Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout051-010-025APPLICATION r-OR Butte County Planning cotrmission Filo Date filed Hearing data Action by Planning Commission Action by Board of Supervisors .� PRESENT ZONING: z l�4N/-es 0 ,.+ Assessor Map Boo►, o Na Iia i _., REQUEST:.ia rd"%C/f C c }� �f .t-.:. F'dreai No, _...:. �...� .._ APPLICANT'S NAME, j PHONE; .a �..,�,d..f_.._._.... STATUS OF APPLIC,' w , t''S INTEREST IN PROPERTY, OWNER'S NAM>w:c ADDRESS: DPSCRIP .,,Ot,$ ",)F PROPERTY-.- EXPLAIN ROPERTY. EXPLAIN FULLY REASON FOR A"P''PI-ICATION" /�L,r7t !G' s°C( c 4�ata/�e2G" C� 7 cp4m _! ��1,_' do G�'�'Glee;17 f77 Th+s abova s+#emanis arecertifiE;d by the undersigned to be correct, Signature of Appil ao , -„- NOTe, Rtaase submit herewith -. _ Plot p x money order In tl.a amount shown below, poyab'Ie to Count+ of Butted also . h a check or �nri di f at len showing the !G .tar n of rufstinp and tiroPosed structures on your property and on the adlacer t t j�ro rrtre) Y —z I+�lYlA71 I .. IPYMR'�ilffCtlsC6mfn�neenmi - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 47,5e �tt30Wt�1 AS THE BUTTCOUNTY ZpNTS7G +" . NAT3LxNG ;ENCU "16-1. VARIANCES :from the terms of the zoning ordinatce shall: be granted only when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape ropography,' location or surroundings,'the strict application of the zoning ordinance deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical, zoning classification Any variance granted diall be subject to such conditions as will assurer that 'the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special, Privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Any such condition imposed Upon ; suance of a variance must he reasonably related p to the use the property for which thevariance is requested, g ;A variance shall, not be ranted for -a parcel of property which authorizes a use or activity which is not otherwise ex•- ressly authorized by the zone regulation governing the parcel of property:" I NBRM DECLARE UNDER PENALTY CSR PERJ'UR'Y" T14AT S HAVE TREAD` r �, THEIR mr-MNINC AND CONTEXT. STATEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND ��� FoR�;�oxN� INSTRUCTIONS .AND sTAT Dais .. ,,fir M APplics.nt - is410 Co, Fl n+�%tire Comm'., JUN 1 3 19?7 :i. .'int •;r i. :+ i v��'I saj 6' �� ._�s a °�,.. to �l.r; f y; ;�; �, ,i"'� 3 I 1 51»01-19 HaroId Sk11 n etal Box 72 Ord Ferry Stage Chico, CA 95926 �. 1 , 51-01-20,21 t► Phillip Smith � BX 206 Nimshew Stage Chico, CA 95926 f 1 51-01-22 P Carl Andersen 1 Box 174 Nimshew Stage, Chico, CA 95926 c k , 1 � 51-01-25 r Earl Garner 134 Ni mshew Stage Chico, CA 9,9926 51-01-26227 U S A 1 , 51.01-29 i Clinton Bruce eta'1 P 0 Box 55ry Forest Ranch, CA 95942 i 51-X01^38 Carmen Fii ntr, y Box 201 Phi .,� mshew Stage Chico CA 959,26.1 1 x 51 -01 "39 9 Jearld �, i1 Ledyard eta'I Box 202 P(4�9hew Sta"ge Chico, CA J 1-"01-47 Loins & Dorothy Fi ori n i P O Box 15."15 i + Chaco, CA 95926 , 57-01-9551-01-96 Staphen 1", Burton Box 205 eJ7mshetiv S tage Chico, CA q5926 Carl And, E NimOeW Stage r„ . x Chico CA 9592`6 ; COUNTY BOARD 0P 210) IXN(' ADJIJF)rr?4rNT STAFF FUDINGS M August 5e 1377 2- VARIANCES (a) Earl IT. V18MOr - Var'iancsv to ­11011 parcels 01 0 �cxes v 5.6 ac V es y and 3.7 Nacres on p open ly zcnned "Interim TDI-511 (Timber Mountain 5 a.cx . Par"15) 10C.aVed on both sides oj; ����n1�tr5 7tnact, approx.. 1111le south Of HelltoW n Road ;I.dent..f� eco as AP 51-91-25 � b c�ms�: a�. i'al�:�ca This Is a reauOst :For a variance from �;A1TBRIPi! TM-5 z division O iGA Plus acres Itito three parcels. The appl�cal4t sea Os vtHldxtbug, 'Road separates a two-acre para ��'i7Til lino ��c�n��aade� ",Cleo remainder is too s1no.1 baa ��r111 �an�i l OM t dor a nd ei , residence." Section 24-49 0:6 Ordinance 1750 he COW10 ZOR' ll ii s y�a4:css � � Ord•Anco "Variances froya 010 terms oj_ i:hi," chnPtel� Shall be grar..ed ODJY Whon." because a�: special circumstances 4Pp�,: cable tothe propexty, iuclur ing size, sTaaM topography,, loci r<.f.on,9 or snzrround:inn; s : ,7,, strict a, tc at on o� th , a ��Taspr,Jr deprives Such 'property of privileges eaJoYed by otheF Pion, � y n s�Tae vicinity nnr.Z cter d€:n c � zcnnx xag Lass ca ' L(3n n'9v If the T;aaxd can makegrant this VaTiancO roquest. these f.irldi'l a it n+tOuld be ap eop:r1.ate to (°t11iNTY BOARD OF ZON } INIG ADD NS';i`MfA'I' VARLANCBS (a) Blarl 11. Garner - Variance to allow parcels or 7., 0 awes, 3.6 acres, and. 3.7 acres on property zoned "Ihterim TMS,, ('Kimber Mountain, 5 acre parcels) loca,tdd on both S* des o Humbug Road, rapprox. 1. mile snot}� of Ilai}.t�7wn }taad�A clan iki.ec} AAs D 5,� -oi 5, east of Chico 78:10-1-5xZ Chairman, Camenzind noted that there were } questionsanswered "ma be+a and one aDiscu' d "yes" :'tn the ) nvironmental Checklist porm He than road the Discussion of hnvironmental Evaluation and Suggested Mlti Measures in their entirety, tion i Proponents: Earl Garner who had, nothing new to add, (675) In the ensuing; discussion Counsel. Siemsen said "You can't legally do i.t.t, In response to a question as to whether, the filing fee could be returned, Mx s Y 'Blair commented that ata ff would have authority to return the fee upon written opinion .from counsel that the application was mpro}ihe Mr. Garner asked if he could submit an applica-tion for two parcels. Lynn Vanhart, representing the Health Deprtment, reminded him that the z e qtr q ements of the Subdivision Ordinance would have to be comp lied1 with Mr. Collins comMontod that, it is beyond the abilityof this Board to act on thlle aco, application and that the BIR action shoo l(j,: 12 t Formal. vote was taken. '= -, JV MOY 23, 1971 Mr. Earl F#. Garner 134 #imshew Stage Chico, CA 9,r),92 Dear Mfr. Garner, This is to notify YOU tion for a variance from that the have received your applica .interim T"I, r) s zoninn to a.1 1 oW division of ten plus the SC'i of tho 14641; of acres into three ;parcels located on the flr of Sec. ", T2?N, P3E, 'wDRAM . We are enclosing our "Notice to Applicant" and "Notice to Applicant - Ordinance No, 13"13" forms for !your signature. Tease sign these two We V1111 then schedule forms and return, thom to ouroi:fice. public hearings at such time as. the environmental determination has been received by this, office. Sincerely, klettye Blair BO:ma Plzinner 11 Enc, (, PL;1NN CNC )PPARTMEN'1' rr1�'r i .�..�.�._.��....�....��.:�.,.wo..�,,..:�_..� ? ��i7 rrrr��r� �lr�"VT�t'v ttr�it.; Bob Paul us g Di Vi s on of Forestry '111E ST Reviev,, C a "7t:Tn 41'1 t P No 51-01-25 DESCRIPTIO OF PROJECT: Variance froT lnlepim 114-y5 7-jll R iaa a11ow division Of ten Plus acres into three PArcels L`"•kTION: On the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 Of Sec. 8, T22My R3Ei MDW4 ON Humhuq Road' Chico. APPLICANT - Earl H. Ga'rner .'l-W'P,S,S 1 34 Nimshew State, Chico, Cly 95926 BOARD OF -ONINC ADJUSTiNtEiNT ACTION SCHf1DULTD: soon RETURN DATE REQUESTED: ASAP ATE DISTRIBUTED: 6-29-77 AT f MENTS: Coaf l icataan 0100 plan n d9 Jut'�� � DEPARTMENT op FUriES1 IiY IT JE �' m < ' �1. « , .„ � � { . Y ,,: � s r ,�✓+ All -------------- �____----J9?7 PL. N N X Nri 0!„P�1T V Bit IL-IN LrILDHP AnTMLi j'AL REV1E.Iy Yt��IJ��Z rl: John Mendonsa, Public Works kept, JVQIIJ $T Review F, Co,'j hent . -"P No. : 51-01.25 DESCRIPTION OF PIZO,JrC'C; _ Variahce from Interim 1'M-5 zoning tc, allov division of ten p1u acres into three parcels C,k-T,ION- Ontom. 1,/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 8, T22N R3E, MDHM' ON Numbun Road Chico, APPLICANT: Earl N. Garner A'I)MN' ESS 134 N i m s h e w S6te, Chico, CA 95926 OWNER Same BOARD OV _ MING aDJUSTi ENT ACTION SCHEDULVD soon RF TUM DATE REQUESTED: ASAP D,JE DISTRIBUTED, 6-29-77 TTS JJiiENTS: CM` c�? ligation Plot .lan. MANNENG I)ITARTMENT'S INTERDEPAR,rDiffliNTAL R2.VfEtLjTE_ UEST OROVILLI~, CALIFORNIA GENERAL CLAIM CLAIMANTt ._.._—.--_Mr. Earl H. Garner A D DR asst ---,�.13 j _N m s h ew St- CITY o _ Chico, C1� 959�'ra CITY a. STATE; a T.=� . s IMPORTANT DATi OF CLAIMt SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE SIDE SUBMIT CLAIM TO DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GOODS OR SERVICES DATA DESCRIPTION ,Df CLAIM (DESCRIBE FULLY TO AVOID D r, L AY) AMOUNT .Ee for a vt�rance from lq,r3�, OQ 8 /i7 Refund of application "Interim TM-511 zoning to allow di Vision of 10` acres � into three parcels. Application imprarl�Y �submitted, mitted, I ------------ I 1 i f - TOTAL ..a it tete underatgned, declnre under penalty at perjury that the servtoes Or articles elndmed have hewn perrortnad or dtfltvared, and that thin claim to true end correct as stated. ; Dated tilts..............da x at , ,«.,,,,......,19 at rnctr { 5t917eture of Gjalroont t, the undersigned. hereby oarttry than to the Best or my knowledge, the narvfceo or .ir tclao speolrlad Above have'been perrortned of de« Iivdrad and t)tot there Is a laud �. Appropriation El Or $pOelfic Hoard Approval (Check tit ep for the Pam. Budget. �proprittt Bated this :day Of , r .e „...... at t, , r ,... , Col1L ,..., r DepnrtmrntFtaadi'orZthoT 6�1' u' l?$pk. lsxp, Gone code ...,., «. t'AYAJ3Lk FROM .... .,,.i,..,„ y _ R.1,i..,..1 ..,... .....i..- . . I-.-.r...... 4 Ui\ lJ q0 NOT WRITE BELOW °FH15 LIWEWpITOR'S USE VENDOR iDEPT, SUB, CLAIM INVOICE INVOICE�� GROSS CODE &SUB, RRQJ, qBJ:' NO, NO, DATE D15C, AMOUNT ENGUMI3, SUB DIST. ._ 1 ANA Inter. -Depart m Memorandum ro: County Counsel Blacicstoclr FROM; Planning Departiaont SUk�JECT: n Variance La.rl H. Garners AP DATE: August Dor 1977 At the Board of Toning Adjustment meeting of August 3, 1977 a legal opinion regarding the impropriOty of an application for the above referenced: variance was requestod by staff. f Your earliast attention 'Go this matter will he appreciated. lli/1rd Attach. (�� INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMOR.ANDLiII OFFICE OF BUTTE COUNTY COUNSEI, TO Planning BY: Delbert M. Si.emsen, Deputy County Counsel SUBJECT VARIANCE 1 AR.b H. GARNET , AP S1-01--?_5 DATE: November 25, 1977 t You requested an opinion from our office as to whether Mr. Garner's application for a variance to parcel size was improper, thus authorizing a refund of Mr. Garner'r- filing fee. The facto, are that Mr. Garner's parcel is in an interim TIS-5 zone which requires a minimum parcel size of '5 acres Tvir, Garner wished to d. vide 10 acres into 3 parcels all which would be less then 5 acres in size. The only possible way to do this would be for NIr, Garner to obtaina variance front the minimum parcel sico. The first question to be answered is whether a variance can be granted to create a parcel which would be sul�•standard in that: it would not meet, the minimum acreage for Che 2oning districts. Section 65906 of the Government Code, dealing with variances, does not include nor exclude. such a variance. lit researching this question, I have found only one case in, Which the Court discussed the question. In ifill vs, City of Manhattan Beach 6 Cal.3d 279, the plaintiff owned, 2 lots contiguous to each other, Cine of the lots was developed, having a residence on it, At the rime that the plaintiff acquired both parcels, each lot met the minimum lot size required by the city zoning ordinance. The city subsequently changed the zoning ordinance to increase the: minimum lot size; the effect of which was to make the parcel that was undeveloped a the lot. The Court in reviewing the ordinances of the city, deckled that the undeveloped parcel, dial, not meet the definition of a lot as defined as in the city zoning ordinances. The Court concluded, therefore, that both parcels consti- tuted one lot. The plaintiff had applied for a ,lot split variance in order to establish the separate character of the 2 parcels as legal building, sites . The city had turned down the request. The Court ii 1a upholding the city's position stated; "There is likewise no merit to plaintiff's claim of discrimination followin,; from the availability of variances to other owners of substandard: parcels. It is manifestthat she, like the awnex of ;any substandard parcel which adjoins other land within the same lot must obtain a lot split variance before selling or developing the parcels separately, The owner of an i.sol aced substandard parcel, wne cannot make his parcel conform p ort.. arm to tI zoning requirements by any method,, may be able to Buff Co, PlanningComm. r » NOV P 9 'I9,7 orbville, CalitomiA Planning Nov erilbar 23 3,977 Pago Two to make a showing of hardship which would justify the granting of a variance Tho,t is not true of plaintiff, who may use parcel B, in conjunction with parcel. A, the ramainder of lot l., and thereby realize, some. substantial benefit .from parcel B." The conclusion reached, therefore', :from the case of Hill vs. Cit of Manhattan Beach, is that a: lot split: variance in artd o. 1tse Tf wou"" �na be i C c ai ," "zio tr��rer, such variance would have to meet the stringent requirements ou't; line -.d in -the Government Code. Therefore, Mr, Garner would not be entitled to a refund of 1s ;filing fee on the basis of having applied for a variance to lot size in order to split property, Although, Mr. Garner would not he entit:l.ad to a refund on the: grounds that a request for a variance to a lot parcel size would. be illegal, if Ole purpose of the variance would i.n efi:ect constitute a use variance, such variance is prohibited by §65906 of the.Government Code and as such Mr. Garnex's application fee should not have been taken The zone covering Mr.. Gar_ner's parcel is an interim TM -5`. Mr. Garner requested a var ance' to lot size in order to file a parcel, map creating 3 parcels on, 1.0 acres. Reviewing the TM -5 zone, this district allows dwelling units at greater densities with a use permit than a single family dwelling. It would appear, therefore, that residential development in: the TM -5 zone would not be an illegal use in the zone, As such, Mr. Garner' s Iapplication wb1ch would amount to creating a residential development in the TM -5 zone district, would not constitute a use variance prohibited by law, fir. Garner would not be entitled to a refund of his ;filing fee on the basis of having applied for a prohibited use varia.n.ew, In conclusion, no basis exists for refunding fir, Garner' filing fee. ]DIS s t Butte 00. p6miqCOtn N WOOV 197 t'�roYill�� L'+�l9#�srtim . eoAt* at gw& OROVILLE, CAUFORNIA ""'o00-Pidnning{;omm. GENERAL CLAIM AUG j 2 1977 CLAIMANT MrEa rl fi . Garner Cts Y o ADDRESSt .134 NimsheW Stage slid b ifornl� CITY & 5TATE Chico, CA 96926 IMPORTANT., DATE O1= CL -AIM -SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON RCVERSE SID SUBMIT CLAIM TO DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GOODS OR SER_V`ICE$ �- _ DATE DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM4(OESCRIaEµ r-ULLY T0" AVOIO O'I OC-LAY) AMOUNT_ 8/8/77 Refund of application fee for a variance from _ 100 0 "Interim 'TM 5'tt _ zoning to allow division of 10 acres � �Into.�thre,e parcels. App imrapeod M . _ _., . R - p p. y� submitted ,-� -- i 1 TOTAL 1010 06 t, the tutderalgnedr.declnre under penalty of perjury that the services or nrtlries d As stated, claimed have been perfaimod or detivened; rind that this cinlm is trues anrarrA!t t / Anted this ✓ "L .,.., .day of „l,.... 197/.., at,..,,,e/ f Calif, _. 1111 _. �_. .� V*•'•F„�+f<a�i.. �.rV.��ly.d'«rk41+9n.. _, !i1 tintixra sit Glnlmeeett theunder,Ig:ted. hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the services or articlGs specl[tecl Above have bceri perfgnned ar:de« livered and hhef sherd Is a tiurlget Appropitiation0 ort Sppetfie gourd Approval l (Ch&ckone).for the anmc,. Dated this. +. day Of • e Iq oGsIIL ....1f yl 1 11. )......'If„1 I ,iF•tl l , i . [Sept t ~— Exp. 00partment tl6od or Authorized epaiy « Code , Gude a,.. .e . n,nF....PAYABLE FR0M y _ . 1111, f.... , ... i• - ...................... DO NOT WRITE BELOWThIIS LINEAUDITOR'S USE ONLY VENDOR D> pT,SUB, CLAIM ! INVOICI~ INVOICE GROSS ENCUMe, SU {{ COME & SUB, i'ROJ. 081 No, NO, DATE DISC, AMOUNT SUB-DIST, i �ta:oarwueear APPENDIX r ENVIRONMENTAL cx MIST VORM (TO be completed by Lead Agency) A'// 51-,01-*, :. I. BACKGROUND 77"405-11-06 77-05-20,01 I- Name of Proponent EARIj H. GARNER 2. Address and ,Pizone Nwnbe oI. rzoponent:' Nimshew Stagg 3. bate of Checklist Submitted �._. 4,k Agency Requiring C'hecklbstS. Name of Proposal, if anpli. able IVariance from Vin• o to � a otar da vision of '10-� acres � nt_ o �Yarr✓P patcel.s- xI, (Exrlana .._. ions ofPall5 p ryes" anti "maybe" ;answers on attached sheets.) are required YES MAYBE; No 1. Earth.Will Will ,the g --_---�_ ,� result in significant.- a. Instable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, comes paction or overcoveriny of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground 'surface relief features? d. Destruction, Covering or .�..,., modification of any unique geologic or physzcal features? e. :increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ' f'. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or arosion which may modify the channel of.a river or stream or, the bed of the ocean orany bay, inlet ar lak.e? Afbpendix V page 1 of 8 ACES MAYB9 NO g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, around failure or similar. hazards? � 2. A16r. Will the proposal result in a. Substantial, deterioration ok ambient air, quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Significant alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in clzmat:e, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in substantial: a. Changes in currents, or the course � or direction of water movements? L) b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns; or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?� d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water bony? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water qualify, including but not limited to ,temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f'. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an' aquifer by cuts or excavations? + Appendix F - ,p e 2 of 9 YES MAYBE NO h. Reduction in the amount of Water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to ~� water related hazards such as flooding 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in substaritialc a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (inc nding trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plasty) b Reduction of the numbers of any unique, race or endangered species of plants?' c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal, replenishment of existing Species?' _..^. d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop,? 5. Animal_L Life. Will the proposal result in Substan ial r a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthc organgsms, insects or microfauna) b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered cies of animals species g p "? �- C. Introduction of new spec.jes of animals into an area, or ,result In a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d.6 Deterioration, to existi,rig fish or Wildlife habitat? 6. Noisy. Will the proposal result in -B- ,ubs antial' a. Increases in noise levels?` �f= b, Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Appandl x page 3 of 8 YI s MAY8E NO 7 . Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce '} .onh�lht or glare? 8. Land G1 se . Will. the proposal. result in a » .�ubstanta al alteration of the planned land u.,:;,-, of an area? 9. Natural Resources,. Will the proposal. resin ,a increase in the rate of use of ;any natural resour(-, es? b, Depletion of any nonrenewable natural. resourced ..� w�F....: 0. R k of Upsef:. Does the proposal, involve a ri's is an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including# but not 11.mi.-Led Lha oil, pesticides, chemicals Or radiation) in the event of an accident ox £; -upset conditions:, 11. Population. Will the proposal. sign Pica tl .ter the - .location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human pope latior. of an area? ` 12. Housing, Will the proposal significantly cant:l.,y` affect existing housing, or create a for housing? AD demand additional. - 13. 13. TranS�or-La'�.ion,/C:a,Lcul.atilon , r��:��. thewww^ ...,.......w., proposal, result in: Zt s Generation of substantial additional vehicular ,movement - - �---- __d-, b. $ nificant effects on existing parkln(� »X facilities,, Or demand for new pack i.I'Iq'I• c. Substaxltial impact upon existing t transportation systems? c1, Significant alterations to present patterns of circulation or .movement of people and/6r goods a. Alterations to watexbArne, rail or `+ air traffic? Appendix F ., p tge 4 of '8 i`r._S . Mt"A. NO ... f`. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? M .. 14. Public services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or, result in a substantial need for new or altered governmental services in any Of the following areas: a Fire protection? b Police protection's c Schools? d. Parks or other recreational'facilities? a. Maintenance of public facilities including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15• 8n--- erg..'• Will the proposal result in: a Use of substantial amounts of fivel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist4;.ng sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? • 16. Utilities. Will: the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or naturalga s? b. Communications systems? � co Water? d., Sewer? .17. Human Health.. Will,the proposal result in`, a e CtGation of any health hazard or poten 3.al health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Hxposur7 of people to potential health hazards. Appendix' F - page. 5 of 6 YES No ls. Aesthetics. will. the-, Proposal result in Uie obit tr 1G{; on of any puts, is designated or recognized scenic vista open to the, publi( , Or wil). the proposal result in; the creation of an aesthetically of ensive site open 'to public view? l 9 . Recreation. Will the proposal result: ,in an impact upon the: quality or 4uantity of existing public recreational tied? � .facili 'U. Archeal.o ical/W V,0Vical., Will the proposal, es t a 'n <" I'F,&a4't:a.on otr a signifIca# archeological. or jA storical zl Le, strI.Igture,, object or buildir,a ,I ,,� 21. Mandatory Findings of Signif=icance, a. noes the Projit have the potential to degrade the gg4al.ity Of the environment, subs tan tial l.y reduce the ►' abitat of fish Or Wildli-fe species, cause a fish or wildlife Population to drop below self sustaining levels threaten two eliminate 4a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the rraag6 of a rave or endangere6 plant or ana,nml; or eliminat- Important examples of ,tahe major periods of C a,li fotnia history or. prehistory? ' b. Does the project: have the potential, toachieve short term benefits t;,)the detriment Of publicl-V Adopted long"te:r:m . eT'1'lY'i:iCe7X1men :al ijoal.s r4 ,�..._.. C. Does the project have impacts which are individually l invited, but, �Wuzrtul.,� tively consider alble7 CA project ince impact, on two or more separate resources where the impact on eaoh resource is relativelysmal-l., but where the effecIt of the total of those Impacts an 'the environment Js ,sign tic nt,) d., Does a ace en ironment;al. .�. fit�rt,sthe Whi chest Cause :substantial adverse e.tw.f`ecL-s, on human being,, , either directly ox indirectly? Appendix F w page 6 of A TZx DIOCUSSION OF ENVxaiClNM8NT LALUA' ION This proposal is a variance from the Interim TM -5 zoning to allow division of 10-1- acres into 3 Parcels of 2,, 3a 6; and 3.? acres. The pa„rre1 is located on Humbug Road about Y► mile south of Hell town Road. Humbug Road. separates 2 acres of -the 'existing parcel from the re- maining 7.3 acres. The applican:L states the 7.3 acres is -too small to fart! and *too large fox, one residence. I(e): There is a high erosion potential in this area due to slope, Soil type and annual rainfall. Slopes are less than 20+,/ ori most of -the property though in excess of 30/ near Butte Creek. 1(g-): A moderate landslide potential exists. Building stxlctures should be properly installed and placed a sufficient distance from, Butte Creek to prevent landslide risks. 3(e): Due to the pro:cimity of Parcels 2, and 3 to Butte Creek, special measures should be taken to assure that septic systems do not encroach on the water quality. A. setback in ekes, of 100 feet should be con- sidered. 3(i).- flood hazards are minimal from butte Creek at this time Future climatic conditions could inundateport_.ons of the property. Setback of houses and appurtenant structures a considerable distance is advisable. 5(c, d) One result of the creation, of"'rural homesi_tes is often the a installation of fencing or other barriers to wildlife migration. Limited fencing is preferable to allow deer migration and the use of the habitat by native species. The Butte Creek fishery is also an important resource to protect,. 8; The Butte County General plan shows this as grazing and open ]and, I - 5 acres per dwelling unit. �� • g aYa.e Open Space 1J7,emer�,t recommends large , This um parcel sizes for open space' lands outside the urban area. p d is currently in the Interim TM -5, lone Until: LTanuary 1978. The Butte Creek Canyon, Rezone pxoposal. desi, ,sates this area for F-5 (Voothil,l, Zone, 5 acre minimum . NOTE: A variance application was made by W'illiau D. Nichols, AI-'5'I-0'I'�2� on adjacent property in November, '1976., In this case-, a 3.8 acre parcel wG.s separated from a larger acreage by Butte Creek. The Planning Commission denied ,the varianae to zoning at that time. 12: This para of Butte Creek Canyon is sparsely populated. The land uses consist primarily of rural residential on, large lots and open space. The granting o:� this variance for less td,"n 5 acre parcels could stimulate a demand for housing on smaller parcels. This area. is outside of the projected urban, area of the General Plan and is designated as multiple -use open space. Appendix r page 7 of a 71 19?8 fir. L arl ii. Garner Chico, CA 95926 Dear Mr. Garner At lone last we have received an op..n.jon Prom County counsel re ordinC the Variance Lippl-iaa-tion to aninimUl parcel size 'oar J+.r .-G - 1�, aiid it who hi, opinion "no btsois e.�irAto for r•efuiidinbri lir. Garner I s filinC; fee.',Jio findiii e WO -re that 'ItTie ,,one cover.i.arz(r T%r. G�arn' Ire p€�r�ce� isoninterimTM-5., Xr. Garner requested e variance i o lot ,.Ize -i n order to file a p€�rcel rap crent;i ne, ''' pt,re ell, br1 1:0 c Revaewiapr the :'tyi-5 J,orie, thi,_di,,,tr cta1Low dwelling unit:T at Urenter dexiiUie'; With 11 U -se permit Uhtinryt� t+ family dUrelline,. It would appear,therefore, that residential deyve�lopme��rryz��at� in /�{{,the�gyTtll- ' {none ry��ryo{t�jld not be ria illegal, use .girl the :,one. 1,,, ,�} "'t�.ch1 ��.1... . Gay,�,ner `1,:; rlj<, %li:oll t.4V,i..ti which wrould . amount to creatinj: a residerra� iel developr�eat in the TI -5 �one disrtrict, would riot constitute a use variance prohbited by lata. Ytr. Garner 1,ould not be entitled 'to a refund o his filing fee on the 'basis of havinr applied top a prohibited lase -variarice. I hope that the delay ha:- uo u been sL, h that you have lost track of this project, but, since the Counsel l s opinion was that the application vjn5� proper, we U ill, therefore, be unable to refund tiny fe,p. Shoula you have any quer3tiorir*,, je�t,.)e raozjt€rt,t are. Bettye Blair BB : db .1... _ t. 1 i i,Y t �':Ii '�� ��F. k._