Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING COMMISION MINUTES & AGENDAS 8/84 -- 12/84W MUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Ml'NUTES-August 2, 1984; page6 Thr hearing was opened to the public. The hearing was closed and comments confined staff. to the Commission and felt thinner 8ehunis stated that in light of t felt this ;was an administrative error andagreed by staff he It Y commissioner was maxed b . agreed d With the car -rection, unanimouslyand ,i approssi oner Behunival n �'- carried far ' 'seconded by Commi.zsioner as follows; Lambert A. Find that the re considered in m quaremertts of CEQA have aloin been completed and Negative D g this decision and recom[:iend adoption of a eclaratian end rind that thero Sections 24�-2?'p "sect complies with Butte Count through 24'-29 and 2 4--95, and y Zoning Qi*di Hance Recommend the Board from R -C to of )RSupervisors ado AR -MH -2 1 /'2 P pt an artl Heights Road). A Nos. 25-24-031 43, n+ance rezoning Heights94 959 96 (pacific Recess from 7:47 to 8.00 p.m. Butte County Planning Commission ssi on Glen Legare'Shirley and "" Ruane Pram TM�-20 L. L. located parcels) 0 to TM --S Oast mbe;r Climber Mountain -'- 20 acre h the ear MaUntain � 5 acre parcels?, MUd Creel: Road z dent tide o'f Cahasset Road, /4 mile north rrf Cohasset. i i ed as AP 56-07-67' 72 (ptns), Staff request rted waiving stated that eading of the staff his bias 4A the rf i Holl ngs Sta cleanup ordinance, ff The hearing was opened to the public~ The heating wasclosed and staff, comrneht5 Confined to the Cammi ssi<an and Cammi ssi oher VL l r:;rUse agre +d' with the regio It was moved by ne. Behunih� and unanimousl loner' V +I�cr-Use V carried fora b seconded by Cammi ssighor �+ proval as follows. Find that the p requirements of CEQA have been completed considered in making thim 64;Supervisors; ado t det;tZi bh and r'c!ctimm a end that Land p Ne- beclaeAta"ipn• He Board atlt! ..r BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION page? iMINUTES-August 2, 1984 B. Find that this prcioct conforms to the polities and the map of Q. 4 -.he Butte County General Plan and the Land Use alementV and C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt an ordinance rezoning approximately 10 acres to TM -5 for a portion of AP 56-07-67 and 72, (Legate and Shirley). Rricess from 8:06 to 8:15 P -m - Pacific Bell - Use Permit to allow a public utility building for fiber optic light regeneration equipment in an agricultural zone, an property toned A-5 (AgricultUral-5 acre parcels), located on the south side of Lower Honcut Road, approximately 100 feet east of SmUllin Street, identified as AP 28 -03 -le,., Honcut. Staff requested waiving the reading of the staff findings. The hearing was opened to the public. Mr. Oohanan - Chico, stated he was there to answer qUoSticihs. He stated that the equipment is similar to radio amplifiers. The equipment would be in a building to amplify Sigilals- 'He htW no problems with the conditiont3o Chair -man Schrader stated that he had gone by the site. He could not see any way this would interfere with the surrounding area. The hearing was closed and comments confined to the Commission and Commissioner Avis qut�tjtioned if the applicant owned the 'property or Was this an easement? Applicant replied that this was an easement, and that it was dilready an So foot easement to the County - It Was suggested to dpletL- condition #2. it was moved by Commission Bohunin7 seconded by Commissioner Lzimbert, and UhaMihbuslY cat4riod for approval at +011bwt'. A, Note that this project in Categorically Exempt from environmental review; and BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMM I,;STON MINUTES--Aug4'.st 2, 19e4 pago'B B. Find that the proposed use of t integrity and character of the zoner n whichlll thenrtdthe la lies and that the use would not be unreasor►ably incompatible i njuri ous to surrounding properties or dear detrimental With, or and general welfare of the to the health nieghborhood or to the Persons residing or wor,Itin County; and general health, welfare g in the and nafety of the C' APProve the Use Permit to allow a fiber Optic light regeneration equipment tility building for Bell) subject to the "`ol l owi ng cni onsap AP 28 o3� la (Pacific 1- Applicant must obtain a building permit. prior construction. to Commencing 2. If sewage disposa) system is requi!-ed, suitable demonstrated and a septic tank !301,,.l must be permit mast be Obtained Health Department for the installation. nfrom the 3. Applicant must also comp l local statutes Y with all other , drdi n;,nces, and regulation applicable State and ti ons * * * * . Rmcess from 6:27 to 8:30 i� �K• '� # 3E iF # .� p.m. South Fort, Developers (Bi 1.1 Cottinghami -- GeneralAmendment from Orchard and Fiold Crops to plan Agricultural -Residential and a PUD reg (Planned Unit Developement) Zonfrom A-2 (General) to residential dovelhpment on 1lD afros develop a 110 lot Side of Midway at HarY Bill Ranch Road, ofd htifiptthe east 40-o2-116, Chico. as AP Staff summarizdd the staff fii on the wal1� Staff stated that this And ORPlained the maps displayed two phase a Phase was the General Plan Amendment and the other PPlication, one Rezone. Staff's reCOMmendatl on 1 s not •i o heamend the Stas f stated that they had �recei's comments 'to Phase was +ile General Plans Commissioner Lambert had two Not is from the City of Chico. rocorde Phone calls she wanted road into the 1* 'rem Conni o bi X cin -- f sLlb is granted, she requests a b forst cycione�fenre with slats be required between projyert She does not ootProject to provide the neCessary*assurancsefshe .- agricultural fenco is*adequatote and er agricultural pursuits..,nor would it Us onethatCantldue her also expressed concerns that ode uatc last, She between the q buffer area be prbvided project site and her orchard operatior) to prevent any Spray Problems, dust, etc. from arising dovelopmont being located aeljacent to her g as a result of the urbane Property. rvP1r�j��p, - BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE' --August 2, 1984 pacxe9 From Jack Meline - He is stil,l Opposed to -1 i3eneral Amendment, the Project, etc. alld for all %+1 an the same r04sons-he expressed at all the Previous Meetings he Attended rog South Chico, Green arding changed.. "nel Southgate, etc. He feels nothing has ,.the soil has not changed, 4t i,r, mtill agridUltoral State that orchard had a poor crop for a couple, of years, the Same AS everyone 61se did. States that orchard has a good crop this Year, the same as everyone else has. The hearing, wris opened to the_ public. Phil Kohn, attarney for the,applicant, had some comments on staff the -findings report. HO felt this was a blind, single miirWine;k,�# rep set UP to destroy the project. He hoped that the Commissiol., wouldort base their decision ONthe merits of the project. the 12 points in the report w He made comment'5 oil I. Hon-ag. use etc . which are briefly summarized as +011OWed." He stated that the pot ic, let related to Productive ag. land which this is not. sd this was documented by the Board of Supervisors. He ThetateBoardthat Of Super --visors found that this Would servk.! as a buffer zone 7. First amendment of Oroehlille, He stated that they did not see;He felt that this is to move the a -f al I acV. the General planGrOenline. He felt amendment would not change the Greonline. He also Stated that there always hat, to - the -findings of +a be a first. He felt that Page 70 of the LUE tt wer misconstrued by staff. He stating that it, efored to only applies wherer the Greenling is being amended Which this is not. 3' Open Space Element conflict - He stated that the pol Stated that they conflict With, He stated that thiicy t-Jas "t Maximizes uZe Of open s i Spate. ;31-oject 4, Cir. Element conflicts - He stated that the . atpol in the Staff report. He again stated not stated change the Groehlihe location, I od that thi,sity WAS projett will not - So DehSity - He disagreed with this. Ho cited Page 49 of the General Plan. He fe1,t the policies were consistent 60110ral Plan deli gh4tibllo He Stated that, PUb was 1i With the A -IR COhditibnal Consistent seed as a neighboring Zone- He felt that it was tomPatiblo With Ago Uses. He said that ttA+4 was to argue on what housing is needed i not in a Position h the +UturOo 6. Fiscal analysis - He disagreed with this. 110 units pro there WAS no indicatioosed anH L n that this would have An adverse ptf +ect, kocot 'nendations by staff were discussed. Mr. k:ohn disagreed with the, findings that havo to be made. Fie said a prior EIR was decided to be sufficient by the Board of Supervisor's. He felt the City of Chico had no authority on project, stating that this war, outside tho City's Spi-iere of Influence. Commissioner Vercruse questioned ter. K'ohn if he was stating that even though this was not productive Ag. land they intended to leave it on . the ag-. side of the Groenl i ne' Phil Kahn stated yens, f v, jai d that thrz� reports indicate the sol 1 is bad and not productive, -ow or in the future. commissio+ y Vercruse questioned Why the applicant did.. not proPose(i to move the Bile . Mr, Kohn stated that if tfie Commission wanted to move the Sreenline that that would be agreeable to them, BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -August 2, 1984.pageio 1. School District. He stated that they have agreed to pay the fetes necessary to mitigate the school'impacts 8. Nitrates - He felt that this was incorrect. He Gtated that there was no evidence of a problem. He stated that here had been extensi vcl testing of this property. He stat :d that it was well below the standards for concern. He said that Public Works and the Environmental HealthDepartments have reviewed this and it was found to be satisfactory. 9. Overriding Consideration - He stated that there are some impacts that can not be mitigated and need overriding considerations. He stated that the Huard had adopted 10 overriding considerations an the EIR,. Tel.atiVe to the window provision Ror withdratival from the LCA. which included discussion of the conceptual. plan.. 10. He fe'i.t the Board approved the alternate use ,of the property when they approved' the LCA withdrawal. 21. Access - He said that there was a problem with ac.cess,. He stated that there was a private crossing. There was a question as to it being made into a public crossing. He felt this could be made a condition of approval. Briefly discussed the Abandonment of the railroad line. 12. Public Controversy - He felt that this; was not relevent. He stated that it needs to be related to planning land use issues. He stated that they had discussed this project with the Adjoining neighbors and found no problems. He stated that if there were any problems they would work with the neighbors, kocot 'nendations by staff were discussed. Mr. k:ohn disagreed with the, findings that havo to be made. Fie said a prior EIR was decided to be sufficient by the Board of Supervisor's. He felt the City of Chico had no authority on project, stating that this war, outside tho City's Spi-iere of Influence. Commissioner Vercruse questioned ter. K'ohn if he was stating that even though this was not productive Ag. land they intended to leave it on . the ag-. side of the Groenl i ne' Phil Kahn stated yens, f v, jai d that thrz� reports indicate the sol 1 is bad and not productive, -ow or in the future. commissio+ y Vercruse questioned Why the applicant did.. not proPose(i to move the Bile . Mr, Kohn stated that if tfie Commission wanted to move the Sreenline that that would be agreeable to them, BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 2, l9e4 page;I Commissioner Avis s Policy as adopted by that he co�xld not designation of I the Board of Stir find in the Greenlin,e A -R wou,l d Rervi sr -os where th be cons steht with the �' Several Plan I�(r., Sohn stated that r - R�rl i cies. designations s tAlas tial uses ar land uses. ' that this .was compatiblee' Rer-mi tten i n w%tfr the ag, density and surrounding Commissioner wi1zin Vercruse discussed the g to approve the project Without District ns nate for fees. tl^.e not being signing of a promissory Mr- F;ahn stated ScFioal Dig than they have ahead strict to pay the y signed an a money would be can de - f>ees• At the 9reement With the posit, time of the fina Commi=so map the before, ver Vercruse stated but were not now that such agreements r that a 4 eements wer-,e acceptable Commissiaver promxstory note was Lambert necessary. School District» 4uestioned the students going to the Durham Di I Cottingham stated t could go to either that it was his understandin ocrt unti I the school di sari ct. g that the children a let units .tire sold He said that make ter of credit. 'that all they need` due y is not taken with the schools. He stated that thehis -1 ettr=r of He said t ic-It t y were willing �tot000 prsite is The he Bank of America poste i hter^sted The letter has vat been has wr-i tteh the pro��?rrt nar-ties at this tirne. D+t he signed by all was in both school districts, stated a the yi again that this Commit ' ner Vercruse the District boundary felt that the C4m.. y l i nes, mx ssi on needed cl ari f i cat i h► o Phil Kohn Stated the Chico that they were treating the pro.iea+ a s x it were ih Commissioner Vercruise dis cancellation. cussed Discussed com the Land Conservation riot in effect wi plisncs with a`�'+ contract her► tl�e LCA cancellation nets gener��) F�tiil took place:. plan which was I<ohn advised the Commissibh the Sotird Of al.tern Supervisors and mead ate use ref the to read d f he �"es6.i µ 't"Oh of , i ndi n stated the same poi cP= operty consx Stant to the Ooard `s finding o� son � . now would support. the General Plan. He Commi sti aver V appoval' of thi s relation to ercruse questioned the project, placement of the LCA for'ract LCAproperties are ho Greed l sine. properties in Sh:j stated that d i scu"ss ' i _ . PUD d the aat man ed t ori de of Y of the I g r3 z ,1 ie Creenl i ne. approprzateness a� a pUD arnix�h�na�exng he �ded� She. 9_ side of tDiscussed the he Green7,ine� >:3'UT1('E COUNTY h�ZI� UTES- PLANNING CIJI�tMIS flugust'L, lS'84 SION P0ge12 t'h31 Kahn stated rertri dent- al that the Board rec ust� ori the a o9nized on the language a the g' side of the Gr that this would zoni rig on 11 General eenl i ne. Pot -mit - with a tau f for acres- was not flan. He stated th►eThey were rc� y ` n zone was proper and he alternatxvo x g mare compatible. Belt that clus of A"2 Commissioner feted ht�rnes the f'UD Lambert quest ioned i f the approval and General .Peon Artendrne A . withdrawal W"3 depend,[nt on Phil fCohn stated yes r►rofaosed alternate uI that there was a i1 f:hat the oRpl x cant a He states) the . � ndi ng Of cons! st rind a tentative RPI,Y and obtain condi ti oris of ency of map: a general Olen Changroval included I�ammi ssi oner .Lambert Chang :and r'ezQne arcel pro.�ect asked how the ►'Pta.l im Rending low suit e'a fectecf thi s Fr�hrro stated str-act the there would be h ��1 sui Commission �r no effect, The Suit Suit chatlanged the lea goad land law -�� s also stated that legality of use practices. houlci not hearing. the lawsuit was Put the adoption IN, stated that nn hold until the Greenl i ne. He all, Cott- nghain the outCome of this t„l this Paint; stated that he ham problem o Hes #been are s Pe orted that there wase Years getting still d R Y that not one faetulthe hearing M thi s He Stated Y ng” di eoussi;nd envi s that can not be mitigated. ronmen less the Almond saxa condition Ne said tal than an r ' and racks the trees Si�•r; crop from Mi dwa flss0cl ati on stated � and Soar crops.. Ola`=e far the y Orchards. that t housing will pro.iect. We .felt He felt he aro be c that this P Was stated that only ampati.ble faith sur �- this 'as a was a good open s y l ��: cif the aundi n goad, place to test Race. pert Or. t% two Ne stated )7e Ora Y wool d g ag. uses,. Co 2 Perm Year study by the had tests of the be developed, 967 Cott tied to escalate ate l'9'S and the Acrop Product? � would be Staves that this 1 depreciation ati tan g" Comma. ssi an anc! there was t e a. ^d was not a, an the Proper they were There g land. Y• He felt it all was a let r Submitted �i ion, She was from di,soussi of In conc�:rned with . m thr: ad iacent the length of sprayi� praYln '° There W45 Property r►wner Karen There was a di a brief n she days of discing andxln o dust problem. ICttS ` ag. ttse; Sriof 0 daY of Alantin Mr. Cott -n Wanted to dxscUssnon gr aRpr-o:�im gham stated pnr, take a nollproductyo e � -and 's. Proximate!. .4l 14 moa ar ciE7 sect is the pi eco of l and i Cottingham sad d days 0 non fetal envy rpn" and USe i t he Thomas NlcCreatl meat and sUrrotrndz for sane there Y3 Chico w gctbd, was no 0 submitted ' nvi l Ohmont, need fbr g e term growth for Calan z 1. limits thea -e wr tas he . Ci ty aofpChicot uttea n County ng" .. 1 -le Stated that a'' dovel o pPr b�, i motel �- a stated th . ale discussed Iona k�ment, He feltY '',gQb acres already outside the Cit a that the Y zpned p~R Greenlee was the demdRlccatx an 0 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTEg-August 2, 1984 line. He stated that could distroy the Greenline. He also stated that there are 490 acres in this area with a General Plan designation of Orchard and Field Crops. He wanted to know how the Commission could say no to other projects of this type if they said yes to this one. He disagreed :with Mr. Kohn about the City of Chico being involvedl he felt they were involved. He discussed the exit problems with Midway4 stating that it was a potential death trap if the only exit were: blocked. He stated that the traFfic circulation in this area was serious. He also felt there was not proper drainage in the area. He felt that the Commission was being asked to approve a project when the drainage plans have not yet been assigned. Chairman Schrader pointed out condition #8'. Mr. McCready asked the Commission to deny this project. Tom Lando, City of Chico 'stated that there was nothing new in the letter he submitted and restated the City's position that they are strongly opposed to the General Plan change in this area. Briefly discussing the Greenlinev the City feels that there has not been sufficient environmental review an this project and felt there Was a nitrate problem, He also discussed the sr-hoal impacts and did not feel the fees would solvc4- the problems. He felt if this was approved it would cause a trend. He felt that there was not the housing heed ,to warrent this Project. He felt the proJect, Was wrong. Albe Houseman, Chico, stated that none of the landowners wanted inside the Greenliho in the first place. He said why buy land if you can not *-j what you want With it, he bought this land to subdivide later,stated that 90Y. of the trees in his orchard are dead. He was in favor of the project.' Barbara Copelando Representative of the League of Women Voters, stated that 3 points were discussed at the League; the support 'of special bouhdarie*.s to encourage controlled growth, support standards +or subdivision and land division (they Wanted the need to be proved). She distussed the problems with ztrei-te.0 traffic, water, and tonfoemitv With tho General Plan* Sha did not feel the drainage was SU+ficl,ently discussed in the o ShEIR -1 1 , e -did not feel the transportation pl-bplems either were discussed 5t%++iCi0htly in thiL, eZR,. She cited the CATO study. She stated there was a problem with Cotler and there would be a problem with Mii.lway4 She stated that the League +L -It that the Water GlUality report should be incorporated into the EM She stated that there was a problem with septics. She Also strbzsod the +Att that there Was no :evidence of the need for Additional housing,. The League felt the long term inipactna were not adequately addressed in the 1:-Tk and that there Was rib need to violate the GreehlihO- She was happy that the City And County were working ttigothero BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION' pagei4 MINUTES-August 21 :Chairman Schrader- 9 uestione-d the purpose of the League. stated the pArp ose was .ro promote the active interest of Mrs. Cnpelanr' a areas of concern and take a stand. the voting population and study member' has a chance ApproXimatel y u members. She stated that every to be active on di-F�er-ent cornmitt.ee�=� Ind to have a vats on {-he stand that the committee adopts on the issues- that ssxpress her to e questioned her opportunity Cot►►fitissiover 'Behunin q p Su ervisars. t concerns to the Board of to C eland stated that she had not, that she had jus came back Mrs. . Op active member,. the League as an r. art in the Commissioner lercruse stated that the League did take P Board hearings- requested cased to the praae�ct, and req Czenr= Tanimoto, Farm Bureau, Was oPp . ] and at the this property was considered ag He was denial. He stated that Grernline and should still be. Farm ti me of the fcirmi n9 Opposed to the LCA wi,thdr-a�r+a1, � He Stated that the Butte County app opposed to the raeneral pian Amendment. Bureau was app ra arty us to this p oiler Dean Dinona Ghicoe was an owner of land against !'antl�]�-t!p oars he fought He statedthe tler th�►tAv nub an He stated that for five y spinoffs. tons; re property. He knew there would be oenline or have a rob]lems with drainage in tho area. He felt there verehrPe oP P basic and fighting, a the gizt in -zone mmiged to change to keep coming ht be buffer lane. He stated thatitiwayer►vHeofelttalbuf xn him wan protect the agn land along help+UI ed at the had Louis Cacneny i nd dr Oro-Chico Highway., stated that the Sreenlie i-le stated that if the Gr-eenlxne haHesalso felt that been changed.-pblem would not ey.xst. original position this p . use hard a CO in of inter'esar�ada�hbexngt'ibadvag� Commissioner verse on this matter., He discussed the l and xnThel Gr'eenl ine i s A farce and land. He was in favor. Of this praadct. • for is ccrtconstxtu`i=xanal • He also feat that the PUi� bane was idea this property. Phil Kohn had nothing +urtrhor to add, the Commission and was closed and comments to nfinF!d to " The hearing staff. of Chico stated that this devHde�tatedwirhatbtlarxSpheres. d Westy City the City. a violation of the Gr-c�enlins by does .come about it should Occur on the Of Iraf l orrice was being e.ttertidr�d i:a the Green He fel t When urbanhousinsitldeofdthe Greeh"nin Butte �nty urban BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMIS81ON ei MINUTES' August 21 1.484 Commissioner Behunin confirmed that all of these problems were voiced at -the Board of Supervisors at the time of the LCA withdrawal. There were concerns that the Greenline was not extended to accommodate this property. He felt that the rezone was the Wrong approach. He felt the Greenline should I have been extended. He +Olt that this project should be denied with a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors that the Greenline be extended, He was also concerned with ci rcul ati on. Commissioner Avis stated that he had not given much thought to the enviranmentalconcerns or design of the project because he could not got past tho fact that this did not conform to the policies on the ag,. side of the Greenline. He felt that the A -R designation was prohibited. Hdiscussed the findings necessary to move the Greonlineo Hee did not like where the Breenline was set. He also stated that the Commission was not a policy making body. He Was opposed to the General Plan Amendment. Commissioner Behunit-) felt this was the"cart before the horse" because the Board did not extend the line to include this an the urban. side. He wanted to rot"irn this to the Board with the recommendation the Greenline be exter led to include this property. Commissione in i n felt that because the Board approved the LCA withdrawal that were also approving of the development. Commissioner Vercruse stated that there was no k-nd Qf (tecisi 'I the project, only a decision whether it would be in the LCA a' t" - Chairman Schrader felt they should deny the project on the pa, ;s of the 'Greenline As set for in the General Plan. He stated that Lite Board Wants to interpret policies difl4erb6t. them they should bp A4 CoMmisr-ioner Lambert discussed the court a",tidn pending and felt the Greenline should be placed an the ballot, She stated that the Ag. PUD Ordinance needs to be defined before passing an this item. She felt the only reason to delay would be to wait for an Ag, PUD Ordinance de+initio0- Commizsibhei- Vercrus-O stated that she Was not comfortable with a i - the ag. PUD donial and An appeal to the Board. She wanted to wait +oe definition alto - Chairman Schrader did not feel that this would solve the problem. Commissioner Ve-rcrute stated that if this Moves forward and gets an Ag* PUD without Moving the Groofiliho and without an established Ag. PUD definition it would be Wrong. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION page16 MINUTES -August 27 1984 Chairman Schrader stated that the policies of the Greenline have to be complied with whether or not there is an ag- PUD definition. commissioner Avis stated that the policy on building an the ag. side of the Greenline did not conform to the A -R designation. It Was moved by commissioner Behuninj seconded by Commizzioner Avis to deny this project as follows: A. Find that the previously certified EIR and addendums h�%ve been considered in making this decision; and Bi Find that the proposed GeneralPlan Amendment does riot COMPIY with the Policies Of the Chico 6reenline and adopted elements of the General Plan; and Ck Deny the Proposed General Plan Amendment from Orchards and Field Crops to Agricultural Residential for South Fork Developers etal on AP 40-02-116. commissioner Vercruse asked if the commission was going to allow the applicant to get Out Of this and the wording Of going ordinance. Commissioner Hehunin .felt the Board Will be able to address the policies. 14e Also amended his motion to includo ti,:, recommendation. for dc nial of the rezone, which was seconded by C061mistioner Avis for C to eead as follows: C. Deny the proposed General 'Pldn Amendment from Orchard and Field Crops to Agricultural Residential for south Fork Developers etall and recommend denial of the proposed retohe to PUD on AP 40 02-116, commissioner VOr.rruse +q, he Board has egprr�!F�,�%od the kind Of wisdom It t they are capable of And the Commission knew what to -"Oect- Ay58b Commissioners Avis, SehuhiM4 Lambert, and Chairman z,,.,v d er NOES. CommIssic3her Vorcruse A085NT-. No one ABSTAINED- No One Motion carried with toerecti0h, c T` TTE COUNTY PLANNING 1r14 IsSION AGENDA , August 2, 1984 7.00 p -mo I, eiBDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IXC ROLL CALL III. CONSENT AGENDA26 1984 7:00 p.mR ,. A Approval of Minutes of idg � PUE Abandonment, 1Ce11y idge Estates Unit 2'1�, Lot 83:s B: C Contreras AP 69-07-26 (B. � IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS o oration 7:30 p ,m, Robert Hammett Use Permit to allojv a p,:oposed raPe ining roperty consisting of removal of rook and a rock crusher on the vest 5 -acre parcels), l °•� Park zoned A -S (Agricultural, t the interseciton with Lang side of Dunstone Drive, Road, identified as AP �7-2.3-14, west of l3ang°fro� . It -C (Resource :45 :m Butte County ]3oard of Supervisors - Rezone Resi ( Mobile 7 p to AR -M14-2 c l/2 (Agricultural -Rosa side of Conservation) located on the. west side o Pacific Home, 2 1/2 -acre parcels), Oak Grove area Heights Road, 1/2 mile north of Welsh Road, 96i south o Oroville, identified as AP 25-24-03, 93, 94, 95' Glen Shirley and Z. L. Legare) m, Butte County Planning Commission (Glen parcels),to 8:00 p Timber Mountain, Rezone from Tri -20 ( Located on the east side o (Timber Mountain, 5 -acre parcels), identified as Collesset Road, 3/4 male north of lvid Creek Road, AP 56.07-67,72 (ptns) , Coliasset. -`c Bell - Use permit to alloy► a public utility building 8:15 p.m, Paci� en_ .A t in an agricultural for fiber optic light reg Pra'taon �quapinen .,r jrltu.�,a�,, 5 -acre parcels), zone, on property zoned A -S (Agriapproximately located on the south side tree We 14011ifacd as AP 8`05-18) 100 :feet east of Smullin S Honcut. Poll'- South Pork Developers (Bill CottinglZam) - General Plan Amendment 8:30• ricultural-Residential. ancltao from Orchard and Field Cro' PUDA(planned Unit Development).located rezone from A-2 (General) In develop a 110 lot residentiaa� rtarylB�l�nRanch��oad, identif1 on. the east S' do of l'Iidrvay as AP 40-02-1.1_6 V: MISCELLANEOUS 1, Discussa.on Chico General Plan Issues Vl x A.r)JOURNNtENT