The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About83-14 LAC 1 OF 1' ` ,. ,�, A tri r a � b , � ', . !t w ,� _ 4 r ;,9 a ., � � �_ �. � I 4 ' A J s r 4' i '0 a .�� , n, t � �. .�' U m r. � G ,. � � r e 1 ' r • � f. . s {4 kS'. i _ ' M ".� .. y � �i t � i , � �� I ,. N. � Cyt I �. ��iA I / I �� . n � � � � � ., ® ,. ;, � �. , . . ' � +' , _ DEPARTMENT OF NCaSINGAD URBAN D iNtLOPMENT SACRAMENTO SERVICE OFFICE Jp �i�i• .� dip. i (�1�1tIfiC� rvp7l�l�. pp * II c 545 DOWNTOWN PLAZA -- SUITE 260 I.�AR % 'i 1 82 Oe MAILIWG AD 0RESS:1 P.O. BOX 1878 + SACRAMENTO, CALIFOO:. 'm 96P,69 OroYlll3, Cnlifor716 REGION xX IN REPLY REFER To: March 26, 1982 Mr. Michael., Pyea.tt Butte.County Administrative Officer' 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 -t Dear Mr. Pyeatt' SUBJECT: Local Area Certification (LAC), Butte ;County This is a follow-up to my letter of November 25, 1+081, to Ms. Bettye Blair, Planning, Director, Butte County. At that time, it was indicated we would be undertaking a comparative study between the Butte County subdivision approval standard's and those of HUD/F11A. We have now Completed our study and the necessary review for the local Area Certifi cation (LAC) of the County: 1e sincerely appreciate the cooperation received from the various county officials, independent districts, and boards who conn ibuted their time and experience to aid our efforts. A special thanks is due Nis. Bettye Blair and Mr. Charles, Woods for arranging our interview sched- uling with the appropriate county personnel.; The team of three also field-inspected a number of areas for consistent application of your standards and seven subdivisions; were inspected for a detailed analysis. The Interviews and the site inspections provided Considerable information to augment our previous housing experience in your. County, We were pleased to find that many improvoments, we consider impar- accomplished in the last year or two in the county subdivision application processing; Hotaever, it is our :finding that the County system, in some critical areas, differs with and does not consist- entiy 1�.set this agency's subdivision requirements. Accordingly, an LAC cannot be made for Butte County at this tame. HUD will continue to t'eview and process subdivision applications under the standard developer' certification pro;cedtires; The following were the major differences' identified in our study of this County;i 11, The County Comprehensive Plan does not always guide future development consistently and On oata8l.on, Boning Changes allow departure from orderly growth criteria: orated differences exist between the c6UMty policy and the incur 2. Si nipficdtd cCitis in some planding 61dments, In one situation, 2 continued reconsideration of land uses is causing economic insta- bi]ity and some local conflicts (greenling), in another case, "island" jurisdictions continue to deprets the ability to provide Adequately for the overall neighborhood improvements. We fully recognize the interests and responsibilities of both the local incoryorated units of government and the county but make findings solelyorn the existence of these matters. 3. We find in the Planned Unit Development (PUD) st,�ndards, espe- cially on prgvate styeet cross sections, signifitant differences from that required b" this agency,' to establish private street cross seWe urge consideration be givenctions to .meet the county publid street standards, This will, at a moderate cost at the Lime of i;nstallatiaYt, assure less maintenance to the future home- owner and also provide a contingency protection for the county: ` re concerned that legal efforts at other locations may result We a it, some measure of local governmerttal responsibility for the Private street maintenar 1 4, On-site drainage and g grading appears inconsistent and occasionally insufficient to assure proper surface tooter clispasal: 5: County requireme;'S for some soil tests, hillside stabilization, and soil comp,actisti do not always meet HUD's criteria, 6, revieIn �ianonet�there subdiv'ision�mbother issues �ohi.al� HUD must. relate to mandated regulatoy federal . Some of these issues . 1 review, and others to areas now under' rhe County General Plan rev'isians. Included in this group are applications"Whete individual domestic water supply or individual/community waste disposal systems are proposed; Other elements tequiring review in your area are.noise, historic Preservation and archeolo� gY, areas subject to inundation, man -trade hazards, and endangered species,- Individual reference will be made at the time of sub":ivision application on the adequacy of fire protection and police setjilces int cases of the more remote developments (rural) which may be submitted. tudy id find The sIaeutsoandgin a ery onstructivemannertomeet Its, unusualgtowthdifficlien s actively seeking to update the General Plan to be the 1�qidely diverse UtIlan/rutal and geogtaphw" Ida! differences that exist 'n the County, tion issues handled and our findings are riot intended y are very we11- to convey an impression of general p y, rather to show i.he results of the comparison study, unacce tabilit but The extent of the differences are such that HUD cannot omit our subdivision application processing on the assumption that the county standatds and prticedures will. assure the necessary namPliance with the HUD standards and eXistingcriteria, is to be considered temporary. toe would This MID study and finding ears tame. Zn Che meantime, like to reinspect your community o about two y please to ever assistance we can. and out office would be very p. rot, We encourage you to work will work TA you in matters of concern. the matters of concern listed above,toe know the County towards improving witls. the ncarpoxated cities in mutual will continue to work diligently problem areas. _ It is our hope that eventually we ran issue- a Local with Calyialbasic tion for the County. This drill allow 7'hc Lt1C will review, subdivision apfilications from, your jurisdiction. under the builder X educe most of the duplicative pt acedure� now required ' certification program.vided . ° . o Thank .You again for your consideration And the assistance p floe team in our efforts to certify Butte County. If we crai er,au befaturther assistance, please conCact Philip l✓; Rabit son, 'Itaview App. (916) 44p_2756. Sjnterely, 1jlehael ps lulicK Supervisor, 518PT PreMs c. Bettye 'Slaix Manning Director #7 County tantet Drive cyroville CA 9596 Mr. Clay Castleberry Director,, Dept. Cif Public 14orks #7 County Cer tc:t Drlve Oroville, rA 95965