Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout039-080-059-7-7 -777777777­77� 7 41 t I FT 90`�Iil (D _7 M C'rM' 8T_YMM.2t�A*%Z ".S1tZ32! LOS No. Stanley S. Smith applicant representative 3662 H* ADDRESS: 0gan L �Chico, CA 95928 343-8686 PHONEt Same as applicant property owner ADDRESS: Variance to the,minimut parcel size A ---rot tiop-rtki 4oakw�,or- p9gAoi TA—q-pAj on property zoned A-20(_ located o n —identifiedasAP jc)-08-�9__ townlarea, QhicO GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Orchard & Field Crops — DATE APPLICATION ACCEPTED; PRE -APP FEE. PAID: $ 16,500 RECEIPT NUMER: 11233, 2/21/9Q FINAL APP. PAID: $ 4 16 P RECEIPT NUMBER: REZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CIIECKED PERCENTAGE! 7. MAILING LIST PREPARED MAIL -OUT NOTICES WRI71EN News: NOTICES MAILED NUMBER: Public: LEGAL DE9CRIPTIO1 PREPARED PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN DISPLAY AD PREPARED '0 NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION 0 P G B R DATE OF PUBLICATION. INITIAL STUDY PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL, DETERMINATION: Categorical Exemption FILED: Negative Declaration FILED: Mitigated Negative Declaration FILM: Environmental Impact Report CERTIFIED., other:, MoM proposed Nega regard" tive Declaration Ing environmental impact and 2a—rianqe- to the minimum parcel size to allow a 19.15 acre parcel on property z ned A-20 (Agricultural -2G acre parcels) located at the northeast corner of Hegan Lane aroid Dayton Road, identified as AP 039-080-059, south of Chico. (VIDEO TAKEN) The Commission waived the reading of the Staff Findings. A video -tape was shown of the project site. Commissioner Lambert asked if this property was on tile agricultural side of the Greenline and staff said yes. Commissioner Lynch asked if there was a reason the tentative parcels are drawn where they are. He questioned th e deeding of land to the County, if it were done by the previous owner. Staff said the land was deeded by the previous owner. The hearing Was opened to the public. Stanley Smith said there are a lot ofaccidents on the corner where Fimple intersects with Dayton Road. He said that the County, therefore, needed to re -align Dayton Road and the previous owner had to deed to the County 1.6 acres for the road re -alignment, which created a parcel of less than 40 acres in a 20 acre minimum zone. Commissioner Ostrowski asked if the County initiated the request forland to be deeded over for the road re -alignment? Mr. Smith said yes, the County needed -the land to make the road safer. Staff asked if the property was purchased or condemned for the road. Mr. Smith said he did not know. He said the purpose of the Variance was to split the parcel to allow his son to have a parcel. Commissioner Lambert said granting this variance would set a precedent and is a problem where the land is on the agricultural side of the Greenline. Mr. Smith,said he has three other children and he wanted his son to have clear title. Richard Smith said he could not financially afford to buy tile whole 39+ acres from his father, He said his intent is to buy half of the, property for a homesite, for when I he gets out and wants to have the property free and clear in his name only, of tile military The hearing was closed. B TTE COU TY'WAX �M�; '0_'o k i JU 1Y SSXot Commissioner Lynch said he asked Public Works how the C6uhty acquired the 1.6 aerb piece and Public Works could not answer. He said tfiat property was purchased from the center of the road, now property is bought from the edge of the right-of-way. He felt this property qualified for a hardship to grant the variance. Commissioner Ostrowski agreed with Commissioner Lynch. Commissioner Lambert said she could not make the findings for a hardship as long as the applicant has an alternative, She did not think a Variance was theviray to handle this situation. Staff said the zoning was done in 1975. Staff said the County does not took at whether a parcel is substandard and could or could not be subdivided at the time of zoning. It was moved by Commissioner Lynch, seconded by Commissioner Ostrowski, and carried to approval- this variance as follows: A. Find that the requirements of CEQA have been completed and considered in making this decision and adopt a Negative Declaration; and B. Find that there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, and that the strict application of -this chapter would deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and, under idea6cal zoning classification because the land deeded at the request of the County has left the property where it cah not meet the requirements of the minimum of the zone; and C. Grant the Variance to minimum parcel to allow the creation of a 19.1.7 acre parcel in a 20 acre minimum zone on AP 039-080-059 (03tanley S. Smith) subject to the following condition. - Applicant must comply with all appli,able State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. AYES: Commissioners Lynch and Ostrowski and Vice-chairman Matson. NOES-, Commissioner Lambert ABSENT: Chairman Forbes ABSTAINED: No one BUTMV, COUNTY PLAMT,,�N (1, ''Po' MT$S, 00 RIMTX'Is' FILE NO.: AP 039-080-059 BUYIE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDINGS - June 29, 1990 APPLICANT: Stanley S. Smith, OWNER: Same RE, QUEST: Variance to the minimum parcel size to allow a 19.15 acre parcel. AP NO.: AP 039-080-059 SIZE: 39.17 acres LOCATION: At the northeast corner of He an Lane and 9 Dayton Road, south of Chico. EXISTING ZONING: A-20 ZONING HISTORY: Zoned A-20 June 17, 1975by Ord. 1588 SURROUNDING ZONING: A-20, A-40, A-10 SURROUNDING LAND USE: Orchards and scattered single-family residences. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION.- Orchard and Field Crops APPLICABL - E REGULATIONS: Butte County Code Sections 24-49 and 24w78; Government Code Section 65906. COMMENTS RECEIVED: Courify Fire Department: "No impact on fire department." Public Works: "No requirements for this projecte" BUTTE COUNTY PIANNING COMMISSION STAFF FINDINGS - June 29, 1990 Environmental Health: "No conditions, excellent soil, area." ANALYSIS: This project is a Variance request to allow the creation of a 19.15 acre parcel in an A-20 ( Agricultural - 20 acre minimum parcel) zone. The project is located at the northeast comer of Hegan Lane, approximately 2 to 3 miles south of Chico. The existing land use on-site consists of a mature walnut orchard and a single-family residence. The surrounding area is predominantly agricultural with primary crops being walnuts and almonds. There are a number of scattered residences in the area. An analysis of the surrounding parcels within a half of mile of the subject property shows that the predominant parcel size in the area is generally 20 acres or more. Of the 30 parcels within the half mile radius, 19 are over 20 acres, 11 are under. The average parcel size is. 23.6 acres. There are a number of parcels on the west side of Dayton Road that are it! the 10 acre range. Howeveri all of this area is zoned A-10. In 1974 the applicant deeded 1.267 acres to Butte County for the realignment of Hegan Lane. His request for this variance is based on the, fact that had he not deeded this land to the County, he would have had the necessary 40 + acres to create two 20 acre parcels. His desire in creating, this parcel is so that he may deed it to his son who is retiring from military service. In reviewing this project it does not appear that there are any special circumstances applicable to the property including size, shape, topography, location,, or surroundings, that deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification. REC)MM ENDATIONS: A. Find that the requirements of CEQA have been completed and' considered in making this decision; and B. Find that there are not special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of this chapter would not deprive such -,r.).roperty of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning cilassification because and C. Deny the Variance to minimum parcel to allow the creation of a 19.17 acre parcel in a 20 acre minimum zone on AP 039-080-059 (Stanley S. Smith). If the Commission can make the findings that the appropriate hardship or special circumstances exist then it would be appropriate to: A. Find that the requirements of CEQA have been completed and considered in making this decision and adopt a Negative, Declaration- and P B. Find that there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, and that the strict application of this chapter would 2 77 APPLICATION FOR BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FEB P41 1990 APPLICANT: Read and follow instructions as set forth on attached sheet. Applicant's Name—JAt 0 Je tj Phone No. Oj� 14 Applicant's IVIQIIIngAddress—.'J(4 le, dA o e -t Applicant's Interest In property (Owner, lessee, other) owpk Owner's Name and Address A Contact Person for Project (14 other than applicant),-& Assessor's Parcel Number(s)-- 0 62 Q 80 — 0 S 9 Present Zoning Location, and size of parcel(s) 4o j� ft -o i-- e Ir -/--o i., i'K en Street address 09 Directions for travel to property (rural and mountainous areas only) Type o! vqj�Oce requested, Lot area or building site Mobile home ,I U. ze Lot width Parking requirements Front yard setback Livestock requirements Side or rear yard sotback Sign requirements Other ($Pa.- I fy) i"IeL j- e- -a-- oz De qrlptlon f proposed use and reasons for Hance because of special circumstances (r istruction No, 6 on attaghed sheet) .�Jqr to li 7-, C W a m - X., 7 -T - Description of existing land use---Vt 0 1- el /t.- a EXIsting/proposed sewage disposal method: J�40 4, a - Proximity of Power and phone I Ines: A, /�, ej O..e Water source: ProXimity of water for fire fighting purposes (hydrants, ponds, etc.). 7* /-At Will excavation or grading be necessary? r�ublc yards (estimate)- I List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, Including those required by city, reglohali State and rederal agencies: The tOl lowing- questions pertain only, to varl'andes'to the Minimum parcel SIZO required Within the zoning district, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES* Identify potentially sighificant environmental impacts associated with the variance. What project des!gn features or special coliditions of npprovel (mltigatior measiire3) are rroposed to ellevlate pot,lnt!�.: impacts" ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING* Describe the project site as It exists before the project, Including information on topography, soll stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. 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 (single-familyt apartments� shops, depart- ment stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). Use separate sheet for longer responses. CL 0- I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I have read and understand the Instructions and that the foregoing statements are true, complete and zorrect to the best of my knowledge and belief. g J J, I , /I le) a. - Applicant's stgnature Date Property owner's signature Variance number Request! Variance to Location and size of parcol(s): located on the VERIFYV vZoning and Requirements CD A,P. Number(s) 1Z Ownership ocatlon Description Proof of Agency (if needed) copies of Plot Plan LU Date Received Receipt Number 12-33 Application Taken B y— UJI U_ LL. C) "'6.7 000 :STATUS-. L'. 03� 01-4 Ac, �hve SMITH STO Y S 8, �IRQPERTA MAE JT 366.2 HEGAN'LN CHICO CA Xl 95928 J/ STATU-61�;lll L: 039 080 071 000 ., ACTIVE GUN , HkR LEu A 3ik ot 4 "T -41TA ETAL), C, 2475 DAYTON ROAD CHICO CA 95C/129 L: 039 080 072 000 ST6TUS: ACTIVE DAVIS TERRY $ & DEBRA R 3886 HEGAN LN CHICO CA 95928 L: 039 P10 092 000 STATUS' ACTIVE CARLOS JOE F & GERALDINE Y t0617 FIMPLE ROAD L: 039 810 096 000 STATUS4 ACTIVE CHICO CA 95928 MARTIN THOMAS B & MARSHA A 2 CALGARY LN CHICO CA L: 039 210 088 000 STATUSo ACTIVE 95926 STORNETTA TOBY & KAREN 10689 FIMPLE ROAD L: 089 210 004 000 STATUS: ACTIVE CHICO CA 95928 NOTTELMANN F H & EL12ABETH 3519 HEG,)N LANE CHICO CALIC 95928 L: 039 210 081 000 STATUS.- ACTIVE PETERSON THOMAS FRANK & R08IN RENE CP 3675 HEGAN LANE L:, 089 180 040 000 STATUS: ACTIVE CHICO CA 95928 COTTINGHAM WM A & NELL M 3544 ELK AVE CHICO CA 95928 L: 039 810 075 000 STATUS; ACTIVE HUBBARD ROBERT A ETAL PPT HUBBARD HOWARD A & MARY H 188288073 L: 039 180 039 000 STATUS: ACTIVE 36BS HEGAN LANE COTTINGHAM WN A NELL M CHICO CA 95928 3544 ELK AVE CHICO CA 95928 L: 089 210 074 000 STATUS: ACTIVE HOLDERMIN ROY E & MARJORIE L 3695 HEGAN LANE CHICO CALIF 95928, L: 039 210 001 000; STATUS: ACTIVE GRISSOM DALE D JR & MARY SUSAN RT 3 sox i8oA CHICO CALIF 95928 I,i 039 210 078 000 STATUS: ACTIVE PAVCIK GEORGE GERALDINE,M 1530 LAUREL ST CHICO CA 95928 1 L: 039 210 097 000 STATUS: ACTIVE TOVREA JACK & SANDRA 3611 HEGAN LN CHICO CA 95928 MS( ill to anley S. Smith egleod W 2 Hegan Lane Vale and ado 762f 95928 ........... Certified Foe SPOCI.t Delivery Fee Resin �d Delivery Fee Return Receipt 5howing to Whom and Date Dolivefetl RcluM POCUIPI Mlowing to wflom, Dale,, and Addross of delivery TOTAL ;0stago aZ F'c' s POSIMI(k or Dale 8/31/90 N CERTIFIED MAIL Re: Variance, AP 039-080-059 Dear Mr. Smith Enclosed is your Validated Variance Noi 90-11 to the minimum parcel size to allow a 19.15 acre parcel in an A-20 Zone located at the northeast corner of Hegan Lane and Dayton Road, south of Chico. Should you have any questions regarding 4hiS matter, please contact this office between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p,m. Sincerely, c er . ®r, __ _.r Dl -- Director of Planning 13AK-Ir Enc. W Department of Public Works (22-) Environmental Health Department of Forestry Y d' VARIANCE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2. 1990 DATE 90-11 VARIANCE NO. 039-080-059 ASSESSOR!S PARCEL NO. Pursuant to the. provisions of the Zoru*ng Ordinance of the County of Butte and the special conditions set forth below: Stanley S. Smith is hereby granted a Variance in accordance with application filed- 4-30-90 to the minimum parcel size to allow a 19.15 acre parcel) on property zoned A-20 (Agricultural - 20 acre parce I Is), located at the north east corner of Hegan Lane and Dayton Road, Chico. SPECIAL CONDITION: 1i Applicant must comply with all applicable State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. I hereby declare under penalty of pedury that I have read the foregoing conditions, that they are in fact the conditions which were.impo8ed upon the granting of this variance, and that I agree to abide fully by soid conditions. Dated- A]�plicant;:r-' -NOTE: Issuance of this variance does not waive requirement of obtaining Building and Health Department permits before starting construction, nor does it waive any other requirements. Chairman Butte County Planning Commission CC: Department of Public Works (2) Health, Department Department of Forestry P, '0 0- 0,,5-9 5:71 =i;.� C oar o 003 -Tj Fri; t'n 4. 20-02 Ana. 7 acre5 Elk% 0% AM nuvk Dn'ELOPMENTRAN DATE USE PERMIT VARIANCE a y1ze- sc AML' NEGATIVE ttECLARATION REGARDING ENVIA(2'N"K9NT' '.1"PIPACT 1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the projdct described below has been reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resou.-APces Code 21100, et. seq.) and a determination 1has been m,�,�.Je that it 'will not have a significan't effect upon the environment, Log # 90-04-30-03 AP No.039-080-059 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Variance to the minim um parcel size to Allow the creation of 19.15 acrc parcel in a 20 acre zone. 3. LOCATION OF PROJECT: On the north side of Hagen Late at the intersection of Dayton Road, ElkAvenue and Fimple Road south of Chico. 4e NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Stanley S. Smith 3662 Hagan Lane Chico, CA 95928 5.1 il.,*TIGATION MEASURES: None 6. A copy of the initial study regarding the envi-rDnmental effect of this projectAs on file at 7 County Center Drive, Oroville. This study was: Adopted as presented. Adopted With changes. Specific modifications and supporting reasons are attached. 7.,' A public hearl,ng on this Negative Declaration was held by the decision making body. Hearing Body Butte County Planning., Cc i8sion Date of Determination Jul:y 26, 1990 Determination: On the basis of the initial study of environmental impact, the information presented at hearings, comments received on the proposal and our own knowledge and independent research: We, find the proposed project COU I LD NOT have a significant E] effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted., We find that the project COULD have a significant effec,t . on the environment but will not in this case because of attached mitigation measures described in item 5 above which are by this reference made conditions of project approval. A conditional NEGATIVE DECLARATION 19 hereby, ad6ptedi Signatur q/ W, 74 matsoh, Vice -Chairman Butte County Planning Commission Title August 9, 1990 T1 -AIR& Butte coun, LAN D 0 F NATURAL WEALTH A114D BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER ORIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE; (916) 538-760-1 August 6, 1990 Stanley S. Sm , ith 3662 Hegan Lane Chicoj Ca. 95928 Re: Variance, AP# 039-080-059 Dear Mr. Smith - W6 are enclosing the original and one copy of your conditional Variance No. 90-11. Both copies Must be signed and returned to this department within -30 days from the receipt of this letten We will then have them validated by the Chairman of the Butte County Planning Commission and the original will. be returned to you for your records. Please be aware that failure to return the signed copies within 30 days will result in the variance becoming invalid. Re-application to this department would then be necessary to proceed with the pr -'ect. 0j Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office 'between 10:00 a.mi and 3-00 p.m. Sincerely, c er Director of Planning BAK.-jlo Encii NOTTCR OP DRTRRMXNATXON 'XO Office of Planning and Research FROM Butte County 1400,Tenth Straet., "o6l, Sacramento, CA 9581� i mr" L ilanniag Dep'al.,tiati%tit 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 or County Clerk AUG 02 1990 D County of Butte CMDACE I GH00S. ww'.'U Filing of Notice of &terk-W49W in q�g*liance with,Section 21108 L or 21152 of the Public Resources Code, Project Title AP # Name - .Variance 039-080-059 Stanley S. Smith State Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Telephone Number (if submitted to Clearinghouse) Bo A. Kircher (910 538-7601 Project Location On the north side of Hagen Lane at the intersection of Dayton Road, Elk Avenue and Fimple Road -south of Chico.. Project Description Variance to.the minimum parcel size to allow the creation of 19.15 acre parcel in a 20 acre zone, This it to advise that the Butte County Planning- -Commission (Lead Agency or Responsible Agency) has approved the above-desdribed project on July, 26, 1990 and has made (Date) the following determinations regarding the above-describedproject; 1. The project will, _.L_Will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the p ovisions of OEQA. r _IL� A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CtQA. 3. Mitigation measures ___yere, __2�_were not� made a condition of the approval of,the' projecti 4. A statement of overriding considerations wlas,� _K Was not, adopted for this project. This is to certify that the fITIal EIR with comments and resp . onset and record of project approval is available to the general public at: Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 05965 Date Received for Filing and Posting at OPR 8/l/90 S�fgnatu�e B. A. Kirchet 0 2LY 7 Director of Planning Title Revised March 1986 Eatte. coa LAN D 0 F NATURAL WEA'LTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT . . . . . . 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 (916) 538-7601 TELEPHONE. July 27, 1990 Stanley S. Smith .3662 He -,an Land Chico, Ca 95928 Re: Variance, A? 039-080-590 Dear Mr. Smith: At the regular meeting of the Butte County Planning Commission held July 26, 1990, your request for a.Variance to the minimum parcel site to'allow a 19.15 acre parcel in an A-20 zone located at the northeast corner of Hegan Lane and Dayton Road,, Chico, was approved subject to the following condition: 1. Applicant must with all applicable State and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations. Should you desire to appeal any of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission, you must do so in writing with the appeal fee of $279.00, to the Clerk of, the Board of Supervisors, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, prior to 5M p.m., Friday, August 3, 1990. If you do not appeal and if there are no other appeal within the 8 -day appeal period, your use permit will be issued after August 3, 1990. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Sincerely, rchet Director of Planning BAKIr Loa 4�' LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEA'UTY PLANNiNG DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 955965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 July 5, 1990 Stanley S. Smith 3662 Hegan Lane Chico, CA 95928 Re: Variance, AP 039-08M59 Dear Mr. Smith - Enclosed is a copy of the Staff Findings concerning your application for a Variance to the minimum parcel size to allow a 19.15 acre parcel in an Am 20 zone located at the northeast comer of Hegan Lane, south of Chico. A public hearing has been set for July 26, 1990 at 9:00 a.m. This meeting will be held in, the Board of Supervisors' Room, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. The Planning Commission recommends that the applicant or their authorized representative be present at the hearing to respond to any questions the Conuni*ssion may have. In the event that no one will represent the applicant, please contact the Planning office prior to the scheduled public hearing. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office between 10:00 a.m., and 3:00 P.mt Sincerely, 13. A. Kircher Director of Planning Craig B. Sanders Assistant Planner CBS.,lr Eric. MA WE J, APPENDIX I COLTNXY OP MUXXE RNVXRONMENrICAT� CHEQKLxSrr Pop -M (Tj Je domplerid by Leae AgIiiicy', LOG NO.90-04-30-03 AP NO. 039-080-059 IBAV, 1. Name of proponent Stanley S. Smith 2. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable): 3662 Hagan Lane (;hico, CA 95928 3. Project description- Variance to the minimumparcel size to allow thp, croation of 19.15 acre parcei in—zi 20 acre zonP4 !h4ANQA!E!QTZY IFTNDXNCS C)F, S:1C�N:r]FMC.ANCp YES MAYBE NO 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 9nVxrn,�iaent, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cai�ia -Z fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sostaining levels, threate,,,i to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the VdngA of a rare or endangered plant or animal -'or eliminate important examplea of r..Njor periods of California history or prehistory? 2. Doestho project have tha potential to achieve short-terp� bar,.Vfits to the detriment of lohg-termailvironmental goals? (A short-tveu 4mpact on the environment is one whic-b occurs in a relatively brief _,%riod of time while long-term impacts will 6ndure into the future.) 3., Does the project have impacts which are individual,ly limited but cumulatively considerable7 (A impact two project may on or m!,,re ?ieparate resources where the impact on �iach resource is relatively SmalLo Wt where the effect of the 'total th()p,?a impacts of on the environment is r�,ignjlicant.) 4. Does the project have environmental. effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either di,-,,ectly or indirectly? IM. r)r:1xH:R-*y1:E1\TA:rxoN (To be completed by the Lead Agency) i On the basis of th ini-tial evaluation: TIV2 find the proposed project COUW NOT have a significant effect the on -;.�r-,',Fironment and a NEGATIVE DECLAR�,TION will be prepared. 11WEs find that although the proposed project COULD have it significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect In this cage because the MITIGATION MEASURES describedon the attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLW,'�ION will be prepared. I/WE find the proposed vroject RAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an'ENVIRONkENTAL- !r4,'PACT UPORT it required. COUNTY OF BUTTE, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: June 1990 A, 0,'� B Craig 'anders Ass 'ant Plannq�rz Reviewed bvn J 1101111�-",�,--�� ,�/Taula Le/s'iare"�eilor Planter AUNIL WSrVXRQNMRT9'XAT-. TMPAC�Vs (Explanations of all "YES" and "MAYBE" answers are required onattached sheet(s). 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in sgnificant: YEs MAYBE No a. Unstable earth conditions�,= -.hanges in geologic substructures? b. Disruption,, displacement, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Vol d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e, Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, ,deposition or erosion which:may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay) inlet or lake? gi Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban Areas? h.. E%posure of People or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazardO 24 AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in substantial: ,t. I Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? V--*, a. Need for off-sitd surface drainage improvements, including vegetation removal, channelization or culvert installation? vl� d. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? o. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body, f. Discharge into surface waters or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters" h. Change In the quantity or quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? i. Reduction in the Amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? j. Exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding! 4. PLANT LIM Will the proposal result in substantial: ai c�umge in the diversity of species, or number of Any sti�cids of plants :(including trees, shrubs, grass', drops, and aq1tatic b. Reduction of the numbers of any uniquej rate or endangered species of plants? ci Introduction of n6w species of p1wits into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _XZ d. Aeduction in attdage of any agricultural crop! C) -3- FE. Will the proposal result. in substatit Jai YES :1 1A _YB E a Chah7e In the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (bir'aspland animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, Organisms or insects)? b. Redaction in the numbers of any unique, care or endan ered species of animals? 9 c. introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration of existing fish or Wildlife liabitat! 6- h=- Will the proposal result in substantial: A. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal producc significant light and glare? 8. LAND USEi Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or Planned land use of an area? --- ____UR 9. NATURAL RESO CES. Will the proposal result in substantial; a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? V/. 1). Depletion of any non-renewable natural resources? 10. R15K OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve. a. A risk of explosion or release of hazardoussubstances (including, but not limited top oil, pesticides) chemicals or radiation) in the event of an a,cciden,t or upset conditions? Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 11. POP I -ON. Will the proposal alter location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population? 12i HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13i TRANSPORTATION CIRCUVATTrim, Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for now parking? c. Substantial impact On existing transportation systems? d. Significant Alterations to present Patterns of circulation or movement Of people and/or goods2 a. Alterations to Waterbotne) rail or air traffitc? f. Increase in traffic hazards to victor v'ehicles) bicYclists or pedestrians? V/ 14. MLIC,SERN'jIrES4 Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for 5'r-71—teted new government servicest a. Fire protection? b. Police Protection? C. schools? d. Parks Or other recreational facilities? 114aintehande of public facilities, including rdads? Other governmental services7 -3- Ark V JJ 15. ENERGY. Will the pro osal result I p in: �ES MAYBE a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy! be Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the developmeint -if now sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES. Will the proponal result in a need for new systems, or iu—bstantial alterations to the following: a. Power or natural gas? V/ b. Communications systemsO c. Water Availa�ility? V/. d. sewer or septic systems! V/ e . Storm water drainage? I Solid disposaP f . Waste and --L/-- 17. , HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic Vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 1q. RECREATIONi Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or TuWit—ity0f existing recreational opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES, a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological sitO b. Will the.proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? a. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical -hange which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area7 D:tSd'USS3:QN OP E;NVT-T-P,1ONM1ENXAT- -8VAT-tYA,!Ca:ON See attached. -4- -DISCUSSION -10F ENVIRO AP # 039-080-059 PROMCT 1:4 t - - SCRIPTION., This projec is an application to consider a Variance to minimum parcel size to allow the creation of a 19-15 acre parcel in an A420 Zoning. Approval of the Variance will ultimately result in a land division that will create one additional parcel. The project is located at the northeast comer of Dayton Road and He Oren Lane, approximately 3.5 miles south of Chico. 1b: There will be P-minirnal amount of soil disruption, displacement, and overcovering resulting from the project. Approval of the project will result in one additional building site being created on a 19.15 acre parcf-4- The soils on site are deep, Well drained loarn with low erosion potential and the site is neariy level. One home with associated driveways, patios, etc., will not result in significant overcovering of the soil. 1g: The soils on site are classified as prime agricultural soil. The project will result in some acreage being removed from production. This amount of acreage will only b � the amount needed for -a single family residential site. This amount is not expected to be, significant. 1h: All of Butte County is in a Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VHL Adherence to Uniform Building Code for seismically active areas should provide adequate protection. 4d,c,lg,14a-. Butte Counties ability to provide adequate fire protection services is in question due to financial constraints. The Butte County Fire Department has recommerided that automatic fire suppression sprinkler systems be installed in all newly constructed residential structures, in accordance with the National Fire Protection Standards as outlined by Article 13 D. This will aid in the detection and control of residential fires and provide improved protection against injury, life logs, property damage, and reduce the demand for fire protection services. This would become a mitigation measure on any future parcel map. 14b: Butte County Sheriffs Department is at minimum staffing levels. Residents in rural areas should not expect routine patrols and responses may be limited it) emergency situations only., This is a county wide impact and cannot be mitigated by any one individual project. APpliemki; Stahidy $.Smith Msessor's Parcel 039-080-059 Log # 90-04-30-03 DAIA _SHE, ET A. Pr oJ_ectDgc-r19ffgn 1. Type Of Project: Variance 2. Brief Description: Variance to the mini'mum parcel size to allow the creation of a 19.45 acre parcel in a 20, acre zone. 3. - Location: On the north side of Hagen Lane at the intersection of Dayton Road, Elk Avenue and Fimple Road south of Chico. 4. 5- Proposed Density of Development: One dwelling unit per 20 acres. Amount of Impervious Surfacing: Minimal 6. 7. Accogg and Nearest Public Road(s)t Both parcels will have County road frontage. Method of Sewage Disposal: individual 8. septic tanks with leach field systenis. Source of Water Sup'Ply' Individual wells. 9. 10. Proximity of Power Linesi Adjacent to property, Potential for further land *divisions and development: None under current zoning. Bi Efivironm �ntal Setting 1. Terrain a. General Topographic Character.- JAvel b. SIOPes: 0 to 2% C. Elevation- 160 feet above sea level, d. Limiting �actors: None 2. Soils r a. 7�pes affil 'Ila, actersticsit Farwell clay loam and Vina loam. Dark brown soil, 2 to 3 feet thick, gra-nrix.,, friable, retains moisture welli Well suited for agricultural uses. b. Limiting Factors: None 3. Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone: Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIIL, b. Erosion Potential: None to slight. C. Land9lide- Potential: None & Fird Hazardi Unclassified e. Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate to low. 4. Hydrology ai Siwface Water: None b. Ground Water: The project is located in an area of plentiful valley aquifers. ce Drainage Characteristics: Well drained soil. Surface drainage drains towards Crouch Ditch. d. Annual Rainfall (normal): 22 inches per year. e. Limiting Factors: None 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Good. Open vistas in all direct -ions. 6. Acoustic Quality: Good 7. Air Quality: Generally good, though the area is subject to periods, of poor air quality from agricultural burning. Bio o ical Environment: ft - 8. Vegetation: Mature walnut trees. 9. WAIdlife Habitat: The orchard offers limited habitat for bird populations. Cultural Environment: 10. Archaeological and Historical Resources in the arew Moderate to low sensitivity, including unknown. 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Orchard and field crops. 12. Existing Zoning: A-20 13. Existing Land Use on-site: Mature walnut orchard and one single family dwelling. 14. Surrounding Area: a. Land Uses: Walnut and almond orchards with scattered residences. b. Zoningi A-20, A-40 and A-10 C, Gen. Pian Designation: Orchard and field crops. d. Parcel Sizes: Predominate parcel size in the area under the same zoning classification is generally 20 acres or more. Of the 30 parcels within a half a mile of the project, 19 ate over 20 acres, 11 are under. The average parcel size is 23.6,acres. e. Population: Limited rural population. 15. Character of Site and Area: Agricultural 16. Nearest UrbanArea: Chico, approximately 3.5 miles to the north. 17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: Not applicable. 18. improvements Standards Urban Area: No 19. Fire Protection Service: a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station! Station No. 44 on Fair Street, approximately 3.5 miles away. h. Water Availlabilit y: Tanker truck. 20. Schools in Area: Chico Unified School District. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL 1- Map H-1, )Earthquake and F ault Activity: Seismic Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH�vf Hill. 2. Map 11-2, Liquefaction Potential: Seismic Safety Element,Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CHX Hill. 3. Map III -1, Subsidence & Landslide Potential: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill. 4. Map 111-2, Erosion Potential: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill. 5. Map 111-3, Expansive Soils: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 147, by CH2M Hill. 6. Map IV -1, Noise: Noise Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CH2M Hill. 7. Map V-1,Scenic Highways: Scenic Highway Element, Butte County General Plan revised, 1-77, by CH2M Hill. 8. Map 111-4, Natural Fire Hazard Classes: Safety Element, Butte County General Plan revised 1-77, by CHX Hill. 9. Archaeological Sensitivity Map by James P. Manning, for Butte County Planning Department, 1983. 10. School District Map, Butte. County Planning Department. I Chico Nitrate Study Map, Nitrate Concentration in Shallow Wells, 1983, by Department of Water Resources, Northwestern District, The Resourcns Agency, State of California. 12. Agricultural Preserves Map, established by Resolutiun No. 67-178, 1 Butte County Board of Supervisors, December 5, 1987. 13. Flood Insurance Rate Maps, National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1988. 14. USGS Quad Maps, Chico, California, photo revised 1069. 15. Soil Map, Chico (1925)/Oroville (1926) Area, U -Si Department of Agriculturei 16. Soil Survey of C.hico(1925.)/Oroville (1926): Area, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 17. Butte County Fire Protecti on Jurisdictions and Factllitios� Map, Butte County Fire 'Department andCalifornia Department of Forestry. Butte County Planning Dbpartmonti .11 41 tic coaft L A ('4 D 0 F NATURAL WeALTH AND B E A U T Y April 18, 1990 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 Stanley Si Smith TELEPHONE: (916) 5138-7601 3662 Hagan Ln. Chico, CA 95928 Rei Pre -Application Review AP # 039-08-59 Dear Mr. Smith - This is to notify you that we have received sufficient assurances from Butte County Environmental Health and Public Works, Departments that your project can meet their requirements. This fulfills the Pre -Application review process. Pursuant to the Butte County Planning Department Project Review Procedure Manual which states, "Upon tentative approval of a land use permit or variance by the Environmental Health Department and Land Development Division of the Department of Public Works, the applicant must submit a completed formal application, including any required changes from the original submittal and the balance of the fees within 6 months of the tentative approval.", no additional work shall be performed on this project until we have received the remainder of the applieation fee in the amount of $410.00 and, if any, required changes from the original submittal. Please submit the fee along with any required changes from the original submittal to the Butte County Planning Department no later than September 8, 1990, or your application will become void, and in order to continue the project, you Will be required to re -apply. Please make all checks payable to the Butte County Treasurer. Enclosed is a field marker for identification of the project., Please secure the ribbon in a conspicuous place on the site, preferably visible from the roadway. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office any weekday between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. so incerely, B.A. KIRCHER Direc r of Flamm' rry Pain Planning Technician BAK.LPijlo Enclosure tte I A N D 0 F N/�TURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-8807 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 February 26, 1990 Stanley S. Smith 3662 Hagan Ln. Chicoj CA 95928 Re: Variance, AP# o39-080-059 Dear Mr. Smith: We received your pre -application review request for the subject Variance. Butte county Public Works and Environmental Health have received the information you submitted. The Planning Department will consider this application complete only after we have assurances from the above departments that the Project complies with appropriate ordinances and any conditions imposed, can be met. It is the applicants responsibility to provide any additional informaL,on needed by Public Works or Environmental Healt). to meet their requirements. Public Works may be contacted by telephone at 538-7266 and Environmental Health at 538-7281 for further information as to their evaluation of the proposal and their requirements. The Planning Department staff will also'be revieving the application for any special conditions or modifications that are appropriate. Should you have any questions about the pre -application review, please contract this office. sincerely, B.A. KIRCHER Director of Planning Planning Technician JAK.4'lo COUNTY PLANNING COMMISS111 IN 7 County Center Drive Dulia Co. plion"Ing owwl� APR 19 1090 Oroville, CA 95965-3391 MAY 11990 DEPARTMENT OF FORLSTM (916) 538-76,01 oroy,110, COMO* Btu L. UP WX I TO: County Fire Department DATE: April 18, 1990 RE: PROJECT REVIEW & ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stanley S. Smith Enclosed is preliminary data Our office h AP# 039-080-059 s received or generated ing t�e following project: Stanley s. Smith - '�rarian concern, a - — --------------- ce to the minimum parcel sizO On Property zoned A-20, located on the north sid HQan Ln. at the intersection of Lua R e of Dayton Rd., Elk Ave,, 1�e Rd,, 059 i0o. Ed :�- Y� Ch n �Rd.�,ide�ntif�ied �SAP,4 039�-080_ We are making an assessment Of Possible environmental impacts and will be Preparing an 6nvironmental document, either a Negative Declaration, Negative Decla!:ation with M11 tigation Measures or aft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Please Provide any factual statements, ideas for investigation, or opini lots YOU can offer in Your area of concert Or expertise that relate to either physical, social, or economic impacts that this project may generate. 'Please respond within 14 days of the above -noted date. If no response is generated by this 'inquiry, then it shall be assumed that there are no significant environmental impacts which are 1-itential from the J project. We appreciate any assistance You can Provide. Sincerely, -id amer lany ng Technicia7 Comments 1K)b Does Your agency wish to receive a copy of the environmental document (initial study for Negative Declaration (With or without Mitigation Measures) Or EIR for this project). Y59 NO BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW FORM To- Public Works Date: Pebruary 26, 1950 RE: Pte"Application Review Information fori Stanley S. Smith AP# 039-080-059 Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or generated concerning the following project: Stanley S. smith - Variance to the minimum parcel size on property zoned A-20, located On the north side Of Haqan Ln. at the intersection of Dayton Rd., Elk Ave., Fimble Rd. & Hagan Rd., identified as AP# 035-080-059i Chico. Please indicate your response by checking the appropriate boxi No requirements for this project. The project as proposed can meet,this Departments requirements. Sufficient proof has been given that the applicant can meet the following conditions approved: The project as proposed caft/does not meet the requirements of thit.department! A revision of the project will be nece.ssary. The applicant has been contacted with this information. BUNCO. Nnntnolnopm uret FE8 27 1990 Signat bwAls, Cdiomta 7, 01046 Co, P1 4nning APR BUTTE CCON.OY PLANXINO DEPA�KTIAEMT PRE -APPLICATION RE -VIEW FORM Oroville! 000MId To: Health Department Datez February 26, 1990 JU44 Co. DiAnninc) AVR I U Wt$t) RE: Pre -Application Review Orovdlox Cautorwa Information fori Stanley Si Smith AP# 039-080-059 Enclosed is preliminary data our office has received or generated concerning the following project: Stanley S. smith - Variance to the Minimum parcel size on property toned A-20, located on the north side of Hagan Ln4 at the intersection of Dayton Rd., Elk Ave., Fimble Rdi Hagan Rd., identified as AP# 039-080-059, Chico. Please indicate your response by checking the appropriate box. [D --*'No requirements for this project, The project asproposed can meet this Departments requirements. Sufficient proof has heen given that the applicant can meet the followina conditions 4pprovedi The project as proposed can/does not meet the requirements of this department. A revision ,of the project will be necessary. The applicant has been contacted with this information. 4-1 lip A Signature:, "A4��O, Environmental Heal(II F L 6 �j 7 1,990 Oroville, Callfomia 20 FEB 9Q I, Stanley S. Smith, owner of parcel #039-080-059 located on the corner of Dayton Road and Hegan I,Ane� am applyitig for a variance to split the 39*17 acres intio two parcels� one of approkimately 20 acres and the other approximately 19.17 acres. A variance is required because the minimum acreage size for agricultural zoning is 20 acres. The following is a list of property owners in the area surrounding the property indicating their approval or disapproval for the variance to split the parcel. APPROVE/ NAME ADDRESS PHONE # DISAPPROVE 3410-6 6,3 0'. J L? -XI V "Iu FINDINGS OF FACT rE8 2 119,90' oroville, COOM18 -zz;!f-*c.,tian :�-nd !-P(l tie- C, ZC.1h zonirg ala J. -- set of f1eve-lopo'ent standards which are specified in the Butte County Code. The C'ode also estab- lishe8 a procedure to grant variances from these standards where unique circumstances exist to warrant relief from the strict application of these standards. A variance can be granted only if specific findings are made to indicate that unique circumstances do, in fact, exist. These special circumstances may ,include factors such as the size, shape, topography, location and surroundings of a piece of property, The courts have clearly indicated that vatianc�!,s are not intended to rewrite the County Code and can only be granted if all the findings listed below are made. Vurther) the courts have indicated the accual, factual basis for these findings must be stated, NO E TO APPLICANT Ple..Ise do NOT apply for a variance unless you call provide the necessary factual ,basis Lo grant tile requested variance. All necessary appiication fees ate non- refundable. FINDINGS 1, Tile following exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions apply to the land, building or use in question which do not apply generall y to other land$ buildings or uses in the same district, The two T.arcels wouln havo met the 20 ajare miiiimum agriculture zo�ling reauiremevt if the 1.267 acres hac-, rot 'heen Heeded. to theCouiity on July 17f 1974 for tho realimtmant of ltega,�i,Layie. 2. Tile fact that the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment or. substantial property rights Is supported by the following-. Thle variancri will allovi tho parcel split permittivig the o=er -to 4end one paroel to his con tor agriculture use) so that each may innividually ancL SeParately onjoy property owtoriihip anm righto. 3. The fact that thp- granting of the vaOtance will not adversely affect t I he neighborhood or be detrimantal to the, public health, safety or welfare or adversely affect ptoporty or iml rovAjjje-jLs in he neig hbokhood is supported by tile following: The Variance ylill pot adveroely affect -the neia-hborhood as, this_katgal has nur-rourding oarcels that var� itisixe from 2.0 acre's mowii tr 'less that I acre and w -ill -not -reduce -the apviculturs land uae inthe area. ALL OF THE ABOVE FINDIN05 MUST�BE MADEj !NCLUDING THE STATEMENT OF SPECIFIC MOTS, TO GRANT A VARIANCE