT LATTICE TOWER L�ON� IMIINICYIAUNMICAL THK THICK INSTALLATION OF 6' CHAIN LINK FENCE AROUND LEASED AREA DBL0. D8� DDO/OOLITION MISC MISCELLANEOUS TS TUBE STIn INSTALLATION OF (2) 6' HILI CHAIN LINK GATES IN 10' SECTIONS �/ p� DRINKING' FOUNTAIN DIM OIMENSION ML YO METAL LATH MASONRY OPENING TYP TYPICAL i1N0 `+ `V �!� $ MS MACHINE SCREW MOUNTED UNLESS NOTED o SE- ZONING DOCUMENTS DTRL DETAIL � METAL VCT VINYL SPECTRASITE DWG DRAWING NOT IN CONTRACT COMNIC TILE smoN 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD, - SUITE 440 T-1- TITLE SHEET No NUMBER (ET p(KTINJG NTS NOT E SCALE W� W�� EIi FACT SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CONTACT: JIM SIMPSON ELECE� ELEVATION EQoCTRIC �c TITH ER ON CEN. PHONE: '(916) 927-0642 A-1 SITE PLAN do ENLARGED SITE PLAN EQUIP EQUIPMENT EXIST EXISTING OPNG OPP OPENING OPPOSITE WATER CLOSET WWqp AATTEDR FAX: (916) 927-2176 A-2 SOUTH ELEVATION EXP EXPANSION EXT EXTERIOR PARTN PARTITION W/H HEATER WI WATER RESIST C -i SURVEY PL PLATE WT WEIGHT FB T A PSNPLASTIC FN LAMINATE RN FINISH(ED) FUR FLOOR PLYWO POG PLYWOOD POINT of CONNECTION VON GELDERN ENGINEERING COMPANY FOS FACE OF STUDS PROP PROPERTY 0 AT 430 SECOND * STREET FS FINISFOOT, SURFACE E CHANNEL YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA 95991 B Fr FEET FIG FOOTaTINcG CENTERLINE PHONE: (530) 673-6330 FW FIN& WALL INDEX ` ANGLESHEET 0 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 11 IT FM OR �� I"" "" � A B B R E V I A T I O N S L E G A L D E S C R IP T I O N P R O J E C T D I R EC T O R Y T1 I� Z. Z w TQ of tLigg C,Z as1 K O N Lm g Ngmq� y oac1�� a4N W. N 6 �4 U a S u o z � mM T1 I� Z. Z w TQ of tLigg C,Z as1 K O N x T1 OWNG USE: ALMOND HULLING ADJACENT USE ORCHARD NORM dt EAST GRAVEL /) GRAVEL I I ' HULLER 15'-0' -7 _ - ' \ \ ; CANOPY ACCESS ROAD 87'-5- L 7'-5' • \ ; \ e -` ` `-------- PROPOS\ `\ PROPOSED iso' SELF SUPPORT j IATTU TOWER L � \ PROPOSED 9'-0'X12'-6• SLAB FOR EQUIPMENT PROPOSED 6' HIGH CHAIN 6ARlUNK WIR FENCE W/3 STRANDS �D E X 'GRAPHIC SCALE 0 JZ 04 08 -SITE PLAN SCALE:. 1/32' a 1'-0' ADJACENT USE FALLOW FIELD/ORCHARD FURTHER WEST & SOUTH 0 1 A2 PROPOSED 6' HIGH CRAM UNX FENCE W/3 STRANDS BARBED WIRE (2) PROPOSED GATES �J X x X x X X — x — x = x x x x x I x x (2) PROPOSED ANTENNAS PER SECTOR (3) SECTORS PROPOSED 150' SELF x X SUPPORTING LATRCE.TOWER PROPOSED 9'-0'X12'-6' SIM FOR EOUIPYENT p 50'-0' - x x x 2'-10' 1 AZIMUTH 95• ❑1 �2'-6 X I1 9'-0' X X 2'-B. I PROPOSED X 5 . -o- � C TRAY by i e x X PROPOSE"TE O/ELEC _ 5 -0• RACK X X X X X X X x X x — I50'-0' F_ ENLARGED SITE PLAN } X 2 _ SCALE: 1/4' a 1'_p• , GRAPHIC SCALE 0 4 G tz PROPRIETARY INFORMATION � IE1�f LJ�oaL Llwnai � C9lJIAR Pa. MSS PIAN! 9ED1 P{tEPHrE♦p ih SPECW 'E AND ARE RISIMKUN13 R EOlYKE .. TECW BY COPWiD{NT UW SS 1NEY WY NOT W FMPRCOUCOD W WNRE CR W PM . W U w N IJ1Y NMOWFJl. WIWWDUT Y/DTID1 Aiprypyµ V WECMR X MO MMS' RF]IAW M NWME O SP[CWR. M (2) PROPOSED PROPOSED GPS ANTENNA PROPOSED 6' NIGH CHAIN PROPOSED ELEC/TELCO LINK'FENCE W/3 SITLWDS -DEMARC RACK BARBED WIRE PROPOSED EQUIPMENT PROPOSED 9'—Oi(,2'-6' SLAB FOR EQUIPMENT �� NORTH ELEVATION Z CRAPRC SCALE 1•_g• Z 0 6 16 24 UR MERIDIAN 4W Wa CHIA a Om ZONING DOCUMENTS x z - AS sW s we PFD 7x9 cd "^�9.m . 1Af. 1 A i R To U C H- Cellular P.O. 601( 19797 RWIL CA 9271}9707 (714)M_MM Md1hd A �` SpectraSite 2277 FAIR OAKS BLVD. SUITE 440 ROE- ((9,9)927-0012 SADWADM CA 95M1 FAR- (916)927-2179 6pnea/Candtmt OFFf APPIOIIFD E DA RE RF INT EE OPS CX �T 0 48 95.87A /50.06Ac. . � r- T. 23N. R. / W. M. D. B. B M. 47-13 /o MR Ae 942.@7 3 80 Ac. 84 1^ 604` 10 , 6 AC. ` 52,77AC.1 80 /ou9h i •6.67-i - i -,l 20 4c.2/4.30AC 1 1284.38 1314.38 3733J3 I= .o' E R 1 / "_ /206 Bonk "� `O 11 .2 I 31 C 8!02.74tAC�u MR~ O I 144 '` s u �g� 6',e ; 119 33 _ 0 '%oda '� N O "� ® N(IOZ.68.ac1r r N M (39.06Ac) I (80.01' AC) 4 / X201 '.! r 68.07 AC. 79.03AC 40 Ac. PM 88-52t �5 BENNErr ROAD1/31 I 2 6 80.OAc. U48-36'1 3 16.36'V 2318.78 1157.Oo 7r�Ms - - - - .1 3 3356.47' 25s �. 1,7�4e' 4. it 2/- 2 / 1 �3� 9 l h I (�� 149 4 ��.. I O ,�. 7/ 4 „ Q - 2el as A. T 4. /I AC. I I AC.- 9 Q N/ !866.28 I l 28.48;Ac h (39.14 AC) I 79.IBAC N 77.41:AC j�I o /4986 AC 87-27 1 /5 .996 RS 78-87: = 40 Ac. 26 23 amu, IL z M 63. I7AC / RS 50 72 w 286 4 74-541 1316.46 �339zs+ / N IJP ------ OJ 3.0� O ACf ACS« I 110 6.52ae N 44.15 AC 1 4g 58 8./as>k,; 41 76.05: AC 1296. 496.IQ I h O .47 2 111 PM44 a 42 229 1289.68 PM 79-100? j 7¢ 6g - M 39.15AC. 34-50 _ _ _ 5A AC _ 39.01 AC. R'S " 12i 3- /! 2.5.59 -Of ki J AN/ T 44 60 67 84 PM 4 -3 j2e p l RS -40 1 39 _ 94� ® 1317.09 7.11 F, i ROA 01214 2 s� PM 87-27/28/29 69 I 2459.14 6 .21 2631. SBE 135%-49- \ 20.6841 C I - 113 112 9.085 ' ^ g / e & 788.e4 337 1159 /sac er3.n�o j 7 3 4 o.72Ac 1 I 1752.13 150 ---- ISI 432AC. O O 484.27 6 220 PM102-47 38.52aC 77.32AC 116.14Ac I 4� N 52.35Ac 38 AC. POR OF '`C V - - - - - - -4 (!3C) ^ PM 132-68/70 Q /.63AC.ze tap PAR, 4 • „� Iv H N 1320. g &I, �.�� 'At°e 1 PM 76-80 195.35 AC N IR G ib3 3T a �i�'b 26 1 REM I . 60 174 5/ I03.28Ae o /42.98 AC PM 76-80{ .. 40.00Ac O f 633.71 �• ti I 432- PM 13�36/3e C i 5093:58 4 i3zo '. -N . 3/4,2:` rrso.or I t7sr.se v 2633.95 - -- A2614.47 763.79 736.66 1//3.30.•... . X420 . ' I Z 12 A7�ce/ 2 ay�4 35 89 /60 Ac. 1. p (KI 0 e I 46.62 Ac. < 52 seA�-�'�4*�'159- /60 Ac. 42.13AC . 6 o I • .I 0 I H _ (37QNO• i Z „ 56.77AC a $ 6 O1 2 v 105 11 - r32 . g Z 0 I ml � a 75 a N g 46 62Ac RA CH .4�, 16 i% @12 a (i9! n 63 n O 9ENN T ®" I (ieJ N h 3oac bl N N 45 AC N 24 E T h (17) I,m ql 3.25AC 10 IO 50.44 Ac. 16 ras.ea2k 40 Pt. SBE 872- 4-/8-L/ to 3 pock I Y aSSE-872-4-18811-1 in 38.3A c. I� I I - !'PM/05- ►w. �l /474.44 /992.54 - 46 ` !3/6A6 , PM 303 !9 .I 11-52.56 I 8 168 .44 RS/01-23 y - 2596.73 759.69 736,66 WILSON LAND/NG. R D •• RSII0-80 Assessor's Map No. 47- / a NOTE: These parcels are for assessment purposes t I s only and may not constitute legal parcels. County of Butte, Calif. Dicy J. Bennett Ranch No. 2 U. OR. Bk. 8 Pg. 2 f ATC Site N \ 8,732 foot ring ATT Site J on A' AirTouch Site COUNTY OF BUTTE :CE OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE �- J OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96966-3397 N � r �� FEB 18 .0 WN ... CL, AN 047-430-0 IRA KLEMM HA IkO PUBLIC HEARINGItEcEWEI 49 DEL SOLSAN LUIS OBIS . FEgr 2 _bis NOTICE COUNTY ""T I PLANNG I ISION ��0305 / rUMETER 72064111 U.S. POSTAGE ***,****k#k*M1 O a r Cq fI! O tet t!7 � W Fu Im 1 � O O ti m A 3svio 1SVIA '31HOSM r 3 S�3 y/v_ jv I t 00-01(-