HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUTTE CO. PLANNING DEPT . 78-27 2n
k .. a
1
t
•�
1 '�� \l � � �. a( "�
ail
r,
J ,
i
Se �tPmber..2,,0, 19 7,211" to
'
z
I
t
J
r
- Cor 1,{ link R;Utl� dr66lhh ..`. �. ,r✓ " 6
(�)
. lv1101,
�r "Chico; C 05926
Re AP �46-�5 15'5
S,, s 1=0''PdtifY, You Ahart kY6 have received your aopli
_. r
..cation fear a° rezone• '•FhRm SR -to 5R for, five acre S
,
�e
tuct£d t1n the wesu,side a#1 ia;,vPhu.e"in rico,
4Je 1 sch du'1e u'L�l `c het^ir► s at ruche time .b the
l6Meht4l date-rmina'tion� hat �
anvit° s bee.ri received by th`is
r, .
i Co
I'Pl ease find en'closdd" recttOt tto 1 128 for your a�,i I
t f n f e c o.f IMTIR 00
...,,,` sin 6 rel .y ;
(3etLyo Glair - r
e n G
rl:
r o
r..
1
,' b
=' BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
NOTICEOF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby, given by the Butte County Planning Commission
�- that', public hearings will be held on Monday, November- 28, 1977,
3 at 7:30 p.m.`, in the Butte County Board of Supervisors' Roots,
Butte County Administration Building, 1859 Bird Street,
Orovi`llle, Ca1`�tornia, regarding the following:
X�l r_- ITEM ON WHICH NEGATIVt DECLARATION.
REGARDINGN ENVIRONMENTAL MPAC�HA�S�MJF� RECOMMENDED
14 Corinne 'Ruth Wal droop - Rei,:',lie From "SR "I " (suburban
Residential 1 acre parcels') to "S -R" (Suburban
;h4esideni:ia1 w Minimum size parcels) property located_
on the west side of E1 Monte Ave., approx. 1/4 mile
north of 5t-:tb Hwy. 32, identified as, AP 46-26-155'),
more parti661arly described as:
Lot 11, and the south 1/2 of 'Lot 12 of
p K "Humbol dt. Sub" per lisp: of ,Record in Mai '
Book 2, on Page 198 of the Butte County sf'
Recorder, excepting therefrom the
viakherly 164 ft. of the easterly 265
of the above described parcel
Contai�ping 5.23 acres, more o> less, Chico.
The above mentioned a p1
,, p ications, petitions maps, draft
environmental' impact reports and/or negative reports are on
file and available for public viewing at the oyfi'Ge of the
Butte Courit Piahning nepa'rtment, 7 County Center Drive,
Ord�vi 1 1 e, Cal ff"oi;n a . Envi ronmehtat Impact, Reports are also
available at college and county libraries.
t,
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING C0;_MMISSr6N
LAWRENCE d ` LAlSOhd
DIRECTOR OP PLANNING
TO ESE,, PUBL.ISHLO IN THE CHICO VITERWRISt`'RE CORD ON THORSDAY,
NOV8MBER 11, 1977.
a ,
Tele
ram.,",,
s�IzC 113 (172kk) (1`012 057rM329) PD 11/25/7? i?
TCS LSA
.`IF;MLZXT
ZCLV °166 11`25 :r
PMS I'►JFOVILLE CA
LYR'i`66(1719)(1-175355G329))PD 11/25/77
1,18
164 IPMIIHA 113
i -S -S FM WU 125 171
P�,;��;;� , s CA
1
F
011102/77 ' hl-IH45z SMRHTWU09
U14 NX 0 0 Hid HX 07
-;
NAUr HI 71/69 2 111 A HST VIR WUr PAGE 1/5� 0
5 7 I5
'gutta Co, Planning Com
no
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING OOMMISSIONER
NOV 28 1977
7 COUNTY CENTER DR
tt������ ..
"
LLECAL IF'ORN I'A 9.5
Orcvillai Cdlfo�rn'iaI
WITH REFERENCE TO LOT NSRR 11—EL ,SfONTE
;
AVE OWNER CORRINS CJAL"DROOP
�,
HUMBOLDT 8UBUIVISION CI,, eO CALIFORNIA
WE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE
THE,,
4,
�,rj�t.en3bc'1977;
,
t
G�,r�nr►ci?'t th iValdroop
„��
t;),e S
!6Uox 9o- IV
��•
11k•lY
Gico,
''`� "i
6
Ril°gone pile 78-7,
:w
`1;; M{ °� lhialdrdop ;
a ,
S,"•��.s letter will serve ��
1 ` your official roti '' F
,fxca,, ion that
Late County Planning Commission, at its
,
the t�
mectin�g`on Novembor
'de�licd your application for a rezoning from �R
S-Rrpr�tperty
A
'.<< V0
located on the West side of E1 Mame
aroi`mat
ti! fpl 'I elY 1/4 mile north of State Hers`, 32. in
{ J Chace,
�
� • 1`oU ha,4e the right to appeal this deci.sion to the Boar_ cl
c f Su eTvisor5 within fere
`
r, f ' 5) dads o' the r��p6rt •of the
�tlannjbg Commi sion�s action. The Board tluf(a
and `y pervisors
�
i'v711 xecei e the Pl.annl g COMMission's ropo "t- an Tuesdays
�ecember J j', 1977: If-
f
;{ �u wish to eat
I P ; ,you Must submit
Cl
dour request to tt�c t,1et°1� of the Boa��d of Supervisors-
e:
in tvrita.119--no !Pt-er than S l oo an ;Monday, December
9.
M
�Sh0uld yo.0 have an �
4 ,r�u a,,'�f;ice; y'uestions '� please feed free to contact
;
„�• Lawrence J. Lawson
�
Director o7 Planiling61
it
y
,
8f
It
fit
1
r
Deyemb�r 7, 197x%
, 5
Corinp.e ),Ruth Wa�.dra p, f r
Rt. 5,''' o 90-W
Ohico,,CA 9926
.
Re,,: Rezone' 78-27
I.
0 Dear Nie►, Waldroopt
At the regular" aeet� ng of the.�-xBlittse Clouat�
;' Board of 8uper�;
visors held Decp'mber 6s, a,9i7�. publia hea'Tin.g date 'was sett
nor Januar 3, l9i% at 10� to 'c'Ohaidbr
..
for rezone from !!aR .°'" (Suburban«:T e" zidential, lour a parae
. �araels)`
:
�-acre
to 11,S-Ril (Suburban Residential) propert" 1 i�atea on the �ves3t
side off' El Monte krenue apprwc .mate,17 1/4 >i4le north of
State Iiighwa 3?, C3hico, California' «
!1:'he meeting" t111 be held in the Board of supervisors' Ropm,
bounty Administration )3uilding o 1859 Bird 'street j OrQVi .la �
�f
0alitornia.
Should � you have �y questions regardx:ng th3's �nattex�i p�.;e�.se
';�
aon'taci, this offiaeo
ULARK11111A. NELSON
.:
�!Y
0(jU311by V l Jr
ld
(I
61 r
I
v
Owl
A. ,SING(*MAN ENGINEF
Civil Ent7inearing, urveyir",g�--, conning
3006 The Es.plariade.: Chico, Cd►�-=arm0 95926
Reply tot Route 4 Box 525-A \ Telephone 91t-342-4136
NOVOmber 30, 197 Nj
l
COUNTSOF BUTTE
Board of Supervisors �
1859 Bird Street
Oroville, Californi a
95965 ; z,
RF VE:PJDE 'VISTA SUBDIVTSION ,
Re--zoneJ Application
Our Job, x#76-134`'; "
I
Gentlemen.
7n behalf 61f my, client, Dirs. Corrine Waldroop, r i, v sh to
protest; to t10 'Butte County Pla.nnina- Com mss:%ons Teter
mination that my dlients application to,,re-zone her,,property
from SR -1 to SR' be deriied
Thank you for your consiaeration Al th1A ,:ratter.
Very truly yours.,
C. W. 1?achman
d/
CWB%ch 1,144o Co, Nnning Ctxom
cc M8 Corrine wt,; droop ULU 12 .. ,
/, , ; 11 , _ OroVillo C;alitnrtida�
3AfMAl �IVC�I�� 1NI }
11 ! Civil Engineering - SurweyP ig -- PI-anning
3008 The Esplunode Chico, Cnliforh1a 95926
Reply to: Route A Box 525-A Telephone 916-342-4136
� December '15, 1977
DEC 1977
COUNTY OF BUTTE,
` ward of Supervisors
. 1859 Bird Street
Orovil;le, California
95965
RE., VERDE VISTA SUBDIVISION
our 0?6- 134/wALDRoup IJ
Rezone ,"Hearing
Centlemexz
In`refetence toqMr letter of December 7,
y , 1.977 ' sckieclul.ing a
rezor.:!, hearinq for`, the above re 4erc need subdivision on
January 3 '1 978, We are requesting a ohange :in the hearing
date.
Due a conA-' 't.t in tY e time available, to trQ parties
concerhed, we ").,ieques 1 the heari cg be rebz:Ir4du1�. -to aahuary
10,, 1978,
very truly fours. ((
r
C. W. BaGaman
6uit� Go:,"rlahniiig Coi0o-
DEC 7 1977
4)r0Vi110; 04"binlq
'TBI/Ch
7
December 13, 1977
Mr. Robert Lemke
1022 P1 easant , Lane
Raradi`5e, California 95969
Dear Supervisor Lemke
As a brief follow -pp tr� my letter of last week regarding the
J
Waldroop rezoning matter- an'E1 Monte Avenue in the southeast Chico
unincorporated area, I am enclosing petitions containing three
additional signatures in opposition to the pro
J pp posed rezoning.
is signed by C. Gary Cooper, M.D., and
ercopydof the petiti
-.theotheroO and his wife, Frances.on
rr
The Sheltons are the real estate people who, as I mentioned in
my earlier letter; hav6 been developing an attractive subdivision on
lots Conforming to the existing one -acre minimum building site rer
quirement.
�
Again, we would welcoi>ie-�your personal inspection of our area
before the Waldroop rezoning request is considered by the Hoard of
Supervisors.
Sal ncerely, 1
William L. Earle
Route 5, Box 9oF (El Monte Avenue)
Chico, California 95926
,k
cc, Bernard p.. Richter
jack d M�
_igan
Robert A. -Winston
5ortha Moseley
i1
!y�
OIri49 Co. Planning 401^
OEli 2 0 1977
!a
1 ,�' fir, 4 I�n.•d t�
v
%1 "Z�.
zanuar
Corinxle�' Ruth. Waldroop
Rt 1; Box 90-11
COCOA 9596
e; r 1•1s. Waldro0p
At the re lay XeotiAg of tho Botta uOunty Boaz ok G%I-t ter--
visor: Md. January ! 19?8�0 YOU r6quest Por rozgww�&
troi 4f;3 ,V (Suburban ReAdoAtial l I -acre pa"Oe_M to
an Residentia t Min' ��� size pa'rco;l.e, property .
loosted ph,the west side at :tel �`�0�, N Avenas apilr,: �atel.y
, � , 1 /4 mile Orth of State Highway 321 :, O�.�.,oa G�:l�,�.a, As
denied
have
at r q" eot;i= re��t#p ' $h to matter lease
0o tld you
CxItT
\� 'Clerk 0,E ''the Boat& off' Sup'ervitso:os .
f clb .,
e,a Schwan E.gineerille
i,
o
vr.J
tit
i
Janua%7 20,E 1978 8 r,1
'
Cr nn -utY Walcl±oop
Rt 51 o�c 90-
W 4`
Chico, C4 95926
He Rezone 78.27
Dear Mxs. Waldroop r
At the regular; meeting of the $utze 0ounty Board a. Super-
visors, .held January 17, '1978,:,y a pzzblic hearing date of
Vebmary 7, 1978 at 10:00 a,m Was sets to rehear 'your
�''
request Tor rezone from ""Slob -1'" (SUburbmn--Hesj,aentialj,1-acre
par;a,als) to "S -IV (Suburban.-Vesi en,tial. raiii mum size, parcels)
proporty located on the west side 'of. B1 Monte Avenue, appro-xi
mately 1/4 miie north: of State Highway, .32j identified as
AP 4&-26-1551 06 taining 5.23 acres, inure or 16589 Chico.
The ia:
!j
tea
/SNI Mme. W
0 Member of ,1 "ultiple oting Servicer � r �
RANCHES i ACEtc:AGE_ 4� ;'L _ ,�" RESIDENTIAL 0 IMCOME PROPERTY
OFFICE' .
1104 lltangt'nvs AV' Muc • Telephone (01,5) 343-1454
CHICO, CALIFORNIA 05920 �
January 31, 1578 :� r
Board of Supervisors`
1859 Bird Street
Oroville, California
�Rei Waldroop rezoiiing request
E1 Monte Avenue
Chico, California
Dear Commissione.�rs:
In
regard
eng pp ed for Eebruar ,
ry
ve
Iwo�11d1ike tto�exp�ess�thefollowing �corr�cnentsFebruary'l,
_�
We are in the process of developing the 25'acre El Monte Heights
Subdivision across the street from the Waldroop property,. That
p'alrti.cular 25 acres along with the rest of the area eras zoned
into minim utt acre lots priorto the develop+.nent'. Consequer-. ly, t
"$l0o,000 piu' , ., hoines have beet,) established. on these acre lots,.
Therefore, i;: would seem iriegditable to allow possible high
density housing adjacent to this development acid the rest `of
the unique., ranchette housing that now exists on El )Monte Avenue:
We, therefore, would certainly hope that the existing zoning stay
in effect.::
1
Sincerely,
FRAN SHELTON
r
(:Uifn C6, i inn f
rE 8 n h9 Cotrtlrj,
8 1978 9
\ Urt�Nilie� ���iforN%•„
{
C. _. _... ,,. :.- . __ _ .._ „- _... _moi. .• ... .:. . ,...,. 9. _. ...., _... -, .. -. .. _. _....
ISE T.i TI Q N_
Tjle, the undersigned resideai`s and nroperty owners on El Monte Avenue, telieving in
-the principles on which this �.ountry was founded, and` the principle of majority rule, do
respectfully- -request that the Futte county Bo ''r'd of Supervisors" deny the Application
for Re -zoning ' (AR hcS=26155): Submitted by Corinne Ruth Waldroop,, for the following reasons:
?. Ihis area was zoned SR -.I (Su.Nurtan Residential --1 acre parcels) in 1971
at the request of the residents in the area. All development since that.,
time h. -s adhered to the one -acre -minimum limitation.
2. It Seel unreasonat.le that the Valdroop property, which is one of the Ian
two parcels fronting on El Monte Avenue, should be re -zoned to S -R (Suburban
Residential --minimum size parcels) This woold constitute a spot -zoning. -
which would to inconsistent with the established character of the: neigh orhocl
3. There is grave d'oubt that should the area in question be re -zoned, it would
ti
support a corresponding- number of septic tanks and wells,:
!xr This is strictly a residential a- a where manse children reside. The children
are already in danger when ridint` horses, ficyeles, or iia -'ming because of ,
the heavy traffic on EI N;onte Avenue, and the fact that, this traffic does `
not adhere to the speed limit:.. High density devei_.ogmeri/t would co(Oipoand the `f
traffic problem.
IU PIPER OF
ITAl� ADDRESS
C1IILHREN
h
- ^✓ ! Glx G.J'..y//' `�, �,. - � L ]�%' -``�' _
3.
.5-
6.7
7.
9,W
l.7s.
mac
O,
V °�-
fir:
L' l 1 I rk 1 0 1V - -
tin
(I igned residentsr ani nropert;r owners on El Monte Avenue, F eliev_ r,F in
ti- the 1nrVCc Viles on which �'?i noun! : y* was f ocndEr-', at d the_ p"ring ole of lnajorit r 1.e, do
resgtctfully request that the kuVZe Gounty'Eoard of ;, rv?sc --'aeny Che 4nnlication
`n or Tie-zct (p.P 46 26 1,55). snkmitter, by Corinne Ruth 'rJaldroa for -the foilowie reasons
_.
t..f
s' l� lhis area was zoned SR -1 (Suburt.an Residential --1 acre parcels) in '7l
at the request of the rEsidents° in the area:. All development since` hat
time has adhered to the one-acre-minim,"m Limitation,.
Z It sej,- unreast r utile that the Waldrorp" prop&;Ay, which is one of the las
two parcel's fronting on --El I',onte iVenue; sh3uld be re -zoned to =S -R (Suburban
Residential minimum size parcels) This would constitute a spot -zoning,,
isnich would be i=nconsistent with the established character of the neiF-hborhood.
?. There is crave doubt that should the area in question be re -zoned, it would:
supp art--=- :Torre ponding number of septic tanks and wells..
This is strictly a residential area where many children reside. . fine children
are/already in�_danrrer uben. rid n[w horses, i icycles,. or val]rcing because of
the heavy Traffic on FlYonte Avenue,. _and the fact that -this traffic does
not adhere for the speed limit.. High density development would compound the
traffic Problem.
Nj YI:?_R CF'
NAPE ADT`RESS CHILD FEN
1 ,
7.; -_
s�
s }_
YJ
Bfe Co. Flan
Cor
CO.Py
Plannr'n9 Cornm
rETi 10N 41917
Qroril;e. 1� oC7tjq
We, the undersigned, residents and roCert; owners on El Monte Avenue, relievinE in:
the principles on �,,hich this country- was, forsndcd,- and the prin:•;iple, of majority rule, 03
respec+-Fn1.I:,- req. de. t that the futte County Board of Supervisors deny the Alililiration
for Ve-zoning, (AF' L;6-26-155) suhmitted by Corinne Ruth kraldroop,, for the following reasons s
1. This area was zoned 3R:1 (Subux ari esi.dential -1 acre parcels) in 1971
at _the request of the residents in the area. Al:Z. development since that
time has adhered to the one -acre -minimum limitation
2. It seer unreasonat le• that the- W&ldroop: property, which one cf the East,
two parcels frontirp on El Monte Avenue, o rezon6,t5--(Suburban
Residential --minimum size parcels). This wodldconstitute a *t -zoning,
which would to inconsistent with the established character of the od.
3.. There is Crave doubt that should tire- area in question be re -zoned, it: would
support a corresponding- numter of septic tanks and wells. -
This is fstrictlyy a residents al 'area where many children reside. The children
ar<_ already in danger .,hen ridin£ horses, t icycles,or walking because of
the heavy traffic on r`I Dante R.venn,e*-Iand the fact that this traffic does
not adhere to the speed Limit ffigh density development would compound the
traffic probers.. -
NJ PTIE R OF
NAS aJnRvCHILDREN
C
SS t t
r _ SS ._
cl
�t•..C' J €
qa
6.
7•er� _
gErr Lf -
e
� l
tG ,� °-
K
�` '� X Cl i IL /�+/Z -i
IJk Lr`►G �L' p't.
Af
•
1- L 0 Cf
r
tle,. the undersiFned-residents and oropert,-�r owners on El Monte Avenue, lelievinF in
the prir;ciples. on 4hi'n bis cocntry Gras founded, and the principle of ma_jor ' y rale, d
respectfully renuest that the butte County Eoard of Supervisors deny the Applir_ation
for Re -zoning (AP h6 -2t6 -.55-x= sut mitted by iorinne Ruth kraldroop, for they follow ng- reasons.:
I., this arEa was zoned SFT (Suburt:an nesidertia-1--1 acre parcels) in 1971
at the request of the residents ii` the area.. All development since that="
ti,we has adhered to the on�_�-,,.nmum limitation.•
2 It se?rr-
unnreasoiaile �hat_`tfe Waldroop property, which is one of the last
t.�. two peels fronting on El Monte Avenue, should: be re -zoned to S -R (Suburban
f
Residential --minimum si°ze parcels). This would constitute` a spot -zoning,
which mould le inconsYs-tent with the established character of the ne4hborhood.,
3.., There is € rave doubt that should the area in question be re -zoned, it would
support a corresponding number of ,septic tanks and wells.
lr This, is strictly a residential area. wb6re/-manychildren reside. The children
are already in daniFr ulnen riding horses,,rIi,cycles, or walking because of
the heavy traffic on El Yont e Avemne - and' the fact that. this traffic does: -
not adhere to the speed limit. tiiph density development would comnound the C
tfafi i.c problem. -
OF
ADMSSS
x_
r
4-O
s
j D
lost '%ZtcCr �- 5��.x�F'
f _
14,
15. f __
Ele, the undersigned residenTs and: oroperty owners on El Monte Avenue,, telievinF in
it-e principles on which this cccntry .ras founded, and the princiri e of majority rule, do
respectfoll.y request that th;� Firtte: Corrty- Eoard of Supervisors deny the Application
-
for fie-tonin
(Ar' 46-25 -155}`. vukmitted by C:arinne Ruth TvtTaldroop, for the following reasons..;:.
I Ih:is area was zonetf 1 (Suburbbaft Residential--1 aci= parcels) in 1971
at the request off% ri.a residents in the area. All dEvelopment since that
" t tiwe has adhereo' "to tie one-acre-minimum limitation..
- Lt ser, unreasonat lthat. the Waldroop•._ property,:which is one of the last
tiro' parcels fronting on El conte Avenue, should be re-zoned to S-R__(Subbrban
ReSf ential--minimum size parcels)'. This would constitute a spot-zoning, _
Bich would to inconsistent with the estaG3isipd character of the neiFhhorhood.
There is crave doubt that should the area. in question. he re-zoned, it would
support a corresponding number-of septic: tanks: and wells
4.. This is strictly a residential are wt,cre zany children reside. The children
ars already in danger when ridinp Horses, I icycles, or walking because of
the heavy -traffic Qa- I Monte Aveintie, and the fact that this traff i e does
not adhere to=the -Feed limit. High density development would: compound the 1
traffic Problem.
W 3-T1-11 OF
NMI ADDRESS GITILDREN-
2.
LA t-
d J `� ��� L Z � �� �o<._ �} G ►' "r '},cam'
tu_,` F6.
l
U
Cif>� �t`•�' � �'��� �_(
r'
- yiri
47
f - '
W ,..
r -
l n
(xL�%i
L
t'
n T _
Py
T1 T1 CN
T7e, the andersipned residents and rroperty ow^ers or El Monte Avenue., 1 el evin -in
the principles on -which this cecrrtry eras founded. Ind the princa, iR of majority role, do
res'peat,ully request that the fut.te County Board of,',Sfxrervisors deny the Application = '
for- Re-zonint (AP lL6-26-155)sutra t,ted by Corinne. Rut%]h: Wa.ldroop, for the following reasons,
-_ 1• This area was zoned SR l (Subur-Ean Residential--1 acre parcels) in 1971
a:'t the reauest of the residents in. the area. All development since that
time Naas adhered', to the one-acre-minimum limitation.
2. it se— untreasona --le that the Waldroop property,: which is one of the last'
two p reels fronting on 1-1 Monte Avenue,: should be re-zoned to S-R (Suburban..<
Resid_entia1-mini;�,um size parcels).- This would cons. tute aspot-zoning,
which wou d- to inconsistent with the establishedcharacter of the neighborhood.
3. There is [rave doubt that sh.auld the area in question be re-zoned.- i twould
supporta corresponding numter of septic tanks and wells.
!�. This is strictly a residential area where many children reside. The children
are already in danrerL when riding horses, bicycles, or walking because of
the heavy traffic on F1 Monte Pvenr;ie, and: the fact that this traffic does
trot adhere to the speed limit.: High.density development would compound the
traffic problem.. t,
NAME TV MEER CFT y ADDRESS:
- CriILDFER
i
1 L F
3s
!-I
44r�.
0641/9
7
r /
T.-
.F
'A I
111 -
t
9.
10r c
t
15.J
_ -CID�y
-; I? b T T .T 1 C t1<<
We, -the' .7ders pzted residents and property owners on El. Monte,P:venue, lelieving in
.the principles on which this country_ was founded, and the prip,ciple of majority rule,., do
iespe^tfe. jy request that the futte Gotinty Board of Supervigors deny the Appli%ation
`ior fte-zoning (AF 46-26--I55-) sutt it ed by Corinne. Ruth Waldroop, for the following reasons-
1.: Thl area. was Toned SR -1 (Suburban. Resider -tial --1 ac_rp� P_q-cels) in 1971
at the request of the residents in the area.. Flt development since that
time rias adhered- to the one -acre -minimum limitation.
2. It sew els easorat:
ynt±..ayso._;nrt+:..:r .v , . , S,. - :" . ,r
B. a Af.
Al
.. �, „ t �).: Po. 1.. :., r•, '\} r t� ,r ,. �.� - "'-. .a. q'w�,�> •a�pv+�riSrr `MI ,:y1a?•++,r:.e' , ,taahf, .� ..il..
" ,�' ls': '. — _: ft n ,, ��,. �y. .. ,,iS:'�I 'fir .r _, ".• �. a'. '�F_1`.
e
u
Oder.
ry v
(A.'G _ 08 I' a
Cpj
0,
� f49 Q4At 110 ac
PlH
„ a6
73
f
.019
s9
J/ /g , f $0146
>i
,o
,y t
1 5-90 f3, `
,
./ p®
C. 6.36► a
h ,
or
In
{ w F
a
5.2 AGa M
7
,
,
it 25 IAO.�3A% S -.
679.x. �f
/9 76
l ---: L
16
'Zi
'I
i 30 r 56
i l
Y �
604'it a /,�B f�/0t-A
LAG'
` 2. !d Ate:
I 5,9
„I
4 �f U
;N _
�, �,,. !,) ��/.: � a7' �•�'� r uy-"`....•'sr-.- ,r � � �'bx �� �'� '' o) � 8f AVE
2
,
f�
(00
JUl
C"v
14,T9 Ad, ---~-=
;, q�,6r ville� rwa
,� tJrh
bk ,
eQl sess r s Mup No,
tiWOIL *00S Njuom
Y �_ r F,C1t�AS�abl� � Pd�kt'IEl"7`.
�+.; Coo rf . df Butte, 'Collf,
�J �� ? �, r M jrt1 �� *1 ! a 1 N 1 Rs v WN
, �.. u7 ". ✓. ,.,FM ,,+%` 6 4.,0. 1 �� Ih�r.�G7 �' • 4,✓ f y, �: k,•
o
�Pq s
.r.a , t, .. ;. » •w, t�n r-.. "L� •..w a . n.. . + . . rw Ts'�e .�� , �,,;. Mr•.� + ... _
�Y
fe, CD
06 ""'
J 1•
`
Chico 67
c°f Y' ,�,''"�� rrN a.r
Q !! At 148 0.4 �c
3� �S
.Z
O
., Q
f : �St '4@
k)J ld - ° Qo
6.84Ac ,I.
I, r
.......-.--� - �?.,.dw...
12
,
17 MOM
52,4c.
Oozy
a ! ass
t.
tu
C
w,...s. �..._..
" t
ctj Q
r r
It
1419
•'tl �, / G•7 fY /
i.'s
�� ....� r...v.,
,may.
y,v
o V2 h 086.5
r'
.�•� wrq �► �r r.rr ' -Ni11j � i� rs-1 ,w#�i ws-4 I.riJ rr!_ � `� 4 JS ' �, ,•, �
2B
„
�"� ✓fr._----="'"moi !.�( .. ---4, S� j�Cr
�'e
,
uk
JUL 1 19'
r
....-.�- � . uifd boa l�l�rrit►�
- Y, � • C�ravijte, r�Ii�'ar�;�
1% A s scot t Ma,'p Noy - e
.. �,�.' C�r�G"�'i'yi�il�t, tiictir-k'6, 'isti+►r+�? :... ._. _ ..-_ -.. ...� , .:_ f - ., .,, -r rs ...a u ._.. -::.. jrY-
(� •r�`.' 6 1�1,� (4 �(
17 �4 1 '�''i�'" r'cyy� j� 1'�, f�� � 1?+•
' ,4 �'•� � � � 1 � G^ a o � ; .,., .+t- � ,� � 1'.0
+ 66F
r
r
f'YY
•
,
�I
�y(pt
,
• ,: '- � /\G.f'�/Y/�t'i' �i, 111
�1
McCH
I
Gi�eCI+*L1ka�^•1 , �, 4
SLI.G OA
-
�`
JL
Sh�tYet
V
00-1
��`••.. � Me.G.e,�r ,•izt>r�i
r -. 1 r: �L ti• •.
�Y `'•
t,
�, �'c�n. aa�c•y „ Ow�w r 7
1
r•
0 G.•rtTL3
tl
. o
,
rf
\ ,.
C.
BUTTE .00U TY".. PLANNING. t . 4G�I�hI1�I� �ON
Mf�ARI�l, CSA" A'm� �� - -
POO
7 r/f
sow =
waern+Inrwllw
r OW � �� bra .,.. ',...�.,.f...��......`. �X���`INC�,'
44
;y�'�{{ ^ 1f