Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-28C REZONES 2 OF 6-T-. UUUDITY PLANNING "'COMMT SSTON MINTTTES NI`+tlbtnheah- 17 "ORA give an interpretation of the code to the Board of Supervisors. Staff was sure that the Board of Supervisors, should the issue- be before them, wouldprobably refer it back to the Commission for their comments. Staff said on code enforcement when they. read Section 41 of" the code it very clearly sets ou, nvestigative procedure prior to the time when any citation is issued. we are not in.a citation mode in this County on any particular violation at this time. Staff said that there was time in the investigative procedure before they get to the ditation level, There are certain areas and, things that have to be covered, and certain notices that have to go out with time limits on them. Staff said this has not been the case With Mr. Menas' property. Commissioner Walter said that Mr. Menas is not in jeopardy at this time and staff said this: was correct. Mr. Menas said he has a letter of August 4th, saying he has 30 days i`o get his animals off his property. Staff said the letter was issued before the ordinance was adopted fo;r, code enforcement. Staff said the zoning violation notices that have been sent to people in past years have used this same language giving 3o days .in which,tO correct the zoning,;violations ror it was turned over to the County Counsel or District Attorney._ The County its now in a transitional phase between the ekisting county Code and the proposed County Code, therefore, many property owners have the same problem. chairman Lynch said the Commission has np role in enforcemei.b. He said it was their role in the interpretation to make a recommendation to the Board and this is why the item was put on the agenda the way it wash He said in order to get to specific property, and specific -individuals, this has -to come before the Planning Commission in the -form' of an application for a variance to the code. Commissioner Lambert explained the types of variances the Commission considers adding that Mr. Menas could apply for a variance to the code. Mr Menas said .he has never heard such a mealymouthed explanation of a very simple question. He said the Planning Commission does riot understand why he is there and what he is talking about is a very simple problem. He said that all the evidence indicates that this ordinance has never been interpreted to .restrict the use of animals. Chairman Lynch said that Mr. Menas asked to come before the Commissionas a specific issue on the agenda and he is on the agenda ♦ his name does not appear on the agenda, the issue that Me. Menas raised does appe11 ar on the agenda, because the issue involves not only Mr. Menas' property, but many, other properties in the count -yo anybOdy that has !i'".R 9t r`iS;N�'kF4},�R� ��tTh'a���t+fktinnm'iNWaW1�w`:Ai�k�ty+• .�n t'?rwwE r51syr. ._:, 8U'Z'Itt C(7U1Mn'PLXINIVING CONIMTSSxbN MI4UTC5�= t�rtirarri��r `i`� r'' 'I aur Nell. Lindasked ,if there were zoning investigators before. She'said the code. enforcement officers as she remembers it, came about from a big political bus trip, made on an`Oroville:school bus loaded"with' people working for this County to look at itrash., She said the code enforcement officers, were hired to clean up the trash and' ,junk cars: she said,b0fore the code enforcement officers were supposed to hit the street, they were out and they`hit 'the Menases. She wanted toknowwho sent them out if they were not supposed to be out there, and why they were sent out if they were not supposed to be out there. She said that staff stated that this was before they could legally be out there because the code had not taken effecti. She wanted toi know who, either staff or the Commission, started this new interpretation on the v.ones and when. She said the Planning Department tells her that thee? have always done this.. She said they could talk to any person in thy: veal estate field and they would be told a different interpretation, She' wanted to know who interprets tha code and is there any control, over how they are interpreted. She said to tell people how they can and can not live in Butte County, that they can riot have animals oh the property 'they, bought without a use permit or variance, has got to ztop: She said she has private property rights contrary to popular belief in some citdlest of Butte County. She has been told that there is no such thing as private property rights, she did not believe this. She said they doh' have inherent private property, rights guaranteed them through the constitutrion.' Commissioner Lambert said that'`Ms: rind was mixing code with officers. She said Mse bind was mixing the Planning Department: with the Planning Commission. She said that letters in the past have been on Commission' letterhea6, in the future this will not be the case. She said there was a period in between the code investigators and the code enforcement officersy where= the zoning violations did:not stop and the investigation of code violations did not stop, the Planning Department- continued epartmentcontinued to investigate complaints,. Mrs. tind said that staff Stated the ,code enforcement officer was not supposed to 'be out to Mr. Mends place, but they were.' they are in the investigating period: y Commissioner Lambert did not hear staff saythat, she heard staff ,sa` Mrs. Lind said before the code enforcement tools effect it was a code enforcement officer by the name of Jeff who was at Mr. Mends'' property who identified h'i'mself as a code enforcement officer there to enforce the codes of Butte County on, a date before that code took. effect. This is the bind of thing that naeds to bestraightened out. Commissioner Lambert said the ;code was always in effect.'' j W LL Urn CouldkrEi i6; � �rt� r++,.+�rr , „' :,c=i � �s8nl; MiRtI is - Nntomh�r i d7 rt7777, X. MISCELLANEOUS 2. Li,scuss on w Interpretation of acreage for residential use in all zoning districts. Staff said this was.not anew issue. It has been discussed for several years. They provided 'the Commission with a matrix of identified zones and the requirements for livestock versus the resideanti.al-requirements. Also in the memo they listed those zones where livestock are not p with no restrictions and where permitted, where livestock are a?_lowed livestock are allowed with only square footage restriction for the number oz head of animals. Staff believed the focus of the concern is on the AR, ARMH, and the,S-.R series. This discussion is "Countywide, Chairman:Lynch said in the A -R zone:: they are talking about the existing' zoning code, not the revised code that is before the Board. It says in the A -R zone as a general thing "one single family dwelling per parcel exclusive of the area devoted to the residential use, the following lot or parcel area shall be required for each animal raised or kept on the premises". Example AR -1/2: 1/2 acre is the amount of land required for the residential use,: then you have the "square footage requirementsspelled out for each head of livestock. He said in the AR -5 series of zones it says "one single family dwelling per parcel not includingtents, trailers, and mobile homes, minimum lot area to be devoted o residential use shall not be less than 5 acres,Exclusive of the area devoted to the residential use the following lot or parcel area shall be required for each animal raised or kept on the premises." AR -MH -S says "one single family dwelling per parcel, in addition, to the minimum square footage required to be devoted to residential use; the following minimum lot or parcel areas shall be required for each animal Chairman Lynch said the problem is not in interpretation, but a problem with the code. Commissioner Lambert said the Commission heard this issue 8'years ago and the Board choose not to adopt the change recommended by the Comnissic41. The Commission heard this 'issue in public hearings as Ipart of the ontire zoning code revision within the last 2-3 years and they had many, people from the broville area as well. as other, areas of the County who came and spoke and gave some of their concerns and the Commisoon recognized the discrepancies that they felt could be improved they recommended changes in the livestock ordinance and sent thosea`forward to the Board.' That is where this is. She did not choose to open this up again at this time for discussion while it ig at the Board for their review and for their decision on what. they ai „eady sent forward. if the Board does riot find this appropriate, if they feel there is need for further change, she would be happy �� hear this again, She to„.tight at this time the concerns should cr-, before the Board', The C�wmi•ssion has heard this, they have sWOUiJ this, they rat^'ii#mwipM'�:+r.»ra*r+:at•+.u...wM++yu.4",Mah•.n•. =a nwrei „*'.u6°'K.".w.'i4i',s'Y+6fef`i1”}'ad�t%e+*�e+N"sS.Yr��1{',�!. i"✓#t�..�KSrs';�r » . ,,�� 4 .13iytTt CORY 15LARkNO tc)MISSTON MVtYTF' y +- s1 4r�t�p„�hot�* have sent forward.their recommendations; and if they, are not adequate the hearing, will come back to the Commission. Commissioner Walter said that the current regulationsarenot good, the Commission did take action, it is at the Board, the people should go to the public hearings at the Board' if they do not agree with the recommendations. Nell Lind asked if it;was true that the recommendations started being ri thhedaBoard's a enda a ear ago in ,lune and it was on every agenda g he line until the 23rd of February this year when it was Y g p he was quoted in the paper as saying this pulled, and put into Committee because it was racked withlegal, mayInever come�backaid Jintoane Dhearin s4 Ms Lind, said document was y g not. with County Counsel; Commissioner Walter suggested that Ms. bind take her statements to the Board. reorge M'anas said with regards to the new 'ordinance that is before the Board of supervisors instead of being allowed 2000 sq., ft for a sheep or goat the new plan calls for 3000 sq. ft.. for a sheep_ or a goat, j.Xlstead tf 8,125 'st. ft. for a cow or horse it is now 10 000 sq,, ft. instead 6,k having the kind of a fence on your front property line to be asp high as necessary to hold' livestock or to keep :out transients, the raew coda requires that the front ;property line not be fenced with any mora then a 4 ft high fence. The new code: says -if you, have a guest ;rouse: the guest house can not have a kitdhen. Tho guest house can not e-gtef;-d 500 Esq. ft.. in size, He did not have much confidPhce that the ne'v cods: was going to resolve the problems that have 'bbenpresented before the Commission today._ He pointed out with regard to the analysis of AR-MH-s by chairman Lynch, that in examination of this code it `nays and implies in pazagraph 2 'mobile homes to house one family which such mobile home is the only housing facility located on the- pre-m3.ses, (a) area of mobile home", the implicatibri is that the balance of the property may be used for other purposes other than for a residence, in paragraph 4 it says Agricultural rises. In paragraph B uses requiring use permits (3) livestock farming. if this does .not permit agridultural uses he did not know what an agricultural use was sub--paragraph (c) 16t area required: minimum area per dwelling unit: He takes` this to mean if you have'a parcel zoned AR-MH-5 it means that you have 5 acres, no more, no less, that's the zoning that it comes under Commissioner Lambert said .her interpretation was that in the AR-MH--5 you, need acres 'for and if you want any animals; yot neeyou, he residence :, fez rtx,.Cr ;BLrT' 8 t'OUWV pLANNINd comml sfikoR 1�IINuns ", -i vow +�r• r , , xa �,w,+•.,.a^. Y4 a• ...° C)TJ,,ir►l- '> t f�� I n{ t 4 SJ "fit N'.a err , � r, r r ! P , 777 Staff said a' lot of the larger parcels were under wi.11iamson Act Contracts. w George Menas said he went to the Planning Department end obtained an. explanation of the old ordinance existing AR-MH-5'zonL, from a Senior Planner.: He was told that AR -MH -5 aii,d any A -R' designation is residential strictly of the agricultural. He asked Y p he word agricultural in the Senior the entitlement ;of the code. Mr. Menas said that the Senior Planner told him it was just there. Mr. Menas said the word agriculture was first in the code. He said in any ordinance revision the Commission is es. y P they saY agriculture consideringlusmaket �e you mean. agriculturalr plain when Colvxnissioner Walter said he does not know of any time when someone was stoT,ped from doing agriculture in an agricultural -residential area. He saia the current rode specifically names agricultural as a permitted use in one particular AR --zone and not in the other. He said in the Code revision before the B ardthComMissil recently 0 on has tried to correct this problem* It has not been problem Stiff said the AR -5 zone does say that are allowed. The 1.-R zone is somewhat of a rural residential. zone, where people can icult that; have. always permitted the agryaral have 'their hobby, farms, He said the statement uses with certain restrictions on livestock. - that it is strictly a residentialzone is not consistent with the way the zone has ever been intended or. applied. 1 Staff said they have always.al.lowed agricultural uses in the AR and AR -MH zones. Commissioner Walter suggei-tea Mr. Menas check through the Department to make stye of this Mr. Maus said they should look at the VR�1.60. He said the first 2 l'I2 pages talk about the uses that can be made of the land which include Just about anything. He said on Page 3 paragraph. C it says the same thing as in the AR -MH -5 which is.being interpreted as no animals what so ever and no plants. He said he did -hot understand whey they could not have an interpretation in the xront of the code book. He said the definition of resideritial use was missing. He discussed: the square footage for animals in the revised code, Staff said that in the A -R tunes under A # agricultural uses are permitted.. Mr. Menas,. from the audience,, said this is not what he was told. Staff said under Butte County Code Section 2h-97, sui paragraph five, there are requirements for l.ivestockc but agricultural uses r e permitted Chairman Lynch said the Commission was getting away from the subject of this hearing: f � :BUTTS dot NL'SC MAIC ING GOMMNgfOR 14-T t-9 '~ 0 obar..2 m. w Baa r' ,� _....__..__.,,__»...��.�.�..�...........rmva7 }au.a�y yy�,r-e:uc 4CIIIUtYG �. k: �. e , FILE NO.-'. 87-28A and B BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING CO.rTMISSION STAFF 'FINDINGS-Septembei-: 15, 1988 APPLICANTi Butte County Planning Commission OWNER. various REQUEST: General Plan Am4hdment to Commercial, Industrial, Agricultural -Residential, Orchard - and Field Crops, Grazing and Open Land,, Public; and Rezone to conform to'Gener.al'Plan AP NO. Various SIZE: Approximately 45 square°miles LOCATION: South of OtoVille, cast of the Feather River;' north of 'Honcut Creek and west of Palermo- Honcut Highway EXISTING ZONING: U A-5', M--21 A'-10, A-40 ZONING HISTORY: Zoned A-2 b OrdinancetJ by Ordinance 2488 on 9/17/85; zoned5A'5zbned Y Ordinance 1506 on 10/15/74 and by Ordinances 817 and. 937 on ,6/9/54 and 6/20/67; zoned A-10 - by Ordinance 1725 on 6/15/76; zoned A, -,4o by Ordinance 2318';on 10/26/82; zoned M-2 by Ordinance 767 on 5/7/63 SURROUNDING 20NIltd: U., A-5 SURROUNDING LAND USE: Suburban residential, agricultural., public GENERAL PLAN DEZIGNATION: Orchard an,d Field Crops; Grazing and open Land, Agricultural-Res�.dentia�.; Commerc3eY APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: tutteCont�Code Sections 24-23.80 and 24-26 through24-29, Comments Received: Healthn-Department,. "No objection to `General Plan Amendment .nviro Dental nd ddivisi.on Or development 'subsequent to the General Plan Amendment anda Shall Comply with Health 'Departtnent requirements and mf,himum sewage d sposal are and tater flow requirements' of the Butte County Subdivision Ordinance.' approximately 924 parcels are zoned °U" (Unclassified), most of which are ate zoned in the Palermo area. Approximately �°ae-quarter of the parcels are zoned A-5 and are scattered throughout tj,,;t area south of East Gridley Road and east of State Highway 70. A handful:�of parcels throughout the area are of existing C-2, M-2, AR-1 and A-10'2,;oning (Figure 1) Figure 2 indicates that a total of 406 • p parcels' ;in the subject area conform to the existing zoning (predominantly A-5 and-A-10) and that 346 parcels would conform to the zon3,ng under the 'proposal. As an alternative, if all of the A-160 zoning is changed, to A-40, then 450 parcels would conform to the zoning. Later discussion of the individual sub-areas will indicate that most of the parcels that now conform are located in eXtensive agricultural areas, whereas this proposal will shift the conforming parcels to the urbanizing .areas; Also, when 'analyzing the `he proposed zoning, it should be ke t in min xistin z` number of arcels that could be created under the e o t tg oning versus that could now be created are located within thehA-5mzoning whics of the hais is r of the Project area.` None of the located e rural parcels within theexist ng oOUiozone located in the Palermo or area conform to the zoning due to the requirement for 20-acre minimums in: the �,v zone. If adopted, the r the conformin proposed zoning would shift the bulk of r utal areas, forplarge-acreage agriculturalalermo and Huses area while retaining the Sub-area 1 is generally located west of State Highway 70 and north of East Gridley Road and, consists of over 3 0b0 acres in 4A different Parcels. Most of this area is subject to flooding and consists of Class T and 11 soils which are generally deeper soils that are excellent agricultural purposes'. The Class IV soils along State for ,Highway 70; are the location of most of the dwellings located south of Palermo Road.` The Class VIt2 soils at the northerly end of the study, area in the area zonenshauldzremainoned oin-11acenrerder OsdS of aggregate extraction; This M-1 p to recognize the potential for extraction of the natural resources. The northwest corner of East Gridley Road and Highway 70 is the site of a flea market,, gas station and tavern, and is proposed to be recognized with a Commercial General. Plan designation and C�-1 zoning. The bulk of the area is currently zoned �'i��� and is proposed for A=160 zoning. The General Plan designation is proposed to remain Orchard and Field Crops. Sub-area 1 which is under public ownershp andh� n�rtherly portion of p gen« .rally referred, to as the Oroville Wildlife Area is proposed to "support a General Plan designation of Public and a zoning of A-c (Resource Conservation} An island in the southerly portion of this property mentioned abovei tall.l remain M-1 as _ Sub-area 2 is located on 'both sides of State Higf�way 70 3n the Oak Gro area and north of pa.Lermo` Road ( and Welsh Road ) from the wildlife' area; ve on the west to Lone. Tree Road on the east,. This area consists of 1060 p, g g g, pcomprising acreslofcAR-1 zonih 6l.ocated on the west16 acres of ifult nsideoof Hi hwas 7�so5.78 Pe110tmo_Road, and one parcel of C-2 zoning 66t Highway y south of consisting 5f 2.88 acres located betreen Pacif c Heights Road and State Highway 70 north of 3, y' Palermo Road. This C-2 zoning is a remnant of C-2 zoning that existed along Highway 70 prior to the Oroville area study, while that area to the north was retained with a General Plan designation of Commercial in the Oroville study, the Commercial zoning was removed until such time as freeway improvements and frontage 'roads are constructed in the area. Similarly, the Commercial General Plan designation on this remnant south of 'the section line is proposed, but the zoning is to be ARMH�-2-1/2 lake that property immediately to the north. Similarly, the M-2 zoning between Highway, 70 and Power 'House 'Hill Road will be.car;ried south, and the ARMH-2-V2. zoning located between Power House Hill Road and Lone Tree Road will also be carried south to, Palermo Road. Commercial General Plan designations and zoning are proposed for the southwestcorner of state Highway 70 and Palermo Road, encompassing the store, Rv park, auction yard and some vacant» property. That C-1 zoning will comprise ap,oximately 7.09 acres (see Figure 3). The remainder of the area south A r�alermo Road and on both sides o£ State Hi hwa 70 is ` posed for Agricultural-Residetztial designation g y pro g n under the GenE_x:al Plan and AR-1 zoning to recognize the existing suburban-size "parcels in the area. The existing AR-1 zone in, the area will be ;retained. Sub-area 3 is located south of Palermo Road from Highway 70 to Occidental Avenue and consists of parcels' that are generally larger than those fronting highway 10 in the Oak Grove area but not.yet in extensive agriculture. There are currently 32 parcels zoned °u" in this area, d6nsisting of 333' acres, and 67 parcels zoned A-5 comprising 925 acres: lPhis arc-,.a is generally Class IV soils and is proposed for Orchard and Pield Cops designations west of Lone Tree Road and Agricultural- Residential desi nations east of Lone Tree Road, The zoning is proposed to be A-10,_which will conform to most of the existingz g �+arcel�. si..es. The Agricultural-Residential designation will allow zoning t at o smaller parcels such time as growth in the Orov lle and Palermo area makes it necessary and, when infrastructure is available. Bub-area 4 is gehdtally cdhtidered the ',downtown area" of` Palermo, rt presently consists of`516 parcels zoned "Ui' Of these 5i6 parcels] one conforms to the existing zoningi under the proposed zoning, 115 parcels would conform. While many parcels in the area are smaller than the Proposed ARMH-1 zoning, soil conditions and Health Department requirements indicate that new parcels less than one acre should not be created at this time. This zoning is also similar, to that adopted in the OroVille area study immediately to the north. Ptoposed within this sub- area is Commercial zoning at the Palermo Four Corners, Public z0bing at .the Park/Grange and School/Fire Station sates, and -Industrial zoning for the large industrial properties located on Railroad Avenue. The General Plan. designations 'Oi.11 al1g match the exxistiIng uses while allowing',a' certain amount of is.fillin' where appropriate. Sub-area 5 is the area located south of Palermo proper and generally south of the brandh.of Wyman Ravjhd' This area consists of 72 parcels] all. of which are toner "U", The area composes approximately 365 acres. Soils in this area "vary from Class 17 to Class TV, Most of the Class zI areas are subject to flooding from Wyman Ravine and localized di:ainage► 4 Y " r large portion of the.Class iv soils. Existing'.uses in this area are extensive agriculture with parcels generally larger than 40 acres,. This area is proposed for both Orchard and Field Crops designations at the westerly extremities and Grazing and Open 'Land for the central and easterly portions. Zoning again is proposed for A-160. Sub -area i2 would generally be considered the town of Honcut. Soils are all Class IV: No direct flooding takes place from Honcut Creek, Wyman,,, Ravine or, Wyandotte Creek. ;However, localized flooding can occur, and' development should take placei with care. Located within the townsite are some established commercial uses as well as some areas that may be appropriate for commercial, the school and fire station, and residential area. General Plan designations include Commercial on those established areas and along Lower Honcut;Road and Palerma"Honcut _Hi'ghwaY''. Public on the school and fire house, and Agricultural -Residential on the remainder. C.-1 and' P -Q zonings are proposed on the commercial and public areas,, with ARMH-1-for the areas ,that are in smaller lots as shown on the old town of. Honcut record maps, with A-5 zoning to the northwest and southwest where some additional'developmont may, take place. Currently, there are 146 parcels comprising approximately 230 acres in this sub -area that are zoned null and seven parcels comprising 157.24 acres which are currently zoned A-5. Summar _:' if the proposal,,, including the A-160 zoning, is adopted as presented,, there will be a potential for a 76% inereese iia 4 -he number, of parcels that could be created over what now xists in the area: This would also mean a 16% increase ,i.n traffic generated in the area, and a 76%. increase in demand for public services in the area. The existing zoning, however; would "allow a 317* increase in the number of parcels and traffic genernw)ad, and would permit them in areas that are currently used prt^dnminant.cy for agricultural. purposes. These areas are also areas where it would be .1ifficUlt i if not impossible, to provide public sexvices. The propo8e4:zoning would allow development predominantly in areas that have already ekperioaco i significant growth, such as the "Oak Grove area, Palermo; and the ttwr jAko. of Honcut. This wouldalso tenni to reduce traffic hazards along:. State RigAway 70 from development of homesites and driveways in the corridor. ,: all of the A-160 zoning were changed to A-40 w�fting as shown in Figure 2, theft there would be a potential for a 97% increase in the number of parcels aver the existing zoning and 'a comparable increase in traffic potential. The disttibutaibn of development potential remains essentially the same as the 160=acre pr»oposal,iut would allow a few more parcels in , the rural area: The A-40 alternative would represent a 21% increase over the A-160 alternative. The environmental documents for this project have been completed and circulated 'through the State; Clearinghouse, and a Negative bnclarat ion is recommended. 6 • a a; Butte noun Plannin Commission proposed Negati environmental im act and .-General Plan Amendment�froinclaratolo�r regarding C mmercial to Agricultural-Residential and Orchard arid. P'c;d Crops to Commercial, Industrial, Agricultural-Residential, Orchard and Field Crops, Grazing and Open Land and Public, Rezone from U, C-2, M-2, AR-1, A-5, and A-10 to P-Q, R-C, C-1, M-1, M»2, AR-1, AR-1!41.1, AR-MH-2S, A-5,10, 40, and 160, for property, located from mirth of Palermo Roa .i south of the County boundary, and from the Feather River to Palermo-Honcut Road and including the Townsite of Ho-acut. (File 87-28 A)B) (Continued open from January 11,,1990) `' Staff said they had recommended than the Commission focus on the Urban Sub Areas 2, 4 5, and 12 of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone. Staff submitted a aiiemo. Staff said that notices were posted :n the Palermo Post Office, Palermo store, Honcut+;tore, and the Mini Ilrfarket 'in Oak Grove. Staff conta.ti d the Oroville Mercury and provided them with copies of the map on the proposed zoning and hope there was some news coverage from the Mercury Register. Staff commented that; eveii thoiigh'the Commission is talking about AR-MH zoning, the Commission might wish to consider the A-R zoning, i.e., AR-2.5 or AR-5. The reason is that, throughout the County with the exception of the zones with the MH designation, the Agricultural zones, TM zones, ,and FR zones, any mobiles laced the P on e prop rty are required meet 1974 HUD Standards. Staff said in all zones except the agricultural, T M, and F-R zones. 'the temporary second dwelling AKA "Aunt Minnie" must meet the HUD Standards, which rs a conflict Staff recommended that the Commission i , d of AR-MH zoning so they would be ndthe g n r4nstst nt befole n the primary use and ,anhAt nt Minim' should one occur. Commissioner Lynch asked, if the Commission, recommends A;R zoning, then: any pre-1974 mobile homes that are in place would still be an allowable use on the property and. could continue even though the property was zoned AR-l. Staff said this is correct. He said the mroe replacere 19 obile home.e Staff said oth s was also correc{ �e P 74 mobile With another pre-1914 The hearing was opened to the public. Betty Armitage said her husband has a �*ara a on their Property g P P rtY and he is keeping the garage there for their sons when they are old 'enough to handle it:' She sdid there are old cars on her proper that have been n a problem ,n the past, but the cars are now behind a sight obscuring fence. She wanted to know how this General Plan Amendment and Rezone would affect in Avenue. Staff said if a LEGAL'use is established, the zoning does not cancel that itse� Staff said the zoning would make the LEGAL use a pre-existing nonconforming use., Mrs. Armitage asked 'it slid would need a U86e Permit for the'garage7 She also risked about keeping animals on the property, Ak'JB'��"'A�"�'�"�rd�ttrs'M Y i "...tl Y , a✓ ,iexa.a..,�y w.a+.a. HI.+*r++:,u4v'»n, ua ww+Ma..Nrr•+*�4+wr.» ,»a., M ,• t � - C�.,JN'CY PL`�iVivNG 'CQNiMTSON :MNtt+LS - �ente�y5 Butte County Plnnnin om'mission - proposed Negative Declaration regarding environmental impact and General Plan. Amendment from Commercial to Agricultural- Residential and .Orchard and Field Crops to Commercial, industrial, Agricultural Residential, Orcard acid Field Crops, Grazing' and Open Land an'd Public, Rezone from Y7, C-'? °M-2, AR-I, A-5;, and ,A.-10 to P-Q, R-C C-1, M-1, M-2, AR-Ij AR-&!H-1 AR-MH- 2.5, 4:, i, 10P, 40' and, 1601, for property located from north of Palermo Road, south :o the County bbz,indaryand from the Feather River t1 to Palermo-Honcut Road and including the townsite of Honcut. (F' a 87-28 A & B) (Continued open from November 9, 1989) Staff said at the Planning Commission meeting of November 9, 1959 there was a discussion of ,timing of this project with the Energy, Natural Resources Element. 81.df said;tithe Commission had discussed splitting thisi into two areas at their last meeting. One area i",r the ed areas: and one discussion on the rural areas: Staff said the animal'issue has been r'%saiveci and is no Longer a consideration for these zoning proceedings. affecting this rezoning was the possible widening Chairman Forbes said that, one of the concerns of either Highway 99 or Highw, 70. Staff said there is a report due this month on the %I widening: Staff said the road widening would not have much affect on the urbanized areas being discussedµ Ind hearing was opened to the ,public. Harold Galliett said he was there representing Betty Vasser. He wanted individuals to be notified by mail if there was any change in their zoning. Commissioner Lynch said it would be reasonable for the Commission to look at Palermo/Idoncut urban area as a separate area from the, rural lands. He discussed the possibility of a need for Commercial zoning along Highway, 70 if that is the route chosen to be widened. Commissioner Lambert asked if the environmental documents or the Energy, Natural Resources .Element would be ready in February? Staff said the documents should be received from the consultant this month, then they will go through the State Clear ng: house for, a 45 day rev ery, Commissioner Lanibert' said she was willing to separate the urban and rural areas under consideration. She said she would like to see the 'docutnents'for the EnergyI Natural Resources 'Element before making a decision on the rural areas. Staff suggested the Cotx missioin separate ateas and take a look at the proposal for the urban area I their next meeting and continue the rest of the area or a 'hearing in March or, later. Commissioner Ostrowsjki suggested the Commission deal with the urban areas first and delay the action on the more rural, ariea& until later.. 1 „uy •Y, k .+1, 11a.Va+11.S4-Mdh{hivaoJM'e+4t4uw.W4M„Vw6o.w.ew��nWXaiYN.MMIWMM�`wn:+i-r'.+a�.�.+�"MM!tZ+ N X „J? ANTQxN'a 60MM'ISSIr1T�1 M "NU'�E5 �+ �7akit�a v ,.Z ►°° 99 0 ° ..s . ....,' .. J '.'rj1"► ( 1 Zoned frartx RMH to A II 1. continued �i 026-174003. 026-181-001 a� 003 , 024 028029 026-181-005' 007 011 019 021 '026627 -1SI-0Q1. 00?p 003{ 005 007 r 008 009 010 026-183-001 002, 006' i 007 019. 021 024 629 ' 030 031 026-202-004 005- 006 010 U13 , 015 017 , Z� 2 , 01,3 024 023 026-'� 029 � 026,221 ayl of 06-190-all ge of i Zoned from 'W, to AAMH l: continued 02&-154-003 004 005 008 009 010 011 012 026-152-002 : 026-121.001 0,03, 004 005 007 011 ; 012 013 014 015 k 016 017 026-050-001 006 007 008 010 _ 019 020 _ 023 02 027 - 028 029 030 031, 032 028-060-a1I of page 028-071-003 004 005 00 007' 009 010 011` 013 014 , ironed T'rom *V toARNLF1-1: coo inued U+28-072-002 ,. 003 'gall 005 010 01.3 015 , 016 G i 017 j! 023-073.-1301 003 006 007 011. 012 014 , 028.614-002 004 00s 006 .008 003 010 028-075-002 003 004 028-076-003 004 007 009 010 o11 028.077001 t , 002 004 006 - ooy 028.0"1$-p03 ' 004 005 ti 006 007 ' 008 u , V 41 �i �� .;,����`f �r.< :.r tom"' �iJ��-✓,. �: ��� ."'"a'+', '`! wF r.. .. ���,1E-w .(, �(. (� ���`�'�� .�O �Y II f. � �o' ' � I ' s.a P3 uLr"� 1: rfy� 613 -447 61,E o a-? Pk, g of `I Y4p, 4 , 0 ; ,' +' 6 n fit t a+ I a �2c 22 1' ria"' G►�3 �~- ©vQ/� Y .� + A3 10 v Wr• x 4P FsS 40 X , �r �.1 V. ff n rl -., syr •A+..wW.'. ... _ a... rr /�j • Y 7 ...Oz tj® OiO Dd 0 O _ :n/027,ted OWN p! R — { • " 0 3 •u'��++rw�Yrrr+�IYr'.•whw.1'�w`ly'- r ell 61 C>! a ! Qb7 0 0 Y W�7 �'`'•`-..-�-�---�....,i� .....w...�u:l vial--+dx ... .. ...r�r.,+k� ;y., +.;. IT (� � I -� 004' r 1I