Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout040-140-0010 M 8 I ,�I .}` , -� • ♦ '� • - el ��. •. {� , • < res a • 'u • 0 M SUMMARY 'SHEET F TON APPLICANT Mel Langerwerf Log#86-04-11-02 ADDRESS 1384 Durham Dayton Hwy., Durham, CA 95938 OWNER Same PROJECT DESCRIPTION TPM to divide 79 acres to create 2 parcels 1 @ 73 aures and 1 @ G acres _ LOCATION on the north side of Durham Dayton Hwy:, approx., 2000' east of its intersection with Esquon'Rd., Durham area. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS) 40-14-01 ZONING A-5 GENERAL PLAN Ag-Resi PROJECT CONSI5TENT7 GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE REPORT DATE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE LAND CONSERVATION ACT CONTRACTS_? DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED April 11, 1986 AGENT/SURVEYOR/CIVIL ENGINEER: Northstar Engineering ADDRESSs 377 Connors Ct,, Suite B, Chico, CA 95926 _ - DATE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION = DATE FILED DETERMINATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED AND DATE MITIGATED NEG« DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED ENV. IMPAC.' REPORT - DATE CERTIFIED_ STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO, SITS. COMMITTEE MEETING DATE 80ARO ACTION T COMMENTS FOR PLANNING DIRECTOR' 1r*OzT _ . � �• �".�- ����' �' " CO M Lm 71 MW AOIXOW To : Research Office of Planning and 'Reh V Rom : Aut_ . 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121,Coif ty ns Sacramento, CA 95314 Pi a ng eP tme ;, 7 C ty enter Dr;Ivti , r or Oro, Ile, CA 95965 X County Cleric 'JON County of Butte p •_ SLif3.JECT g CLMNOR 1J�( IKOUltiyClerk Filing of Notice of Determination in eompliancqyith ,S�1--.;�,.LL�De of or 2115 of the Public Resources Code, p y Project Title AP 11 Name Tentative Parcel Map 40-1,4-01 State Clearinghouse Nttrnber Mel Langerwerf (if submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person Tel'— e" p --h n N Public works john Mendonsa Project Location - - 534-4266 North side of Durham -Dayton Highway aPPrOXimately 2000 feet east of its inter eCticn with Esquon Roadp Durhamarea. Project Description. Tentative Parcel Map dividing 79 acre tWo parcels, one of 13 acres and one of 6 acres. s to create This is to advise that the Butte Count Advisor A enc has approved the above-described project or r23eS86nsible an Ageno ---------- - and. has made the following determinations regarding the above=described) project: I. The project will;will not, have a significant effect on the environment: 2. An Environmental Tmpact'Report was prepared for this project Pursuant to the provisions of CgQA, A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project ursuant provisions of. CEQA, P to the 3. Mitigation treasures were; IX -Were not, made a condition of the approval of the project, 4. A statement of overriding considerations _�:;w.�s, ,Was nota adopted for this project. p This is to certify that the final EIR 14ith comments and resportses and tern project app};oval- is available to the general public at rd of Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center beivd Oroville, CA 55965 Date Received for Filing and Posting at OPR 62--==-r____-__, ra_..� n A» S�:reeher Seng or Planne! Title a 7 bV,tsed March 1986 �' ' R I.AN1) ter rvATu At WCAtIII At4f a Co. PlanningCArfln DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC WORKS WILLIAM (B111) CHEFI`, Director JUN 24 1986 y COUNTY CENT8R DRIVC • OROYII.LE, CALIFORNIA 95963 Qroville, calitotii# Telephone, fh1GI;,3A..3G81 RONALD D, MtELCl01" Deputy Difecto, June 23, 1986 Mel Larigerwerf 1,384 Durham -Dayton Hwy, RE: AP 40=41-01 Durham, Cid 95936 Tentative Parcel hlap Dear Mr. tanl;ertverf. At the regular meet.,ing of the BULte County Advisor Agency June 23, 1986 the Agency adopted a net y g ncy held on environmental Impact and a l,ativr tleaclaration of nbovct-rarerotlecdl arO ctI•t pprove+d the t;ent�at i e parcel, map on the 1 L Y subJtrC to 1.11e colidi.tlons of approval listed card Li7e attached shoe>f<-. 1C no appeals are Li.mel.y > tl,cd- tvl.tha.n ten (10) days of the Advisory Agency `s app WOVE ---with the Clork of the Board oardate of Supe�rvi ors, this aetiOn tvi,ll be final. of When the conditions of approval are complied with, it will be in order. for you to file your i`final map" with the Butte Counl'y Department Of Public Works for rocordatiort tvaLhin twenty-toilr (�4� moan of the date Of approval. by the Advisory Agency. if you have any "Os"011-9 regarding this matter, ' lease office.p contact than Very trul=y yours, Willa.am cheCr Di ,rector of Public Works JT.hn Mendonsa Assistant Director Jh(lds cc; Planning Department Envirnrlmentnl. Health Department NorthSter 1ngineorl.n Y Mol Langerwerf, TPM, 2 parcels on the north side of Durham Dayton Hwy. mare, 2000 Ct. east of its intersection with Fsquon'Rd, Durham are, . AP 40,=14_01 Engineer: NorthStar Engineering Public Forks condiLi.ons 1. Deed to Lhe County of Butte 30 ft. right-of-way from the cenLorline of Durham Hwy; 2, Indicate a 50 ft, building setback from the cent.t ra.ine of Durham Hwy. 3• Show all easements rr - record on the final map. 4. AbLsin encroachment pormit ror all, driveways, new Or exisLi.r Gond ConsLruel Lo craunty standards. t S• pay any delzill(juent taxes or current taxes as required. B. Meet the reguiremenLs of the Durham Mutual Water District. Health Dept, conctiLit>iisi 74 Provide a 1.00 ft. l:eachCield free setback around existing wells either within the property or within 100 ft. of the property boundaries. 8. Show a 100 ;ft. leachfield setback from the highwater line of the creek on parcels 1 and 2 9. Provide a Source of domestic: water ror the existing residence on parcel 2. 1f L10 tlxi.sting well, on parcel, 2 is to be the Source, all . ��sc�mc�nL to L ber�(iUi.t'4'Kl. he wei l shown cin the final lmap will be 1' inter-Depnetmental Memorandum To: Butte County Advisory Agency FROM- Planning 'Director SUBJECT: Report on Tentative Parcel Map for Mel Langerwerf on AP 40-14-01 DAM June 13, 1986 This is a proposal to divide 79 acres to create 2`parce1.S. The present zoning is A-5 (Agricultural. - 5 Acre parcels). The .Land Use Plan Map of the Butte County General Plan designates this area as Agri- cultural Residential. There are no specific or community plans for the area. The proposal does not conflict with County zoning nor any adopted or Proposed element of the Butte County General Pian ;nor any County, specific or community plan: The applicant paid the cancellation fee on May 29, 1986 for a of the Land Conservation Act AgreemenLi portion Recommend approval. SAS - it cci. Mel LangerWerf NorthStar Engineering Inter -Departmental Memorandum Too John Mendonsa and Stuart Edell, Department of Public Works FROM; Steve Streeter, Planning SUBJECT! Tentative Parcel Map for Mel Langerwerf; AP 40-14-01 DATE; June 5, 1986 We received a copy of the receipt May '9, 1986 showing that Langerwerf Dairy has paid the LCA cancellation fees. Scheduling with the Advisory Agency may proceed now that Environmental Health clearance has been received SAS:lr J r y Ba tie Coun, PEPAR'f MEN7 Or PUDLIC HEALTH DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH C0' ° Address 0196 (.Memorial Way 07 County Curttar Driye fj 747 Elliott Rood Chico, California 95926 OMe, California 95965 Paradise, California 95969 MAY 2 t' Reply to ro Telephone: p 916/891-2727 Telo hon.t 916/534.4281 �a�t�r���,,��r� Telephone.- 916Al2-296), !~xi. g$y May .16, 1986 Mel Langerwerf RE: Mel Langerwerf Parcel Map 1384 Durham -Dayton Hwy. NIS Durham -Dayton Hvjy Durham Area Durham, CA 95936 AP #4011.4-01 Dear Mr. Langerwerf This department has advised the Butte County Department of Public Works Land Development Section that we are prepared to act on,the above application. Based on present information, we can recommend approval or condi- tional approval. Recommended Conditions for Approval 1.4 Provide a 1.00' leachfield free setback around existinig wells either within the property or within 1.00' of the property boundaries 2. Show a 1001 •leacchfield setback from the highwater 'line of the creek on parcels 1,2. 3. Provide a source of domestic water for the existing resi-- Bence nn parcel 2. if the existing well on parcel 2 is to be the source, an easement to the well shown on the final t't'lap Hill be required xf you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact the Chico Office 'Very ;trtxl.�ours,, Thomas Reid, A.S. $upervising Sanitarian ' CO'.Public Works Division o� Bnva:ronnental Health. :Manning NorthStar Engineer ihq Si TO: Inter -Departmental Memorandum. Advisory Agency PR9Mt �� , Steve Streeter, PJ.anning ATE:; 7: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR MEL LANGERHERF, AP 40-14 oars01 May 15, 1986 This Tentative Parcel Map application is a subsequent to the cancellation of a Land Conservation Act agreementeon Parcel 2. The Butte County Board of Supervisors the cancellation for the 6 -acre approved March 18, 1986., A cancellation foewas calculated AP 4and on certified to the Auditor -Controller in the amount of $1,107.80. It is necessary for the applicant to 7.80. Prior to action by the Advisor pay the cancellation fee pay the full. amount e Agency. The applicant must issuance of a final certificate cOfber11, la986 to allow the cancioThe attached Initial Study was of the Land Conservation Act contractefoLL rothe hland n� repre- sented by Parcel 2. ;Since there is buildings on each a residence and out- buildings map will phave lapnesiitib�,eteffect.filing of this ing environment. g `�gon the surround- ing Negative Declaration re arding environ- mental impact is also recommended for the Tentative Parcel Map application. The Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) for the D Dayton -Nelson planning area is now published. ThisdocumentWill have a bearing on any future plans to d. h sub Parcel, 1, divide gencir Comments: Department of Fish & Game No Public Works: Beed 30 comments. April 29, 1.586. feet of right -of -Way from the center- line of Dayton -Durham Highway, Butte County Fire De rtment: pu. A water stt t Protection will not be required.p for fi APC'i3NI)C)C F CQUNTY Oft BUTTE UNVI RONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (ta be complete by Sad—Agency) 1,01, 11 85-10-09-01 1. BACKGROUND AP II 40-14-01 1. Name of proponent LANGERWERFDAIRY, INC, Z. Address of proponent and representative (if applicable) Langerwerf Dairy; Inc. NorthStnt Engineering 1384 Durham-Dayton: Hiqhwav . nrfers Ct . ,, Staite B �.co, Co. 95926 Durham, CA 95938 Ch 5, project description Cancellation of LCA r 1`iANl1Al'Cfty 1INllINtar; C%' SIiINTh�CANCIa MAywy N a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wil.clliro 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 Calirr Ka history or prehistory" !X"" b, hoes the yect have the potential to achieve short - term; ane nits to the detriment of long-term, environment.l goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period of time while long-term impacts will endure into the future.) c, Does the project have impacts which are individu- ally limited, but cumulatively considerable' (A project may impact on two or more separato resources where the impact on each resource .Is vel,atively small., but where the effect of the total. of those Impacts on the environment is significant.) -_ 4 d= ooes the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on luman beings, either directly or .indirectly,' lll. 1)i ilnitf*IINA')'i(IN (To be completed by the Lend Agency) On the bask of this initial wvaluntion 1�1Vk, grind the proposed project COULl, NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, 1/1V1i rind that although the proposed project COW have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, there SO not he a significant effect in this case because the MJTTOATTON MEASURES described on the attached sheet have been added to the project, A NEGATIVE DIiCI ARATION will be propered, ilwu rind the proposed project 11AY have a sign,lU cant effect an the envlronment, and an ENVTRONMENTAI IMPACT REPORT isrequired, 1fA'1'7if .�� Novehik ei ?5af. 85 .:., u . v_C'OtINN- t)h t31:J`L"C`l"s, PLA- ING 'DEPApTMBNT Amended Jnnuary 10) 1986 S ep pn A, Stteetet, Senior Planner Reviewed by: , r , IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA'TS xp anations o aT ''yes" and "maybe" answers are :required on attached sheet(s)) - YES MAYBE NO 1. EARTH. ignificant:a Will the proposal: result in significant- a.Instable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? C° c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?,, d. Destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. rase in wind or erosion of soils, Ince eithf. Changes in deposit or or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, depositien or erosion which may modify the chanuel of avvrieer or§tream or the 'bed of the Ocean or n y bay, inlet or lake? g, Loss of prime agriculturally productive soils outside designated urban areas? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure or similar hazards? G- 2 AIR. Will the proposal result in substantial: 77 Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors, smoke or fumes?, c, Alteration of ay movement, moisture, or - temperature, or any change in climate, locally or regionally? 3. WATER, Will the proposal result in sub8tantial 77—changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh wators? Changes in absorption rates, dvainage patterns,, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Need for off-site surface drainage improve- mens , , includl;,6 4ogetation removal, claatnel- ization or culvert installation? d Alterations to the course or .flaw of flood, waters? e, Changein the amount of surface water in any water 'body? '— f, Discharge into surface waters, or in any, i alteration of surface water duality, including { but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turgidity? g, Alteration of the directinn or rate of flout of ground waters? lz Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? i. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of' people or property to water related hazards such as floodi:ng7 y2_ YES 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal r(-4ta!t in substantial: Change in the diversity of spo eg, Or number of any species of plants (inclu-:.'ing trees, shrubs, grass crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of grass, numbers of any unique, -rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment 01 existing spec' s? d. Reduction in acreage ut any agricultural cr6p? .51 a 7, up 91 10. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the Proposal result in substantial: a. Cha -in the diversity of species, or numbers Of any species of animals (birds, land animalsin c luding reptiles, fish And shell fllsh, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction in the numbers ofany unique, rare or endangered species of animals' c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial: T_-1`n,--reases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? LIGHT RINU GLARE. Will the Proposal produce Yig—nificant ant and glare? LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a ,suE_stawtial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? NAIURAL Rb"SuURCho: Will the proposal result in su stantial: ai Increase in the 'rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any ion -renewable natural resources? RISK OEUPSM Will the proposal involve: a, A r!SY__0_f explosion or the release of hazard., ous. substances (including, but not limited to Oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in tL event of an accident or upset )nditions? b. Possible interference with an omergency response Plan or emergency evacuation plan? POPULATION, Will the proposal al -ter the location, UUtribqil n, density, or growth rate of the human population? HOUSING, Will the PrOPbsel affect existing housing, or create a demand for additi�.nal housing? A7 AV, y r Yes MAYBE NO 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in; a Generation of substantial additional vehicle movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? C. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems? d. Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ..� f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor Vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -- 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will ti+p proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered gove,,nmental services a. Alre protection? X b Police protection? --- c. Schools? .., d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. $Iaintenance of public .facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? w 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in a., Use of substantial amounts of fuel -or energy? b Substantial increase in demand on existing up sources of energy, or require the development —- Of now sources of energy? 16. UTILIMS. Wi.11 the propsal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following: A4 power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? -r-. y r, Water availabil it d. Sewer or septic taiix? -, -- e. Storm water drainage? ---_- - - f. Solid waste and disposal? 17, HUMAN 8EALTH-. Will the proposal result in a: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. EXposure of people to potential health , hatards? 18. AESTHETICS. CVill the proposal result in the oUstructiOn 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? yy��^ YES MAYBE NO 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? r b. Will the proposal result in adverse physl-cal or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic buildingp structure or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause "- a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values. d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the jotent:ial impact area? V. DISCUSSION OF.ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AP 40-14-01 See attached. ` 4 f DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALOATION AP 40-14-01 lb,9;4d: The LCA cancellation for the 5 acres will not result in additional resIdential use beyond, the exi,;tIng mobile home. The surrounding pasture land Hill still bo used by dairy cattle of the Langerwerf Dairy, 1h: The expansive soil characteristics are a geologic hazard In this vicinity. Potential subsidence Is also noted. 3j. The Durham Mutual Ditch (Roberts Gulch) has not b(,owj a source of flooding or Inundation in recent years and is not expectod to be In the future. 8,11. Withdrawal of the 5 acres from the LCA agreement may encourage similar withdrawal applications on other LCA land In the Vicinity. Themet effect on surrounding agricultural uses seems negligible In this Instance. ONCLUSION: The applicants state, "We are segregating this parcel from the rest of the land. We are not creating a new us%ti or anythUng Incompatible with the existing use." The 5 acres Is to remain in pasture with a double -wide Mobile home on the site A legative Declaration regarding environmental Impact Is recommended for this wltfidrawal from the LCA aoreeMont 00 a portion of AP 40-14-01. Applicant: Langerwer4' Da i r -v Assessor's Parcel 1t 40-14-01 Log # 85-10-09-01 DATA SHEET A. Pi-04%Des cr• i at i on 1. Type of Project Cancellation of Land Conservatlon Agreement. 2. Brief Description: Removal of 5 acres with doublo-wide'mobi1e home and related 'mprovements from LCA ;agreement. 8. Location- North side of Durl%am-Dayton Highway, 1/'4mile Gaut of Esquon Road, east of Durham. 4. Proposed Density of Development= 1 existing dwelling unit on s 5 Amount of Impervious Surfacing= . 6. Access and Nearest Public Road(s):Frontage on Durham-paYton HighWaY 7. Method of Sewage Disposal- Sceptic system. H. Source of Water Supply= Individual well 9. Proximity of Power Lihes= Available to the site. 10 potential for further land divisions and development: N+t:ne' under present zoO1n9 B. environmental Settlnn Physical. environment 1. Terrain a. General Topographic Character: Relatively leve) valley terrain. b. Slopes: Less than 37. c: El evat i on t 155--160 feet +/- ASL.. d Limiting i"actors 9_. Soils d a. Types and Chat-6cter i sti cs% V Ina Clay Coati; e indepthbpthce; retains toll of 9-3 feet; Clay Loam to 6 feet or me moisture Well; surface drainage is pont" In manY Places•, subdralnage Is commonly poor; mainly used for pastur-land due to the cultivatl©n difficultl•as. b Limiting 1+actors'4 Refer to Soil Characterlstidti 3, Natural Hazards of the Land a. Earthquake Zone= Three and one-half miles +/- east of the Foothill She Ztane a rioderate Earthquake Intensity VIII- b. Erosion Potential; Slight. c Landslide potential: None. d, Fire Hazard.' Unclassified - irrigated areas e, Exparrs i ve Soil potential. Moderato -H 1 gh 4 Hydrology a. Surface Water, Durham Mutual Ditch (Roberts gulch) to the south and Past. b. Ground Water. Underlying aquifers for domestid wello c, Drainage Characteristics= Refer to Soll gescrlption d. Anrival Rainfall (hormal )':b�2g+ e. Limiting Pastors= „7 W 0 5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Moderate to High. 6. Acoustic Quality: Intermittent noise from Dorham-Dayton Highway vehicular traffic 70 decibels (d.B) within 100 feet of highway. 7. Air (duality: Moderate. iment., 8. Vegetation: Low -growing t.-k-Ases and landscaping around existing mobile home. 9m Wildlife Habitat: Grassland with limited riparian habitat along slough. Cultural Environment: 10- Archaeologi tal andflistorical Resources in the area: None recorded; low sensitivity. I 11. Butte County General Plan designation: Agr I cu I tura I -Res I dent I a 1 (map) ; poli cies indicate Orchard & Field Crops. 12. Existing Zoning: A- 5 (AGricul tural , 5 -acre (nit, linulij parcels). 18. Existing Land Use on-tlte: Pasture and double -wide mobile home. 14. Surrounding Area: 6. Land Uses." Dairy Cattle Orazlhg as Part of Langet1werf Dairy; grazing amd rural residential Uses in the viclnl�',Iy; limited Industrial Use and Highway 99 corridor 1+ mile to the east. b. Zoning: A-40, A-54 c. Gen. Plan designations: AgricultUral-Residential along highway frontage and further north-)' Grazing and Open .and to the south: d. Pardo! Sizes: Four to 678 acres, generally over 40 aorosi e- POPUlationt Sparse In this locality. 15. Character Of Site and Arba.'. Rural area outside of Ourham. 16. Nearest Urban Area: Chico} 10 miles */- to north; OUrhamp 8 miles +/- to westo 17. Relevant Spheres of Influencez Durham Mosquito Abatement bistrict, Dunham Irrigation 01strict. 18* IMPrOVOMOnts Standards Urban Arcot 19. Fire Protection Servit,,,e: b. Nearest County (8tilt6) Fire Station: 445o burham. bL Water Avallabillty.i Wells) fire truck capacity, 20. Schools In Area; Dul-1180 Unified School Olstricti. "8- TO: LOA Committee FROM: Planning SUBJECT: Cancellation of Contract for Uangerwerf Dairy on AP 40-14-01 (POrti on) DATE: December 27, l9as (Amended January 10, 1986) Cancellation Of a Williamson Act Contract an appros i mAtcl y 5 acres north of Durham -Dayton Highway, 1/4 mile east of Isquon Road, east Q Durham. WAY02! Removal 0+ the 3 scros will nOt cause the remaining proportiez to +all below minimum contract size, 40 acres. The applicant OWMS approximately 286 adjacent acres Under contract, An initial study has been prepared-, a Negativo Declaration is recommended. Future and existing use of the land is anticipated to be a mobile home with surrounding pasture. The Owneral Plan designation is Agricultural Residential ion map) though Pullm'00 Ond text Of the Land Use Elowent indicates Orchard and Field CrOPSY the coning is A- 5 (Agricultural - 5 awro parcels) . 00-YOr"Iment Cude Section 11281 suts out two specific Wdings, Of which the ltgimlativo body must Make one prior to approving a vancellata, on. a. Tho Board must fine that the cancellation Of the contract is COnliatent with the purpo%oz Of the chapter, Making all the +011OWing finding%: i. ""hat the cancellation is Or land On which a notice Of nonrenewal has been sm"d pursuant to Section ON& 2. That uancollation is not I;Wely to result in tho rownNoal Of 'djaceN lands, from agricuitural use. 3That Cancellation is +or an altornativo U00 which a rons,ptsh oith the aPplicablo provisions 0+ the County Genor8l Plan, 40 That a,*At,juoljItiOn will urj;M developmunt. not rOsult in discumtiVOUS Patterns Of tiat there is no proximato noncOntractOd land which in both available and Zwitablo for the U10 to Which it in proposed the contracted land be put, or, that development 0+ the contracted land Muld PrOVido more contiguous patterns Of urban develapmont than dovelopmpNt 0+ proximate nancontractod land. b,. That the cancellation iz in the public: interest, finding; I That other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives:; of this chapter; and 2. That there is no proximate noncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contracted land be puts Or, that development, of the contracted land Would provide more contiUkAOUS pattorns ci+' urban development than development a+ proximate noncontracted Iand ,, A notice of nonrenewal has not been servud- The PI-ooposed land uso docs not Cun+IiLt with the (BonerLil plan. The cancellation does not meet the reqmiremerjj*s of paragraphs a or b. Tho appa,it,.,ant should file a no -Lice of notirenowal +aj- o portion of AP A-0-14-01. ba -fore continuing with the cancellation rogue t. The A-5 zoning has been in effect since August 1967. in order to create a .5 acre parcel . . by subsequent parcel map, the pertinent General Plan findings must be made. The Applicant has not completely disclosed the future plans for the parcel other than their intent to have the 5 acres remain in pasture with an occupied mobiie home. B!2q9LRmendgt-ion I+ a notice of nonrenewal is received for the subject. 15 acretajapprovcA.'!, of the Contract cane011ation is recommendcd pursuant to section a. ckbovu. SAS/ I r cc: 'NorthStar Engineering 377 Connors Ct., suite t Chico, Cai 95026