Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRED 04-20_PLANNING IVIN� u � II � I� IuIV � YVV � N � � I , SEPARATOR SHEET. N o36 -rvo- a» PROJECT UM,Ea PkeD o4 - 2o Correspondence Log Sheet Applicant: Enterprise Rancheria Project Number: PRED 04N-20 APN: 036-540-010 Date r Name/Agency Correspondence/Comments Attachments Action Received r i I I K:\Planning\Projects\Log Sheet.dot 1 r - PROJECT SUMMARY SHEET FILE NO.: PRED 04N-20 PROJECT TYPE: Predevelopment Conference APN: 036-540-010 APPLICANT: Enterprise Rancheria ADDRESS: 1940 Feather River Blvd., Suite B, Oroville, CA 95965 PHONE: (530) 532-9214 OWNER: Rice Revocable Income Life Trust ADDRESS: 8172 Bayford Way, Sacramento, CA 95829-6002 REPRESENTATIVE: Tom Turk/TNT Real Estate ADDRESS: 2317 Lincoln Street, Oroville, CA 95966 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pre-Development Conference for a Tentative Subdivision Map to divide a 63.6± acre parcel into thirty-two 0.5-acre parcels and three parcels of 15.9+acres LOCATED: at the west ends of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue, west of Oakvale Avenue, east Oroville area PROPERTY ZONED: A-R(Agricultural-Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR(Low Density Residential) TOWN/AREA: Oroville 1. Application accepted: 3/26/2004 Amount: $ 1;454.00 Receipt#: 395313 2. Assigned To: Stephen Betts 3. Comments sent to: Development Services Director,Public Works Director, Environmental Health, Assessor, LAFCo, Agricultural Commissioner, CDF,Building Manager, County Counsel, City of Oroville, South Feather Water and Power, Caltrans,RWQCB, L.O.A. PUD,DFG 4. Sent to Inter-Departmental Review Committee (IDR): N/A 5.- Status Letter sent to applicant: 4/02/04 6. Date scheduled for IDR: N/A 7. Comments received from: 8. Mailing List/Lead-in Sheet: 9. Environmental Determination: State Clearinghouse No: Categorical Exemption-CEQA# Negative Declaration Mitigation Negative Declaration Subject to Fish&Game: Environmental Impact Report Gen. Rule Ex.—CEQA# . Other 11. Staff Report: Project Video: 12. Clearinghouse circulation required: Yes No g q %f Date Sent to SCH: 13. Publication Notice Written: Display Ad Prepared: 14. Notices Mailed: Number of Notices: 15. Newspaper Publication Date: O C P G B 16. Send follow-up letter: DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUTTE COUNTY UNIFORM APPLICATION APPLICANT: Agent information to be provided is on page 2 APPLICANT'S NAME: (If application is different from owner an affidavit is required.) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: Enterprise Rancheria 036 -540 - 010 ADDRESS: STREET,CITY,STATE,&ZIP CODE FILE NUMBER: (FOR OFFICE USE) 1940 Feather River Blvd. Ste. B, Oroville, Ca. 95965 NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT(If any) TELEPHONE: 530 532-9214 LOCATION OF PROJECT(Major cross Streets and Address,if any) East—Next to Copley Acres Sub.—Div. (Crane Ave./Tucker Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION REQUIRED OVINER'S NAME: TELEPHONE: Rice Revocable Income Life Trust ( ) - ADDRESS: CITY,STATE,&ZIP CODE: 8172 Bayford Way, Sacramento Ca. 95829-6002 ZONE GENERAL PLAN EXISTING LAND USE SITE SIZE(in Square Feet or Acres) AR L Vacant EXISTING STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) PROPOSED STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) 0 (Check One) (Check One) ® PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE SEWERED 0 PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON PUBLIC WATER ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON SEPTIC ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON WELL WATER APPLICATION REQUESTED ❑ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ❑REZONE ❑TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP ❑USE PERMIT ❑ WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP ❑MINOR USE PERMIT ❑BOUNDARY LINE MODIFICATION ❑ VARIANCE ❑LEGAL LOT DETERMINATION ❑MINOR VARIANCE ❑CERTIFICATE OF MERGER ❑ ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT ❑ MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN 71 . J `'+TTA .l.TT ♦/'n t^rw Rrw im _ n OTHER _ tVe�t]tMe CO r►}. PROJECT DESCRIPTION FULL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT(Attach necessary sheets. If this application is for a land division,describe the number and size of parcels.) See Attachment BUIR.4 El OWNER CERTIFICATIO I CERTIFY THAT I AM PRESENTLY THE LEGAL OWNER OR THE AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE OWNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. FURTHER,I ACKNOWLEDGE THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION AND CERTIFY THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. (If an agent is to be authorized,execute an affidavit of authorization and include the affidavit with this application.) DATE: SIGNATURE: K:\FORMS\UNIFORM APPLICATION Page 1 of 2 F '��- w t• �t i I 7 16 686 2298 Adek AN.27.2004aM 8:55AN TICUS ELECTRIC"- 10.944;=:20. 1i1 AGENT AUTELOPJZATION I To, Butler Camey,Department ofDevalopmeat Savices: TOM-MUZIX I TIE= 21161 E lhaaeAtumber('S3fl 3,3•-ib35 _ pry 14mm - 2317 Lincoln St . _OrgV lle, ca. 95466 X&ft&Adm is hereby authmized tD process the appl icstiou for a 5ubd i of 'oa on ray property, identified as Butre County Assessor Patel Number: APIA# 0,3�-54�-010 This autbo=t-U a allows mprescmta m for all apphumuoas.bmags, appeals,orfs. and to sip all doeumeots =cemary for said processing,but not including doc=cn*)relating to revord title iatere$t. ovmer(s)of Record: (sigh and print name) Ani Name T Pnn[Narae S*LVM Sere ArrLrtaat andtar Eugtnter: Fbone Numbs Primo W me of MfilceN&*ft= g Adds�s; FOR OMCE USE ONLY trff j►: Date Receive& Total Amount Received: 1] AP NumbM(s) Legal Damiption Owner;Autb=udoa Zoning Requir=ents P<ojcet pescnpnaa ❑Copies 0410T plan Tikes by: R PL No. �WlLD Plant E�II OF NOlNNOZ Fats Paylquat of the cut cvdy r qu=d Applimon Fee audlor Deposit(Any Unused p0man of a deposit)will be returned upas f1 actim Creat fee for tbzs applicadoa is as of Make cheek pay=blo to'Butte County Treasuree. �.�o�►asu�r�o�ws,�r�.tc�►� Avg 2 oft Z0Q 6'ON SWUM IM �13113}I * M71 nolo aru l.L Aamdn 4I W b21 OT 'IO COUNTY OF BUTTE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be Completed By Project Applicant) Date Filed General Information: 1. Name and address of owner, and/or developer, and/or project sponsor: Rnternrise Raneherin 2. Address of project: Assessor's Parcel Number: 036-540-010 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Clifford Angle-1940 Feather River Blvd. Ste. B, Oroville, Ca. 95965 (530)532-9214 4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: 5. Existing general plan designation: I N�2 6. Existing zoning district: AR 7. How is land currently used? Vacant 8. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed):_RP G;rt.n -j, Project Description: 9. Site size: 2,773,030 Sq. Ft./63.66 Acres (Acres/Sq. Feet) 10. Off-street parking spaces: Full size: 0 Compact: 0 Total: 0 11. Plans attached Yes No X 12. Proposed development schedule See Attachment 13. Associated projects 14. Anticipated incremental or phased development See Attachment Attach description of project containing the following information: 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. 16. If commercial, indicate the type,whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. '17. If industrial,indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division Cl 1 18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy. loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. 19. If the project involves a variance,conditional use,rezoning application,or any development permits, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. If permits have already been issued, please attach as Exhibit Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes(attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO 20. Change in existing features of any hills, buttes, canyons or substantial alteration of ground contours. _ X 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. _ X 22.' Change in pattern or character of general area of project. _ -Z- 23. 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. _ g 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. _ -X- 25. Change in bay, lake, river,stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. _ X 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. _ % 27. Site on filled land or on slopes of 10 percent or more. - _ X- 28. 28. Use of,or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,flammable or explosives. _ g 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police,fire,water, sewage, etc.including special districts). X — 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity,oil, natural gas, etc.). g _ 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. g _ 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division U 2 Environmental Setting: (Attach brief description) 32. Describe the project site as it exists before the project,including information on topography,soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 33. Describe the surrounding properties,including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial, etc.),intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses,shops,department stores,etc.),and scale of development(height,frontage, set-back, rear yard,etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this inial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts,statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature for K:\FORMS\SUBMITTAL\ENV-INFO 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division 0 3 Attachments 1. Proposed Development Schedule • This project is anticipated to take approximately 60 months. 2. Anticipated Incremental or Phased Development • Phase# 1 Infrastructure, Roads and 15 Housing Units. • Phase# 2 Cultural Center, Administration/Housing Office and Maintenance Building • Phase# 3 Fire Station • Phase#4 Storage Sheds • Phase# 5 Gymnasium, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts, Picnic Area and Park • Phase# 6 The Tribe would like to add 1 to 3 Housing Units per year for 5 years Answers to question (15) of the Environmental Information Form Number of Units: • This project will consist of 15 to 30 units. Unit Size: • The size of these units will very from 1400 sq. ft. to 2000 sq. ft. (2,3, and 4 bedrooms). Sale Price: • These units will not be for sale to the public-these units will be sold to eligible members of our tribe that meet HUD guidelines. Household Size • At this time we can not predict but only speculate from 2 to 8 individuals per household. COUNTY OF BUTTE AUDITOR ORTIFICATE AND TREASURER'S REA ORO--ALLE,.CA ATR'NJO 72764 RECEIVED FROM PLANNING BAG 0 316 DATE 312912004 FUND FUND DEPT ACCT CASH DESCRIPTION; TITLE CODE CODE CODE CODE AMOUNT I DEPOSIT DATE: 3r29 FOR:3DB PLANINIINIG APPL FEES GENL 0011 440MI 4210900 101001 3,933.30 Project Number Amount of Fee APN:047-320-082-WR06ERTS-PRE_D 04-19 $1,008.00_ APM038-540-010-ENT RNCHRIA-PRED 0420 $1.008.00 ? APNVARIES-MIN RSRdS MI 64N13 --- $1,917.30 LAND DEVELOPMENT GENL 0090 440004 4611700 .101061 674.0 Project Number Amount of Fee AFN:047-320082-WROBERTS-FRED 04-18 $337.00 APN:036-540-010-ENT RNCH,R;A-PRED¢4.20 $337.00 ENVIRONMENTAL. I-ILT'I-I GENL 0010 54000`3 4614901 101001 132.00 Project Number. Amount of Fee i APN:047-320-062-W ROBERTS-PRED 04-19 $66.00 APN:038-540-010-ENT RNCHRIA-PRED 04-20 $88.00 FIRE PLN G APPL FEE :'`'FIRE PROTECT 0100 4£17240 10101 16.00 Project Number Amount of Fee APN:047-320-082-WR06ERTS:PRFD 04-1.9 $43.00 APN:038-54G010-ENT RNCHRIA-PEED 04-20 $43.00 i TOTAL $ 4,825.30 APPROVED BY: RECEIVED BY: AUDITOR-CONTROLLER TREASURER ellBY AIia white--treasurer pink--auditor canary---a3eposrtoa' golden rod--file /l:12 / -311.2. 1 Monday,March 29,2004_ y T. W �i Development Services PLANNING DIVISION ver. 1.0 i Counter �- DDS Planning $1,008.00 1 Person Mark (General Fund) Payment Date 3/26/2004 Public Works r $337.00 (Land Development) Receipt Number 1395313 Environmental Health f $66.00 Received From Enterprise Rancheria CDF(Fire Department) $43.00 • Applicant Enterprise Rancheria NOD/NOE $0.00 ; (Recording Fee) Aunt Minnie $0.00 Application Number tPRED 04=20� $1,500 or$2,000 or In Reference To Planning Review $0.00 Parcel Number 036-540-010 Fish/Game $0.00 Check Number/Cash :Check 1745 ALUC $0.00 Total Received ,454.00 (Airport Land Use) Non Sufficient $0.00 Total Fees $1 ,454.00 Funds ($25.00 Fee) Cell Tower $0.00 ($2500.00) Public Sales/Copies _ $0.00 Other: $0.00 l COUNTY OF BUTTE 395313 OFFICIAL RECEIPT F � OFFICE OR DEP)4RTMENT ISSUING RECEIPT \;> 20'- Received'from le Sum of 'q\:. 1 ., ., .F r .J s.}., ._ s ...t 1 tr 1 X3•,4? a: s ✓_ r ! For 1! Vt Di y, � �, i" ;�•.}r-� { : l' c-f; � ��- ;; � Received: Irl 't, ! u z ! ti✓ Received By- CASH ❑ - Title ` l 1 t *:' t`t(, ,} 'i. • CHECK J By DAVCO BUSINESS FORMS•(530)743-8511 Form 75702 s.1 n, •,.�,,i-. .-�. !r:-r 3+ r3 r`kx_.� -�i...�yr. sV-1cls ice : .s. ' 'Z.�s?1•+"' Sre^.y`t ..—Ip- d .7 4 '::5.«}.` ..�at'-. Y�:J' s `rre:�. '.3Yr`�*-•i Y+ J*: %r'v{jf�`=•4., `lf�•.'!• *`'_ y-r"tin-e• h a _.c.r a'3_ Js ,q+•+, �,k1 `i. �sr ¢> 1_.7'/, G�,i,-lr � �S*' ',.. L-,PP ',;'. ._.�-e - heti 7' •..�r 'Ci^'-it Sr-W $ r„ i. R1?.°,4 J i LL `- r r�' i s V !r?'.+.�'+t' v f,�` w'�BANK OF AMERICA -.:�v 'ENTERPRISE RANCHERIAr Er � • r4 ` �rf ` x�� _ ,�� ORO DAM BRANCH,1169 .INDIAN HOUSING AUTHORITY'= ,5% , sr ;?h s '` 1820 ORO DAM BOULEVARD ts ;` Maas;x, �tf 1940.FEATHER RIVER BLVD.,SUITE B , r t? } r " .•sOROVIL'LE;CA!95966k- '(530) 5966 1 - Sh �.,.. G sr1 tti�.OROVILLE 'CA r C (530)53314950�:,2 3 = t .x.Y ..r."' C..yd•t= } Jf i !. riJ4.__�3 d- S iX.,Yn, 1210 .r f 'y. "a,i a id .-�Jf :F'i' ,r�'Z �- -•, ,• -. �.' �Y -• ..�.4 9 uci .F J ., � r+i �.�- ,. `h � r.0 y �-_ r-sr --.:.f.,+• -r !•+ 4� i _-✓J,,t .• � y.' ,'� •. 4.. AY-TO THE�r�� _ . ��� - - �y,�,..�{yp,�-£1� r y f� s. fJ �.: ._.+', r" 'i[ s, r'Y � - '�rf -2- r �r S� -� � •=�:9 K P , '.,ORDER OF Butte County Treasurer ? 1,454.00 One Thousand Four Hundred Fifty-Four and 00/100****-****************************'**'**'*****'*************'**************' DOLLARS r5 Butte County Development Services 1 _ 7 County Center Dr of - a; Oroville,CA 95965 • o� y � M MEMO pre development conference "°' 11100 17 4 SII' 1: 1 2 1000 3580: 1 169811180 5611' • s ' � y �v10 .�.}, o.►v1�5 �1�1J� - - l I� I �� '� , jI - . . - -- I� ,, -- �� - i� --- �� i II �,� _ �_� ilI �' '1 '' ' , � _. __..___ �- _. _ _ ___� _.___ __ ._._. M_ ._ ._ .._ .. .._ �. � IIS■..► . ,•• �� • ■ ��� �i� ��1�����■ria aa MEN � ��■ �� � Iii '���� � i. •� 01 PAR r 4 , _y �► -''•/ � ��1�� , � r � � �r I IJIIIII■_• ♦ � � Ira �� Page 1 of 2 Betts, Steve From: Betts, Steve Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 3:36 PM To: 'Kevin C. Butler Broker/Associate' Subject: RE: Enterprise Rancheria Kevin, As we discussed on the phone earlier this week, I have not had any contact with anyone from the Enterprise Rancheria, or their representative, since July of 2004. According to my phone log, I received and left voice mails with Clifford Angle of the Enterprise Rancheria on July 8, 2004. 1 received a voice mail from Clifford Angle on June 23, 2004, and my log notes indicate that I had already talked to him at the Planning Division Counter(so, I met with him sometime prior to June 23, 2004, although I don't have the exact date). On July 7, 2004, 1 mailed a letter about results of the pre-development meeting to Clifford Angle. Since that time I have had no contact, either in person, orally, or written, with anyone from the Enterprise Rancheria. I spoke with several people in the Public Works Department who may have had contact with the Enterprise Rancheria, but no one remembered speaking to anyone from the Rancheria in a long time. I did not poll everyone in the Public Works Department, so someone there may have had contact. The last I heard from the Rancheria was that they were in the process of preparing an environmental assessment required by HUD. The Rancheria has not submitted a tentative subdivision map application to us as of today. If you have any questions please let me know. Steve Stephen Betts Senior Planner Butte County Planning Division 7 County Center Drive,Oroville,CA 95965 Desk(530) 538-7153 Fax(530) 538-7785 From: Kevin C. Butler Broker/Associate [mailto:kbutler@kw.com] Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 1:44 PM To: Betts, Steve Subject: Enterprise Rancheria Mr. Betts: Please e-mail or send me at 2424 Professional Drive Roseville, Ca 95661 information on tall the contact that the Enterprise Rancheria has had with the County of Butte since September of 2003 regarding the 63 acres project near Tucker& Crane. Thank-you in advance for your attention to this matter. Kevin C Butler Broker/Associate Keller Williams Realty Office (916)960-1843 Fax (916)771-4808 www.KBut.ler.corn. 1/12/2005 a oe a AV ,g '.�.�? 47 rZtA tj rill- r_ Ile 051 o 1 ---------= �] ------------- ---------------- NOW 111[m MIN all w NIP L Lu Im & RP MEIF PPI -4— i Ila lot- WSW I� 1 1 IL 0 r�,_ NmMm" '' '7\ illi■I■■t� w1 I,� SIR pog UNK ��� Oji _ _C 1:... �►��� - � i r _ 1 ►, _ •_ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUTTE COUNTY UNIFORM APPLICATION APPLICANT: Agent information to be provided is on page 2 APPLICANT'S NAME: (If application is different from owner an affidavit is required.) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: Enterprise Rancheria 036 -540 - 010 ADDRESS: STREET,CITY, STATE,&ZIP CODE FILE NUMBER: (FOR OFFICE USE) 1940 Feather River Blvd. Ste. B Oroville, Ca. 95965 NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT(If any) TELEPHONE: 530 532-9214 LOCATION OF PROJECT(Major cross streets and Address,if any) East—Next to Copley Acres Sub.—Div. (Crane Ave./Tucker Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION REQUIRED OWNER'S NAME: TELEPHONE: Rice Revocable Income Life Trust J ( ) - ADDRESS: CITY,STATE,&ZIP CODE: 8172 Ba ford Way, Sacramento Ca. 95829-6002 ZONE GENERAL PLAN EXISTING LAND USE SITE SIZE(in Square Feet or Acres) AR I Ltk Vacant 163.66 EXISTING STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) PROPOSED STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) 0 (Check One) (Check One) ® PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE SEWEREDX❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON PUBLIC WATER ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON SEPTIC ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON WELL WATER APPLICATION REQVESTED ❑ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ❑REZONE ❑TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP ❑USE PERMIT ❑ WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP ❑MINOR USE PERMIT ❑BOUNDARY LINE MODIFICATION ❑ VARIANCE ❑LEGAL LOT DETERMINATION ❑MINOR VARIANCE ❑CERTIFICATE OF MERGER ❑ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT ❑ MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN I� TIT\/ rynw.T .wT ♦rrrr•w.r•�im _ ` /1 OTHERe.— ����1e�a�e CQ Apt►. PROJECT DESCRIPTION FULL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT(Attach necessary sheets. If this application is for a land division,describe the number and size of parcels.) See Attachment inii B OWNER CERTIFICATiO I CERTIFY THAT I AM PRESENTLY THE LEGAL OWNER OR THE AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE OWNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. FURTHER,I ACKNOWLEDGE THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION AND CERTIFY THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. (If an agent is to be authorized,execute an affidavit of authorization and include the affidavit with this application.) DATE: SIGNATURE: K:\FORMS\UNIFORM APPLICATION Pale I of 2 COUNTY OF BUTTE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be Completed By Project Applicant) Date Filed General Information: 1. Name and address of owner, and/or developer,and/or project sponsor: Rn erprise Ranrheria 2. Address of project: Assessors Parcel Number: 036-540-010 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Clifford Angle-1940 Feather River Blvd. Ste. B. Oroville, Ca. 95965 _(530)532-9214 4. - List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city,regional,state and federal agencies: 5. Existing general plan designation: LAR 6. Existing zoning district: AR 7. How is land currently used? Vacant 8. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed): uPGi apn, ai Project Description: , 9. Sitesize: 2,773,030 Sq. Ft./63.66 Acres (Acres/Sq. Feet) 10. Off-street parking•spaces: Full size: 0 Compact: 0 Total: 0 11. Plans attached Yes No X 12. Proposed development schedule See Attachment 13. Associated projects 14. Anticipated incremental or phased development See Attachment Attach description of project containing the following information: 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. 16. If commercial, indicate the type,whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. '17. If industrial,indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division Cl 18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy. loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. I 19. If the project involves a variance,conditional use, rezoning application,or any development permits,state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. If permits have already been issued, please attach as Exhibit Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes(attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO 20. Change in existing features of any hills, buttes,canyons or substantial alteration of ground contours. _ g 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing.residential areas or public lands or roads. _ % 22. Change in pattern or character of general area of project. — -X- 23. 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. _ g 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke,fumes or odors in vicinity. — -�- 25. Change in bay, lake, river,stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. _ % 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. _ X 27. Site on filled land or on slopes of 10 percent or more. 28. Use of, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. _ r 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire,water, sewage, etc.including special districts). X _ 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity,oil, natural gas, etc.). g _ 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. g _ 0 Butte County Department of Development Services ❑ Planning Division U 2 Environmental Setting: (Attach brief description) 32. Describe the project site as it exists before the project,including information on topography,soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 33. Describe.the surrounding properties,including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, -or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial,etc.),intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses,shops,department stores,etc.),and scale of development(height,frontage, set-back, rear yard,etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this inial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature for K:\FORMS\SUBMITTAL\EW-INFO 0 Butte County Department of Development Services 0 Planning Division ❑ 3 916 686 2298 AN.27.2004.-. 8:55AM�ARTICUS ELECTRIC"' '0.944 . 111 AGENT AUTHIO &TION TO: Btu COU5*,Dopa wtofD@74lopm Swim: E lbam Number LS 30M ,�•-�6 36 2317 Lincoln St:. _OrgyJILe, ca. 95966 X is he by wed.tQ procen ft application for -.--a subd ivi 'oa on my ps+opwty, identified w Butte Com Anewor Pucel Number: Ate_02 Lo, -010 This autlso izvtioa andws Npresenntim for an app3ir.$rioas.bcataaga, appeals,etc, and to sign 0 documems necessary foc said pmeessing,but not i=luding documcngs)relating to record tale interest. Owner(s)of Record: (riga and print name) Ari N� ��� - � Pnt�tldarne Sime USime tPot and�Or�it�I': P'h=Numbs U Print WwM of ArKhlca=TQ$nea ' g�lddresc FOR OMCE USE ONLY ; vel. Date Ttecai vel Total A==Rmmoived: ❑ AF Numbar(s) Legal Desariptim Owners Au&=udon Zoning R.equireme nts Project Aescdpdm ❑Copies of plax plea TW=by. _ Receipr No, �W/LD Flan E.FL CDF NODWOF.Fats AAMt of the cursrvdy squid App4enon Fee md/er Deposit(Any u=ed goman of a deposit)Will be rebzTOd upon final actioaQ, C=tw&e,for this appuaaaon is es of Make check payabb to'%Vtte Canty Tmsuree. Fera 9 ort Mel e�61 ON SwernTm Fa7r_- 1 X14 awn aIw 102 101 pe/E2/,ca Attachments, 1. Proposed Development Schedule • This project is anticipated to take approximately 60 months. 2. Anticipated Incremental or Phased Development • Phase# 1 Infrastructure, Roads and 15 Housing Units. • Phase# 2 Cultural Center, Administration/Housing Office and Maintenance Building • Phase#3 Fire Station • Phase#4 Storage Sheds • Phase# 5 Gymnasium, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts, Picnic Area and Park • Phase#6 The Tribe would like to add I to 3 Housing Units per year for 5 years Answers to question (15) of the Environmental Information Form Number of Units: • This project will consist of 15 to 30 units. Unit Size: • The size of these units.will very from 1400 sq. ft. to 2,000 sq. ft. (2,3, and 4 bedrooms). Sale Price: - • These units will not be for sale to the public-these units will be sold to eligible members of our tribe that meet HUD guidelines. Household Size • At this time we can not predict but only speculate from 2 to 8 individuals,per household. A Project Description Crane Ave./Tucker Ave® roville9 Ca© ® Goals—The goal of the Enterprise Rancheria is to provide Safe, Sanitary, and Affordable Housing for our Tribal Members, who are low to medium income. e Objectives -Purchase land and build fifteen (15)to thirty (3 0)homes for our Elders and. Members that are homeless or living in dilapidated unsanitary conditions. We need to better our lives and provide respectable housing for our people. • Land Use—Residential , and other possible uses are Community Center, Housing Office and Maintenance Dept, Fire Station, Storage Sheds, Gymnasium, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts, Community Park and Picnic Area for all Tribal Members, and other outside athletic activities. s Population density—we propose 60/120 Tribal Members to reside on this housing site. ® Services—All utilities such as Water and Sewer are on the premises, and PG&E and Telephone are in the vicinity of the property. • Traffic Conditions—We will check with the County of Butte for a primary access at Crane Ave. and a secondary access at Tucker Ave. • Drainage—If the County agrees to the use of the property and,agrees to let the Tribe purchase this parcel of land, we will hire an Engineer and Architect to accurately design and deal with drainage that would satisfy the County. • Wildlife & Wetlands—We will deal with the-Wildlife& Wetlands as required by the County's Policies and Procedures. . Zoning—The parcel of land is zoned AR, so we don't believe we will have to request the County to rezone the parcel of land to enable our Tribal Members a '/z acre lot. ParcelQuest by CD-DATA "Property Detail Butte, CA 'Kenneth Reimers, Assessor Parcel#(APN): 036-540-010-000 Use Description: Parcel Status: ACTIVE Owner Name: RICE REVOCABLE INCOME LIFE TRUST Mailing Address: 8172 BAYFORD WAY, SACRAMENTO CA 95829%RICE DOROTHY O TRUST Situs Address: Legal Description: PTN SEC 23 T19N R4E ASSESSMENT Total Value: $556,255 Use Code: RV Zoning: AR Land Value: $556,255 Tax Rate Area: 091004 Impr Value: Year Assd: 2001 Improve Type: Other Value: Property Tax , $5, 678 .80 Price/SgFt: % Improved: Delinquent Yr- Exempt Amt: Exempt Codes: SALES HISTORY Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Transfer Recording Date: 12/13/1993 05/26/1993 05/30/1991 12/13/1993 Recorded Doc It 1993854743 1993822594 1991821059 1993854743 Recorded Doc Type: Transfer Amount: $472, 000 Sale 1 Seller(Grantor): RICE JACK & GUITHRUN TRU 1st Trst Dd Amt: Code1: 2nd Trst Dd Amt: Code2: PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Lot Acres: 63.660A Year Built: Fireplace: Lot Sq Ft 2,773, 030 Effective Yr. A/C: Bldg/Liv Area: Heating: Units: Total Rooms: Pool: Buildings: Bedrooms: Flooring: Stories: Baths(Full): Park Type: Style: Baths(Half): Spaces: Construct: Bsmt SgFt Site Infince: Quality: Garage SgFt: Building Class: Timber Preserve: Condition: Ag Preserve: Other. 4 Other Rooms: '**The information provided here is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed. Page: 1 of 1 1 S -p S( _ 1 I i I t I i. 1 11�- �j � 1 It` •i t7O1 ^---------"--......� - .. .-.._........ _ .Ii�.. .. ... .... ......I.. .... ..._...__-..... .LII..._. .. .. .. ..... .`>-_. ' I '} .' N I -;,�,iy �� '� � iii• 1 t WWI 4,V� ,W1 ilk A xt 71� 0-g- F ILI f-I 4i, �ow - -:...y—•r - - �`�s, ¢ .!`;--�', =5+�' �, "Ys��v -�`+u� �-,7; J^ j!`rt":42•' - i �j,,,:_ �1c,.a• +�• � mss., �,; -'�,` ,Y:' r �. ���+{��.,.��''�•*r �-it`�,/� '.nS.*' i ".'�'. + �•.` tr+�''� � � �z•�t.r � t..�.�•x..,,'..y Z'h.1'` � � + �;. *,.".'({[�r7.� yxetl�:� .tA •r' V..•, Ir, 4� ��r. = yy ..'Y✓ fr � A.. ,,}� 3 }q 454'l1 w�li,�• r Yf"y''-'t _� f tr � �•t� x � '- S..r -r t �' S �.f,.s"te..:a7 _ •a ltt� '�� t .• �+dy;l`yY �I��°�.}.i' by b-w �, ti '�' Y 1.. _�'-' �.." 2. - - pV� "•� c,� Jnr;. �h�=`vf.�.f< .Rit Ta��.-�, •rp •,,i tX - ' �-- t � „ c`r.."' - ,. � r « �-_ ,�- _ � - e,.�y^�.'kt�r�'�y..t� �Y�s��`•1�f t"Y Fz,"�`,�x+, � �' �� T-� r .. x•F _ �.• ?� r q+1 y*2 .[,f Azo" if T �"w� 'p ( ,'yw-- �1''�'`°t �"'' lk •fir v'�1'' 3, � �',�1 '� ,r �'"A :`�"{ * "� :_ li"j," #,,. _`T '�' rit•.,Mat ,; -rCay�. t -+• r '� '"-'„. - L� y,�M'w ��•.A�yp` •.;� _ L-"`" !yS� �CT�.:$i � '�7#d•1I�r�/? ,�{ a -.+r 1}". /�. h � i�:D'~ �� f V Y�t•- A J�* � .X�•2 � l� " YYt?' c1, S+ A_��1 !.^f�� Z �"F• Y S L�-`R!'. ' � � a� aX i Y i�y�� rs��.�r+ .�. �y.n�`� •`f �#�'- c �`��„J�='•y r,1P' r -"'i'1't-1-T1�ti3;'`""ii� �� �E.�''�,rt•�', cnc. '� .T� + •� ' '-�•ly'.i ''"" ,',^ i `��• c?` ' - 'J+:• "`.`'".il' a... ^,.; '+a�'r� J'�` i -y.•✓.t`«, y .�", y` n4:.,4 '�:, ' 'fie a '• _ z'.'. jx._ �''_' :8 is.,... ��* .+ vy�> .' � '. -. ? _ Cie t,2;.7�. � ;•t .�„w =fix.,,., �. Y'.: -�" y„ : " �. 1Y • ,. ems., - - �"�}, y t � '^`�,,`e;�-•.�f. � �>.'1�~�j •,y tt{ A.1 x•.7^'I' Ri.�t�� Mt� 1,itd N� f�,� f + j"' ���- ��. .��. "'� . • 'F +tir.-r tw�1 R w .rN �_�.ti, tat. All ? ,.� ,.,�,. . ....,(..y +e*,�_—,. .i�sn �,�C�j.,�,S+�H'],h(r, ..rf',1�`y�, `r�'t^.�,rt, },:'%�;'�• f'Lx� ��,+K ."'� - t'Y� + d�•rx'F 'f pA-.. 'Y�t-� � f � d ,s ���f i,?�'C•f rs,,.£!`,� '�i �'x'\ ,ice _' .Y �,�•/},tl�. r .�3 Y.7+5� ,,r �:`�, �I tF .� f�Tif trRtlyi� �`�k�}+C��.•ytY�, t 't��.. :.w:�..-d ._ 7'+ ''' �..'r +••Gr: 77'f •, 7 .T I} r •'�.A i..,. 't♦, 'i r'iV d+•�:��.f T'�: n} J•- .• ,�. .7 k��' is ...'t'IrY�t�4��'t ?'t,I +-�J '��t ', r� '� Y 3`� ',1 5'�.' � �T e r. jr `�'.!S' •.,�e♦- � 4.f;t�.Z, yl.yr r56,±r ",.. t.�����i .. ,V':i �r � }_ y�, N , ', Iii Fr.1�' Ir _ �,•i e'�� .. J�. a'�. ,'��! +,� i +:.'C •y! :ti.�"f;,.+ vj�y�JN�t�i.�Pi`s, r r, y��r ��L 'N .;�; � �. j.'f� ,yt �, �'f�;•3�.. 1{ .+.. a 1 ; .,V .' p..w n P�4'C���" � •��. � � �� !.,A. i ���� �;�r ���i�jPi.�'t 11 1W `V .. - G l h t L. � ^ M!-'.'^. z v _ ��'•�I l.x.i. `.�, ti 'i� "`-;x. .i 11 a , e r ���' 't:l� k` t�. +i5.r= �'''• 1 � IJ ! •',' :'� �'' t• �! L,i.f,. � `y. :j _'r V-9119-,', ,rnPS�,t f'.rh��ytF P•r.lr rf �, mfr r Y� �"--.G .'- .• 'e f x� • �,�' �w- '+i r ✓ f irr , f t.. a. � ,_ e sfl 'F'` 45 4/f a:� v r�">.• >f� �.,,f �>P�,✓"' r ��4n -. � r,'�f,��, t� _,�'�'Yt �, �` t �l"' "��,s>Nfyr� ,,,ia�' �..P; �n,�il�S F , A'i+ �_A•.'w Y^`Y :ri.s�'", y . _ �y` , tk ,• �` � .`�11 ft�yql!`; �1- ,i"Ks'i., .r' Y�'. r'�"v.�F tY'Y"_A ! ,Y'.t>iY+,"Y-^ �, `X,-..e - �. � i' '��� �.' " �'I t�.} .�' ""j i`�'r, /- r•�."1> .,y_ .,a f?.r-� '6.' , F .l.. it ".,+ y' �t '4 ..!� ' 'T��k.f�d'� q,3 C Jt ,y+�• � _ '` '' ,�.w'.,.�-'�` ) �{ 'y1�� `�'+r-, �'+�,j�Y .�.. �jFa� r , vtyi!�,. > ,4. H,f•�y� � 4 i f t �, :, w M *.� ��=F`t'�� e`'r�./ "�F�+`S•�i. t`d'�g�,n,' � P.x� y.�i..:'t,���. 1 �• �.1' :.�' .. v"..,,�r1 - + '1' tit l� •,T � 'li"'. �I.�a 14a,'�,f-.'�` .�- .T ,t• ; 1 "1`, SI•+Y .^to..y � ,��' F�� !r r SM fj" �i 1 N1F�'[ ��rq .J> •:.... tl��.r ;..,t � L ,(} ' w # e�+r. un lit A�� KR�f P , � k �.'��.� -t .t" �.rit; 1�� �'a yKt �' �}, +i"...` �'r,`r r t - •".t �i�J, t �" �t-k��'r a.� v r '�'•� tX� S. ,� k '+� .�F�' Y,. y t�"1. r„� � 1 t (;1 ; i•c` y �,'3 ��r tu�♦ k _ 'k �+ ,[ ' ` 1 t ,w 1.r I. `-�1�.�+�' � t' '•` V �' � �� ,.et � �.�;� F ,,:,�• �. '/ t � r4f.�a� w+ ' " r..'� •.-x r. ,�, f. }LL 4• J.W7� , � ��;'S't ( <�S �t'Y .��• - �- � � �-f+.�' _ j� �1 °rPj..rY!4/15f�1[,11.a,. ,�t` �`+n,�17 � -e ' .`+ � �y` F �. "� r - r. r "y}l,• � }1 s,���,'yC`6 `-y�C�ih,� � — !t'. .i �y _ sf t. ,� n ♦a i���t-`;�� 4„• �' xir''� tty+' '' t -•;'t, ".��^r tit � ��ti!•�s.. it t Imo,.+.'I �,# '! ��.4..t��P}"�' �,� �ce:�'�'%�`: ,-` .,tr���"'� +x.1'7,'E`y ��_. �/., . �4 J '7,�x'�l i� i t , ' � �r... t •tl� '.� �.�'��`�r tlu'�{�,�., "^`. �Jff�.'g."i,} tC '-t,` '�' 'Y� �,t F 1 w -'� 1 �, µs. lC ..> !�. , Ps 1 +'�•-v�y�..H.. � s P ` �•+ � 'r1; � � .x?} �' ., - 1 ,r�•-r - �� t• r � It�lk'. _ r,a: (!t„ �y y �� ♦ M'f rC.•#" � , *,' - �. `t y>r � i'r _, • } ._ .. I+ 1gl r W t,btu e♦♦�JP t o 41, s t -v ..r ,.w t''' ��~' ���'�- V_ s�r I yJ'�91,,, -{w4•� � ti��j'yy " T � �,'� r �"• r` ' A��, ` f '.c!, v' �,3'��,} �t• i�t '�- � '�'�rr+"!'. �, �� r jt'yr '1 P-;1� "+�. t �:�, tC � �;� � '��•..•� tt','`,•s'''�(•.• i...r. f•��^:•� '�^. ���^''�T� ;.;y..t,,?- �ar t-r[' y1 ,,t .�M yl.. r� {`,Y4•tF'' ~ � �s + - '�e�� 't � ,.*1'� a� - ry��t,!�3 ti. .� �f!�'e z •w +�3 .SYR r .11 ��i�t*+/Y � .�: F�44{S„r t,:�T.�jt. ✓ a��4. , ... 1`�"'r � � � t .. ~�` �F•-'f�.>fl � . `.. c�.�Yx `jML ru-it i�t� ,e� `l`'�'y"N '�++�y�''�J:-' � � +i^i1�i*6�`='� �'f ���: f r✓-„nn'`��!�+JJr.s�'�'+ � a '” ", ��x�y`>•r�yy��, .. �1. y e 'y. w +0140 i Oroville area, California, United States lT-le- ve art �7 ; Crane- ve--�- _Crane- ve .. .. i 1. ------- CO.akva~ le t anter:Ln ; - uc�' key ve . e , r4 0 yds 200 400 600 Copyright O 1988-2001 Microsoft Corp.and/or Its suppliers.All rights reserved. http://www.microsoft.com/streeta O Copyright 2000 by Geographic Data Technology,Inc.All rights reserved.O 2000 Navigation Technologies.All rights reserved.This data Includes Information taken with permission from Canadian authorities O Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.0 Copyright 2000 by Compusearch Micromarketing Data and Systems Ltd. Oroville area California, United States x 5� 'a;' <.'�ti;'lBia:� .1„„.,• ,� ,r,r/ 't, 1. r s .rl:'+'.,c, > iu!rr, .sr,., '`J-: Y •�..,}.t --ti r ^h. n A' -:F{e" .l:•n,.L.:..?. +y. - ,,��::o:: �':, :LYrk's'-,,,.n. 3}zr<:,x .>w .3.• _•; 'S^'z"."> e ;`Y'� :•f'.�.1 "-, :<,,.�s,i .f;... y,„- '• '3 a .z,<"f>; 'i'n.'t�s<�sst,�, .� „•+g 5.` x,`fF r ,: .a -,,'> ,:.`��^=to .:: .•:,z2": rf Ge,,f'a:cl?F ;"-'7^S //„ :s` 2 � ei.. :?.,_„+, tFY:•., •i-�-- Yl,,�'t'T:•nr.-:•riti:.:,,, `z fT -,' asr�.<,r: ' cr� .'' +�.zy y 't,t 'Yh ry"1 •'"t-;ir`se a. •[r. ..d'�'" ...t, b' .?r:p:v Tr, t d?. 'L•z ., . ta :�,9 r ;u� .> '�L .rf:c:. �;,;,n.. �,'s<"'.•$m.,r„a SE`k;•^4•> tiu w� '.i, - if'..1„ `;,-`+-1..,>,"' .fa:`�f'"o aP rNFt'a �r�' x4-,. -a. .w•.< ':<': ' > ',.S '+*'t•y..=. . ' F,�..A,,. ;`'it L- 1` .r.,.eL'^ -»•' �?' ,1.".. .?.r.,)<r':i ��:n., stifn, �.[5�.5* [ nV..:s vF t.. oy',,r v`'''�•i 1' ..r L{;�r�,',-� ;,;y:e<on',. .:�., ,.ko .d.:r, .7..�t31r �.r.'-:. ,�r> :y ..r'•„} dr '"�,. �_.,.. .>...... Y,v r.. '>`Sr'?Y-'v',r+-a, -.'b•i- ��. •in '%u>r.'E1 y>FL".,%C : - 'xT' �. �5`,p.'-�:t'..,,' _ -`>• -;�^T @ � u - `' _•'sr'.,,..',,..�.:�c5� =�, r a"''�<- ':�" r' F:" ,s'�>r:..�'„ Y�r..,. / ,�.� �'n-'.�•u-u"f�-�,,'_.x•:^L;=` r'Y'r�s''-', �`•.ro r� +<s•. ',Lr_. �" S'o-,^'° •4.��,'i�,..��r� ;ra< 6-1' .1.,E. 7K ! .I=:r:..t- •ail-M.?.. r, -�.. a?4 '•az;. _ ..x.>.:. � 'S• x:. e,--E•r_, ;i _9.y.!>. rF-k, +r ..r >'3n: .k- '::�-afl: :a ^;:S,.r ,. r e,'. 'rY.Li-•* ,-G" i^',,, yc;,•x „•,is :,-v: �'< ..F�c3:,. N•. . '�7v 'a•. �- ,S'._ .."z+,-;C .,:;`a..' ..;z.;;.r 'c�,t s •.>< �'. • 'x .�;, ..5:f ''�� .� �.� ,, >•.�• .a�'>- ,,%%jj,,'''' yy 1'y': .q. ♦; :.�.'`Y x .t. ,•.t'••1r` 'iFF•': :':fy .� ' .yra•'r.'. r ,i i1F::''r". n`^I;'._., - �=Ar •';L. + r.3.<"=:"','a2v'�,= •Yt .� .sn, 3 . . ;x:. „w,r,r :.%tk;r....di•' f.,•,r,. 1.. .+--,• ah:;-n v .,,::«ic.i`'tr. - i:d;{: •f..sXb'i-i e: _ _,'4-e ''u,.�Sia*'k�n'N:,sAt - ,s42; � �1„.q,}•t'8.>r„ :6�`:. � #-4. 5.1,..4�:2 �:'Sl,•y,-... ..�i• -"Y .��'< _r;2•r�:sai<+,1. QUinc�/-G ..,.: .,..7 •;t;7, ,+•.,;.;, :7"a,;>•:y3, <'Yt:S:u.[,,. '-h-'*, 3._s. � �,:-•�:>�'ti�::r-:>• ;::^5,.....,y.�i-.,r�F-'a„> � ter' fig., yy:: �.4� >I;.K:y�,a>,b,:..;•f+Y.r L-,. .,-P. T'ry;, ,i't:.. .-,ti `.S. )?C; ,p:".e. �il�:, •'Yj(r- _ ,rp::2 v11a`,J+F�.. .�,t1 ••' �i � ,eS.Y , - r:•Kn: =mom'}, d._"hw•> _ -$- :.5Y'1".r. .,'ic-- R'F.c •.i'7'L-.r J� .,1rYr. 4 �'.�ti ,..c:, ,rS&F','-: .4.�' - �.,�•'�,st- r;a '�- '�.,zrn+ ..`any;; :ry.,'Y -:;s't„ ;'�:;r,S.,,, .+'o-:�.q .,x'" •vr..<ti...,;.1: Er .,e `•�,'>r .k+i' '+,.v. x t"3j. D�1=.z;. ��:. � - <'E...�_.. ,z-.. ... .r#t�. >�`'`6f,{'� a'•.z.% .,,- �s.. ,�. ,'>:'.,» _6,==aH<,:r.;, `.�zA, .�=' .s-,, 7 ,z�y'�:�. -,�.Pz^ :a�. ^'i'�::••:rFY, v. z,. - ,ga ,.<, ,;v.," �m a" - �,. :q::>•:,,�` zr5�,`.s ,.a *-('"r'r.; :`�..f .,r. � f:-s' s^ '. �� :sf'" r- ,i.dr rr•,'s•^,. +J... .,�. .�. a. .•.`u.:y �.. +�`,,1', mx'r: '%'. ,�', ,,d:t ar."': ..: k:':,. L'.x�'sr.^e•'7 1 ;�`�''- .� q r t:;e'' rr> tx'+_1,o- .,c':T; ,t>, .r,.1"�"',.-!`;�.".,,�^:"-'i s'�:. ! x. ,:5.. i. t�' 4..r. r4•i.• >,ygtr .:,'�"+ ;;�. •:;v. ��;. �: .�::Ct :5.. �:;" +-`L - ,y,.- ^.ky^t�,a.;v. �,�,: :.ta., '�J-.,n � .•.'f:;'.-a_ , Hr •,'.; a ! 162' `"n ',1y , ���.-:_<�: `V`- -e7^ t`-- 't-,.,. t.O1 a �.f',�. •4r' .•,p. :k� r+'c !r- a' .,�;:c;X',, .r..: w'"'E,„ ,�, r,•rr.?v..,;,t., a.}3», FiS- ^•-'...:s;:: :.`.Y.':w' r :_„srr>:�.-U,.,.. ,c 4� r,y;;_:.yx c}; ,it ..__""i,,•:" mu'+'"5 x? -b. -3 t=r r•C..Y;. �62,M'.'y.. �r_�.y, Yr••• .{: „ .;j 'S. _�< Y.Rr.r,y;.. ."3-...^.,,,rJ �+,•� yz;. V;, Y!- -',;a... ..ti,. -, " - - l' .:^' „5' ;`�F:i?''.•:> - �, .:),t<'a..>J,��:'{,.s. ..,pr!�.m' ,s •.,av. .,:4•. v C � �•' - <.t ,r..' ,.t`�:",...,.,F,,+. G.j .//' K. 2>. .:1,.' w' .tfr�:.,r .,I�,j,••,. sy- y. :� i^!',,h y. •: 1� r,c, V, ,F,: 3 N :s-.,+�:y,3 t ;�C + .- 1,�•."�'>�`?. ,t.c�` � ?'su• F- .k,SF' `�. '•r. `x� -:r;:�.. /�. w.»IR_ -Eh. �ryy2.-0�;'' ,.,;e.-r" ,r'>" t^�7 .n-' .�.t�. ...,ra+: ;.h.+'•:`",�„z;;.�:.>.t.•� :.F. ;t.: : •:.•V., ..a> ._'`a. - ,..a'-�="' .. Ff><r ,aF. 'STs. .�-r •1" �• �r3 r..,.:;..: c�:X.t >:..:,,.. r'L[ ;ssYx tY,t'`"a`-',s,., t.,3t: ,.,�°. P`.••r`- ' a•'p, - it.as ,rGS, t';,•= '_'��•r.'�z,M �s- ..a:... .. --�'"�� .� ,�:: sy. .1� 9�`�'--.. ...>,.d' ..r< -.•r' :::'s�hr,.ta;>..• ,%.x-cp>u.:b's:>s'a"^...:..ti,. ...r<..�,.F -<.:is�• :f....:-, a<, tr.!sz.:'�; a� s>[^,•, )V:l.^ r�:' rtr•+'.•r. .A 's"'=r.., :x. { ,,�r ,,, - ,u`t_r2'`-' .,+,_ k'.'�� °,S- �. �'x- �f s .-b� 'c,'�.. .;;y. 3'� r;� - ,tcF'.n 'i •,r. ,fir I: .:t v,''-';{.'ry 5... Gf.- e'L`: '<iY�,' •:3'1. ."'t,ia°' :+},•,.... ^"v..i :�:F'••' r>1t'.-d J N E_ �'YZ L. <. vv��,,4•< .tf.[<.i-.T,, r SYS - `-'�..h. ..4,+at-' v.• ^'an.-. .f -'f'- i, '4_S`'!' f'u ,•,SP'l? ,a. - �'G1'''."; .9•M„c::-r �7 :''�' :;•'°x� a..-. �. •c{'s;,rd:c�(!r�';. ,..i..x..1,"�i.•5, r, =1z. r :::> :..t `>_._<i,°arr~.'�rr,v.. a;i: .n.::i.�<:.'.i;4.S`•' ''..d._ rrs„ `[• xf_ -rt «{"er .''?"•-„y ✓:t,:lGu`3'_-yd' ni ,?,l a',ri<.,'� f,r - .•; v ,Yti,.., i[!:'a,:? ?'' ..rL 13 ;?i= :,t,..h:''z•.s. -r3'' _ _ XR.-, ,{ �"+ s :t-...- ,•E::.• R. s'�i^•':.. :t,�a ..er.. u^>,7'+:' .n, '�`•y-:^,fb� .�' :,�n a:•'•': .•SL_, r.•c ".i':aV:. ,ar -:�>",.,, - .. _ .. .. .. _.-:�' �Vr"r:'r">- ... .- -:.-.:,:.:-`:`.v.d nJ. •4'x is'`�-'' `'-'!:r' t i`".. i "^t>"y 3 ,.:.x" >_ .-��, J'}:fi-:JZJ'G :nla.. .�':- iyz-ur"•. :_s;' .� ai.,,u.-:•[ ••,r.,n..> >Fizs: ..A r-1..,5,:,.atF t:,t`,f •ar ;> .,zV'!r'3'r' ..t 1 '�'. 4;,'"c`'~•.:ax! ,t*,>. �e ^:r1,,+;fir' A,;.. ,m Zy i 't': -.:�YII ^9: :,t'• 'dl'...t:. ,(.'3 .-�!' �. :%) �„L..nn V` .}.r t' 1^r. .n ,d'Z'.> {. aj�'',�'.•"`a ,.:t,;i<, rR±`„" //t� ,:a._ ,"s,•" s�_ xt•r' `a'. r:: �*_ l3 2'n,.gF'�-. ..�! B�'. Y^rt `, �`.i..n '[r, �•: `3« ;:rri` .,fit , y�'�Ci1.q- J,- "t?' ..� :''{3..,�'•.. °� r,r..,.,r .5. - �`., .,r:• �w *d a .,,"� in �.r 7. 'SS, �i,,o'_. ,.,:.>.5?;-.. ..a,Cwn:'=t"�F�'�'f'•5''' - .>*.. .v, yr:•. '=�:. ..,.'.. :,. � l'1',;•,>,n S� r'v`x'•15`�.:.,Fv1 errs(tMr;,,� .d^. ,;tv� :N�:Yru_ raL',s, j'. y",,` - ,. •:'' .>n;: -e,�.x ;..:rpt-• .-,ra _o `tK,,.•,a-,:lex- •..,tr,.' "'!i~t:i. '.,Y, rr:„�.✓` �+ -- :. s^•F�r�+ Ir .,V�sr�,i.., x z=fir;; _3-..`1, �.^. •L»r :..+''Y�' -r : � _S ,s...kf' -�i .3..: :a:L:rl`'', i'<:.•s.:i' _.+'#,sl 't _. ','`: ^Y,. >_ �t•y"ir,'•...?£•'% fS „r.. _ `'ems= .;r. �L;'. ,Y`•sc,.>.. -r+- '>s ..,d',,.:,y>.. `�k .. - 'e.:"a:.: _:::`J:a� :�s;:,r >'�kt.. .{.'• e'r -' F,: $rl i•}.:- „�?yu.. .1•� b •�.�'G xr, .?c.:•-ar.:? ,.T,: ',n'. ae,!,� :,.i: 't,`ti. ,W:t✓.., .�v- .c':^'- t•s. ...P.- .,:.>V r' a - .-l. i:` _=->�5'•: �: _aa ..ter t 's>F'�. r_ �v,, - `.t".�. �ru: o;s'�-t r .. -4,. $..- .. . - 'N'_..'i��' YSt .r.A .t'vt,. ,`., S .v •1',,:' +`�ts�'{r„,. ,•a ,:-r:.n •:',+.�.-• iii+"�'.'k•`, '�'•�`.• a(', K .,�• c.J.�,- .,,.F.,L..}.1ra` ,._r$� �?.,,.,F ..n E�: t #:r - :r« :4. . sr��,.. ,>" ..�. " '-'••--".'fin'" :r!., x .:k:�,. ...[:r.,f,._. ��. e•:,. h> .✓'�, fit, r::, •3iF:'�., v,i•�''i"% � s ..). i:. ,F�•'-,>,.: °,:sYC•-w .5< i "t1'�� -";.35::' -!y ,:'&, a, ..'3:.. -3 ,�. (�,,( ° , :'�.., ^•�r' .a. s5 Y-` ,) �;?::,::w.nl<, Y air ,rC��z# :4-€ , - . :rv�-: •.sem•' 'x. �l sx-.�•,,. L+•-? y z;. q•i" },.. ::t:,,'r_t...,."':,:r_;. � + ' �{.,'��_ +r� t, b'au d,. v' -`'a. S 4�-�r,r ^c_. .r„..j_ �• tt•� ,�:;rr'3s; >.�;�; a-. :b `'4, -. v.c"' .�"7�` r• ,,ii����,,,�a :��°u,: :t�'kks.,er .*x-n: �'- _ 4,E{; "J. k>.+% -x�9"..�Sb". W�41 �'' \r.^i.'�' x,. ..,.. >ai _ ty."> .<4 i+Ut> _ a ^G`ir,<.•; �<T', 1,.. ^:Y�R .r.. it y' ��r- >c�' ,:k•/`, _'4.o ,,77 '^-•t.,r "Si'�:t;".. :s'a - ;'�tPf fr�:•t'r ,r,<r,-sc ,'J+u"� r=S.r.Y""., t '!:F r �,•+3+: 'S si» r. k1 k. Via. t 9 h x .- ,,a,:s"u' >-1»:>:; J}x"•,n,_r .,� m'r .c a- .'7> .,e 'r ."r,:` '3'S.< n<;>. ss�l;.w:_.� '_t .n:^. _ iif v1., ,!r�:," , .j.. t.' kt•,? �,..�--y. ;c- kri' .L- ,Ca?.,-:`.'a-e'r-'t"z.!_ - >v ,a ,2 �.1... ;4r > -.,i ki;:..� ._.; ..:F,r: ~'-kro i.>•y .i6'1. /� ;.xi: •-;� #: F. ,#3- n�.;- :,tt� >..b ''ir=.tw,.i n?.°'et+ '>}�, _.r<'+' 3 �':,�.. -tq 3. ,x.3/�...R.• af•u-., ;."::q.,.'�.!qV ,!* -'•Se ,'Ea,- 'Tiff, �;l" ,..':a. G. .� .�. ..a„ sx. <_tet"t -rs�� .,-f .,.5 Y�.� <.. •::t•:� .,&;;:,.�, .r�w+..."....a rv�« �.�,.. Y, zf� a .I.,' fi}'•B4rk•., ,•vJ °s'- a. ..i. v�r:=;�^``i::-=K'.,.-�..•�r;', „'vr- .x"s ,>.. =� G.� 1.�,. .x'.ww•,fi.`. •-.-r r 't.•- :m .6 s: r'.�',':::t.-.5., .: nx, .� ".rfi' vy� � a"`- ",#`��{ :r,':,;' e'• _,,:.1s" .r.,a,. .+. b.. ..><. .s,r rC _`�?: .<#y .� "•t•,r �' n-:`,- ��1.- y v, ,�;':>..; ...x": �:'=:;: .u. �,2:r�!,,.,,-` .'f-�'. .=r,:' .�". ,?''•M' s', <r�t• „�`,? zt ,`3r.'f- t :. „ti_r;„.. ;.;;a: F^...t._kN. .r r Y7,.c(: .3 .rt.. , i_x w'ta�., -a..-,«'',_'>,�:v!.' ..c 'r:r. .t.;xl'... _•[, .. M;' .,s•,., g'.r�''-y, ..�:. ,a,.,.- �s'r;r.-.� •.j,i..,h; , a ' t , fix, .•�' y:� :;•:rce�p;.,..w,s.^�r b$u ,..a. _ 'a '.1:; sXF ,' ;+;4 '<"�:�,.. t ,$s.•.--. 'r.....r•-„sz:.-kt--a- ,t: -wm=a >•r .,. .... ...1`".h:Fir': 'i. :•'` - '.i. _i, -�. :•1 i >s: 'L� �: �'�YxFf^:�-< T<,rr .t_. _ ..��'„Y ?'&. •r�. ;� d,,. `�+'[�, „). r"'i.,w,"�ns. ,`P- s1--1'l r:' rxrr r.a `�,?,3':i..s,-S i 5 s:;F•.;; .-.3 a-.A..ci .,.>"t„ :?h' ' .e'....xr,,.;."H'• .,-,'.fi.7j ,:x°1:4. '?rl�r•:+,:`h;I,,;+z;:`, ¢i,.•r_ CL~ r''sr`, S-frl, :.✓•u+,..b-r,r. M 4�j 1,., '3",`j.,[ ^, r .u.Y. ':e,.>,7 Y ,.:!,`I;.� '�.,:1 .. „ �'1�.21+ .;:;`' a,4, - ",U` :c: ynr .,�,'E •d f_:r::.'�"fi;;'rf:/".•c 1,;. �>i� Xr;; >5.,,::d.ar8: .�!;. .•� "ti: i ;°y':<°lts .v a ,r,, •1-•.s._ 'yry�:i+a ,r) ": "r. =SGS•..`.�t`rs=e:_- t"n ,:.X`df:,.o-i:;m_..t y,S...s,_ .#. „i..,'e 'j. ¢- „a. .. -''"' rr+`i*,�,`:i .4 �..C,; .:'1: ,; ,sr. .&2wri* i'-7"'.? `.i:"w;? ..#k .t�.,• Sk:.:•• r^f:'}..;.;,f,ir..rls_.lrp'' r - ,�r.!'. o .iILB r� . - u. _:.., t -t•� t :.a .2 '.•fn rr 9r.:z�=-' .A> Y„err,...... - ..L'aca*:,r. :'.[ - >'•'r.. -=y.r .•,,, "Y>'" '� :3r,-F:t,2'•aT ^ - - I ^-k:7Fd 'rt<^A. •>F,t.r': 'M .�' � .. '+}.rv'7:',.�y,".-..:.-. ;.' o- •;':. z,�, Y" �:;n• •,£F' e� _t, 5^>1-r,°-:+.AF':.r,.,," .-..t,.t.t: -.€< .ei2ft,''k,. 1;.='?'q. ?'4._ :F` ',t.: �,�••.-• We,.•r,. D:r: ,.s3rJn'�r., -JfY",i. f. v`t• u` K <r.. Y =rr,. ,''-•�+r.rz ..� ,y�:�y. s Via- %4. '•5,7,r.54c.. ?.�n ,'F• 'sett •z r... ,.;.� ',y(�' r',! s,., ,. Ft: -•,!„ lN.. i-\,<,i,,, q:Tzf r :�':T :'' t :•11> 4...4 1•n l: :�•r'.::,SE .;-'.'::".,u,:{Y;R+n..VF., n..V�'rE�+' .:i".- ..Y' ✓> af'•, f- ,.:N:.,.:rr•,i S 'c`''.� 15 •ih*. r', =.v:, �,.s: to�.:••S.'• >.,:1„•c4.:,.� ,••�i:sTs-iS. . �..n' 3•r' �• ..,e �3. ,z" 4 .. : a.. .> .xYtx.F. , ,f- n . . - :F^7i ':C" ! :''r•'7.`_ ,s 's,4-. e$;�SiL:a_.iy '`S: �.x=:r'Tr T, •�k¢ ,s;3i^rx-••w, !+f,. v-R Trf ..R>>�. •n.:...SAE 'S:.,ha :max• ']F .,}S;p .R,i. -=i Y•:::4 .. *- ,.. Y i3...q..r''Ff'• ,t .;�.?�'r--, lt4•,- ,4 �r'�x"� , .4r*'X j�-'�r 'fi,_ .Tt..<, •z w. ... 'v.'r',. ' P�.`c?[>. +r r x:• Q7' r Y y,p '-¢ .J.,1: xs,,^.,."?t?� ^s 1;.,-w...:i3;,"a•� -, t',.. •.,•(, �-��-..-�-' J,-iit,*y +. "t :G`- h+ �{:;•; `' „-t�., t•;}:, ,Y.rs�,>a. �?_ •3:r..99a�. 'h.,.-yJ'b�y� (!r rG'T11V„u•na:-�� '��1a:,'sX..g. /a •'!- v>, `M'!t w„ <,•%' r.T. S".'R5 �'r,y}".". Ll:;,i pY-,,J�`3^, ss:a. ..I a h• -./ X,oC/r -'s: s'i ',�,:?•-iii _ 't':,�: -' 1:�,,.,;'. , ✓,� tI'sP an- `a't-�r. vY.,,-. ij, .b,.r�.`- - •e,�-,', �.:o' U,,... -2. } .5�, �1:.V"=a'{'.%,"..•...£-:. a^ :r2 ux..,. 6- � .�......t•?+ •'-f: r.w.a:-,`,,.'H�•.��'�- ' ^pv�'•�s;-. a .e2'�- �b,. :st.•y..";..,:,.,,, .U"� 1. - -era ';-.:r"� ..1,;�.: ,.� (r.' .,!. .`'# tt� :}�t ,�9,,., �.. a'rsy';1':�' '�s=,"•.i'$�'"�::`<;' , 1 !r.: t: res;�:,.c±,ar :.t nv, Sj' <.s:•.*,':+�'"-l+'. '3 �''S:y/'F .�,,.��iw-.C`ijiT�:rA r`K('b4f�[,.� 51� ..�t1.:;3 �,.x�. ».:c�1j, °'.;+, .X.':7 L b 1 r<•' �,C'.�'�V, ��.'��. e, f„' .�.4,�' �.'1): :tA3t .x:f •. }i..yFj�,"''y`>"^ �� 'T+''*:1 l tfi!'i•M" �,Yf ([' S1T lxh.-,4�y ,f.,'3i,' �fY�r.:{at:':Yv ,l [, •Y � ,.yiJ ,,.-f'� Y.,r .F.,'-+-c .'•a,1'-'..�-lr:.-rl?=�r�?vr ':''r, ..+r. - ;a2 i-r35 :'e,"'L<: .. =li1%'rz}`<,.' .-b -++4 �3" -s': ,�..3ar-v>i•-'xj}y ",�,.'Gz�•'; "?"!,>F r A;,i> .moi:-:1 n> : rx ts.:r. .. y d-'-i i3: .Oa .a e.. s .�[,,� f .':r-. .f_�. - f '� 1.f --i.F "(Y-•s .e ':. .A f E..,.]'V :,:�L ? .-..5� C`M ,N, 5� -�h'<,- W. �• �r L�,P' ... <:f. •-•�: � :,yts:y,; t�'osiv Rf6'� z,. r k. x;� �=•" ,:R,k:+3.�tr.�.. .r� nF,:'. ,r Krt.- •e ti c. '� `x:54 :s; o-SXk :+. ";K£•' .t _c�:,, ..x `,�tG;° �'t�l .':.tr 'z':'�rt<:,,:14f%�-'J::z;F•,. »,s""`-";.r::.zw_• _ _.:�r>~k _,•.�,al, •';fie_ FF ' �` � ,)'ice':.-' T..r '�,;-`_r9''M1": .er;�-.e:z;L" ',ry:"'t:: d...� ,ac:�' P ^/ :n 15� y 3=�:. i?t:t'° .rR�:• :::�-- s,'w �F' 7s, Y' T-:x. .. ,,5.. _ >!`:,x.: r�.•:`2, :ni:- .;l :�.',3r'" ��� t`5,,,:.'` .:t��•• n`..y<,..}r £� r`�,>r .,?.r,ff•'' .. - ... ;.: ,. t'-�..d + �;+4, - > .._'#�.> "'!7 -',:.ata: .� :- .t':-v- -�r>: 'y.6•>3�•`�:�; - ..vv` -m1!`"i.!• ,z x. :�' ,�!�-., ._,;,, „o,iu.,:.rts-'.;�i.::r,:'' .r �.;,r=t ar. �.r 3;�'�':.•� rpm _ _ .. • ks*'.',�n:i'.q_s�[if-::?...f:>-�rL-�,f��"7�,�<J*,(,D. �*r�;.,�t4�e-�9y5'f".'r�.a r'i,.fi-f�:�e:};;,5.ev'.�,.:rv5+'.�S.yS.Y.r-,a4�Y``r=�Fv i'-:-`.'.:tS'-Y'-=L,~,,`e,✓,..`,`:.t`-.&..g,#S.1+.r[+4y3`,•."r..",,.!�r,,..:-,r'a-.-.,...,nr,Sr'Sr'z•..cF...Y.$.-;P.°�c.;''x;-.',i•,:'t.�:T,ttr.'r..r.-.�:',:,`Y�'r.,"4.,'¢,a:,'r•e,",t._s�,:>:,r`{!k,Ti`�r.•><,L-'.1L�rS•r'�.e-.,,�,L'y.s...,KY;,�r-ra7�"r`•«'.•a�.-,>'k'r.,.3 s;'1rY::-',�..5tJ.�:,•,",r.,`..'+i+�'..1-,C.::G��?-^,,r":':,F,�=.'a.J,'.>'.l,,.+>Jr'tr''�yd'•; 'r._r:,,��'''a.,�.f�'X:�L,<.£:,"L&,,:G F.'.,.�.'-^.-h:Ff Y$''2i->';SX..'T"t„.'r.n$..a!.=.,`7.:�..C��r'.f,.t_`...s..,f.,r�.;.'i:....'.�-.�Y,,:rrY-.3 fd.[^'.,!;a.c,,7iFi'.>�`r,,:..�+�'.',4ic.,�•t,'_,.a.;,N�.i.i:lt5.'nx,,`r,-"`uu,.t�S�'�'..'''e�:W.•.W,4.'.A y.N+..:',y'ht.'`..',r'£"Y�',s.jFL..-.^rs.Wa..r.,...�,,4.n1.•b`�'o._'8.;.-,h•i?t.f,..-s'�'>...,:Tcx<i?,¢S„t-��'�,'•:rf.m:�'=...t,sN.1t_�,`tFe,_',.rms=,'-•x..1 b=l>M5�r-austa1'i-,"l; �:".'.g , y d 0 101 rsT= f+w „ . F•.!:f�s n'.r,.!:a-r...kv'_,�,..Y-.x,:..y•:"",am•.>,'.e,+:.s:<:.�,.y-#>h•'.-:�[r_'°"n,'.a.y'-,.'.rt.h;r$r.~: ..-:'S.,a,�r.rr3.c_r-r.�n.`,`.i..,�.�«r••',1rt1%.!i';.r•R.a ;;#.:.fiy.,zr,�'.k''",:�':`,:;�,�5J.�;,.Yr`._r:::rz:x.n'.'iI�':3r4'C,;8':na-�•i.,'�'=�:,.>,,:�zr::+.�3...[r5.i-,h'_''."yybt•:rf.h!�.,'i,.,t,s-.;'.,1c�ix:F,,;!i:`�.z't.'--'",t;,:.,...s,`r.';.�';.v-1-%•Yo1:''..�ad.�.•?;-.<Y^a'.�:,^::�,n-t^;?':+„.'J•�,:a.0;r..-f?'t�aW�•>�-.,.S. is,a,ryc.sy;.'•rL+-s"�c.rt,s..:g�.,.r',f,,,�[=>I;,r.�,"y-.:,•:Sr<..�:3}'2.`$'.'.•y+�,5v�,-=T`,.�.•.E-:,h>;a�',mrs7b^,.r•4.?„~-:_.,4•'<4.y,:..� i-�.3":r.�=F�`x:'t,7e•r:+:s,.h;�:,.;,.: .=•it�z_7.=:.mo?z1u�-1. "_-ov..:,...,x•.R. , + - - rx� � .t�' �.� �r.'yy .Vit" 4...�^ nvv:Y�!"w.,�' ,-�1'•.•.. � `�,J.•-'»d � Y.-.:._>U .;„4. �,F. x ,.- ,.?. r ..7 �. 7s;" '.•s..� t'. -'+'L.q n�•.•;y"', h ar�•., •��rr,, i� ry.;S '4':§•r ?,n <x,>,."�';•:;^•:,��+y�,',':.. - ,. "..r}i%< a _;•Y*. - ..,r�i, j ;'t :•,.',-..,, w:..r' :n J::1:;hhmr:r, +`S K', ->':_ ` x v:S.„ -"�.,R':!,�. .j ,�k.;sy , .. ._r",v ,.:�t�?�:'r•�.c, �'� �s r-ny"'-•,,�•a...7__, [. Y„� _.:Ik ,s,,, � -� ,.,� a",''$,!S:t., = ..-:_Y•, :},,`": � "^x-.-'-¢f'"2c }��3.;^,.2,.re"�t:;r�`^.'•.i--,:n .1 .<> -.hE.r. r 4 4,..-�jy;3`-1:-.,:"�'=.''r%. .=;r .r�. `•� . ,.t. 7":,. -;y �.: .�' �.t" ;h,a: j�G•.."< ,t 3":%�:1,• '� ':',:6`-i,:, •xiE•.ny-• �:ii , �'h r.:'F=, s.0 - `�.:.i •aY'r'�. .s..n. .� �r.rr. .- 5[r+: ..v,r>s :�,, •e �,, ,�. aa,:d., i" .a,. `;�^: `��":. �r '�:x ,r .£,� .. .c •-�,i3'-. :'F. 'pry. �I �.�.�'..a .?t<-. :m, •�. ..:h, G-.'.'ai'k-.. ,er.; •ust. 7l`.ti�'' o 3 .a-' �•'+- :.,'�"•+�'� ,-I:A r~-, ,L;Y.<. :�,tiY .as.'{?-z,. - �t;.c_,,.,, x "i.,�,f,,,: 'C'c. `•Z ''}„'.i;,r-.y,:[ ..,s'k.-',;i..r,::-},. ,?w;a`3?•.., .h, a''•r`r - zf'�": _y,., `1<'. :I ,.e rC,l'• ,'� 1 __ z-'?'a" F .w.� .d-' 7x''s, t.a }� , .�' - C'e� ,e,.T. sfr" :s`'i' t'�h: �= :��>. y Jo, :x z',aL iw t::zr:• � _ ';t <,. r.�, N�r': .Y a, �•''t t N•, ;2•;i':;, ,,.r,>?�., :�7t?., .� �,�iu`.' air. x: i-.. N 44r; ".{-err �.- ^'.3z,. ::�i,.,.. »+ -3 :rySz°'s' .:'z;..>r_.:, '�r,.�s l, i:J7' �i'' 6.,,r ..,,5 "x_ ..SD'�' A.•. ..0.,t+ ,u`r- -)• -1,.`' s z. �' :�:u,•,-.': ya' a ,z. «•:r-, ,i5`~ d+.�,�' ?,.. ..�_ "rr ��:.. •+r �'.'.'./..�Y:n. „rca•c >A%:f %�;s4�:• .',,:.,.. ,. '�' .6•'.,. .ty-� r,.,r:.. „y:>. r ,.y .� �. ,...1,.,•,.�.b - - ':z .',,t" :.?. • e. ;,3.'• .t..r}n. �> :p:.,,:.e. ',i=•.• .:u3..i5:'�.s.so _1 b.a:rtt,. ,,.4' .7... „r.. 7• ,y.:d,. - •>3. - _ha?..�..1t, ',-EEl'�r`•'r" ri.9 .la.. ri �''� �. 'r�'1.;. 2' :,'.�. ��`T.- „�'Lr'i. :;iMy b:a..,:<' - ..;'.:•i' ':"'ti.' P. -a� ,w`T=--' � ,.,a,. v�' '•<.�'. 9'si:'"��n.>,.�.,x'.'' .,eii";:,.. .r„'. %r'9:e'-''riY+�';.+% �:•• N;:4, rG:T.+.'.,.'•;,,;; .�} ,tt2'^�=;a v "�'::;:• "a "tea-aC a t.. .'r- ,� rn^r:z�'.• .t';,.r<y:d,,.,-.,�_ 3-.,k + !„•:`r' ,r,'r•..4 .„a: -.:t,,-,n ' tr':�9>r �'.^, .4' --4 r>Y �•l, t-sa-:, ,,..`.•,' /:•:c-'T >.',T,.: r 'L`.t"i>� - •,,C.:e V ` +.'. '3•� NC"�.a 'r: „� 'z4 tF" =� 5F•trx:,G:r',u. :fr:,;, .,,,t �`d[:+' a g�•;x, ,>3f_ ,u .P o � h a 4'. �=`qas. 1:•,v,. nv :.�..s� .4r p R,�,•� . -N 1- :i rM* q;.t.;.;.i:.c '-r z•^r..w ��t�9Frr, 99 ;,, r:, :.r.,e't„ '�r'F -�'._.: T.<,t`,. '.y,�. ";c;•'n,-,#.-tk, ,. .>�..{,.ff.',r�.:^r.., ..;� ��._.','; ...q'..' `1«� .•;.�'� \ ����•: '%lir..a�y.'z,-sr ,_rYx-r,. .,�.�.n..s'�i d'r. ,`3z.. ..,;�� >,-._ 1.-.•�1,_,.;- :}L ,k•i �. f•-s,+._ •„s.,-t r:S....Y ".•:i� .•:L• .;.. ^`r� aw :S`"- -..x".1•..yr;,.-fir. :E- ",•,J �+." _� C�,•.r iF•L-'.: F r,r. C+ :.1.,, F"h: 'I"n •3is.V.. Now .frw ?1t, .o-;,-x:. .J*.reC)•;,.' •,•'S'r'• - ,:-r.'l�,tY. �• `•:iE ,u. .N_r,.n„�-,',l va..., •'n ,t,}S'�rt% ,tit Ji^.,.. ,;M.,. _ �*�? 5>xr_ ,f r• !� x,.,;�: ..Z' „moi :s'.,, =^.t t;•'".. �-" <:t:a.��?. •+r, --Y�v.' •.,� F. e,.�,, cr' 'if+"F,3%` 'c.', `e 4.a>r z,+"-Y ritW-- ryrt-t;•„•a•.Ti,.,:s+:d: i:�'a.. - :-s :,.. :.-: }t'+..<. ;..-<_ ;:, ,.a,,_._^..•k _,:.H .- -3•'.%.� ��c„ '2" ...",•'.i'�.'19I:..�r'K= :}':�" " x..:..y,.r,:'�a;,:^.%'..,' '�_`•`•f',F'. - -'�'.t:, .,,: ;:r. is '�3 ;.x,d'�i^,. .: ''.�l'" .,5'.:<�'• .t•s..,ln.. =t�-g .',e,� 1�r=--'�.?:.".�',,;,,'4 'b,.#ifl.:. e�: .r. '1^er.. -:tt,r.-,:..d'J ,�.y',': ., �'4 'v7":%F' ;p 't:"..t''-. N••c. G•..- ;it f x;. ` _3"'•u'r- ..� _ ..fir a' _t .,,,:. :-t �r,.rn�'. .�:,� '>�4Sss�, �:,� ..�'�, �' 'S`�...,r•�'i-tt;,�;r`� ,� �rk<.:v •`„�.., .. �+r- .35.*`'.- rte_ •cu:. r.<?'�?{,-+r}::<. .y-1•N.t�T;?3: ,,t&R,,, ,<•.� .1`3.:-., ,^�,.:. �•_•, r-u.. -�..r.,Lr_a:...;,.•:t. "•a :?{!; S 1�- �.f:�' - ++a'1`'�v,. ,:l• '.�'i�?'r. ..,x ,!., `, <[•T.-.,_arr:x ,z+.. I.'::Y. ;n. -.,.>," �7 'J. 'S„;�,' p>: $.,:,.��,. .;t'�.r,.y.. :',.#:,p Sv .:,'?'L:r"..? .a>, r,u..�."C- ,„Yr, -f: J•'2',ka.;:.f, ?,.'`. ..`t.b`T`�' :^J,, .n[`f' .. j,`hv...a'.rK a'R.T.:fr'�rb'.r �< �,.� `•..�,`-`�?-'.1' '¢"1',r tac'' ."�'"'.t' .'�.�', w;H:..3 a tqA'..J'. -} r r' .�: •M',, '1!y .;� fr'S-1;7;< ;�:uhx, '.X.^7',. :.3-- r.-. rt.,, /;-i,rx,i°,,,: ,Secy, a ,1 •X: .�•s.r .''ik 3;:1 Ci u: _ '• r- �:��.. :;.fit-,�'`"' .a� _['�'" �.t''.;._ .r �` ._R':ts;�.�,.r. ,-;:+s.. ��c's.'.�,SYf;w,:,....ti=t' . 4c ��� _�ISY-- ^'i "•r•,a,, '.-'.:- :r.Y,r.,. rru,r.: - .lr�.,,-,_:: 'i�•? ,,..,w•r.--;}�- ,,..o ,a?:-1�;,v ' - -t„ t -�r�.-r_1..",.e q�.{'`-ar' ""$ee as r-�- �z r�- x',•,.. t•. ::'�<^r„y.3. .n,�^',`,.v r,,".;i'.;;tieS' „xa�.�<�!^: s-.. .:i`.�,�v r�....,_.arf,;•,:,. x:;�i5�.�?k>, ..c -�;a� �` r _ s:�'�'>_1r<..., ,rx=.- ,.� "•x '� ,.: v:k< -oz�..,r:�.,.,��a..�. ...��„>..: r,--:_`�:.-,_'� -<rr .'•r, '�' . yY'• i� 5y>s;.- ss, �', c.a.Cr' .,.J'�-• --"�1 ::=W`'. s:< ''�, "-�: �2� rr, r�� '_• •.ag;Ek t„r,<;r;:- _,n,., n„-: , 5:, �. �+• X' .>1��=-� "tr aka �, if'� ,),:w.r. ,?.a:..t< >z, iti?- -.�,'ea '�Y'-.:r:=1."n•"ai>"F•..3 A"5�. '�4 [.'��,,, �hw .;.0 ra�;,rtr,j:'.`:- .�; hr...:'�:.: }r, .�.._ ,<.r:�, ,.+# v� ,S -sem .-y�. J..r'_ ?� ,f •CISi"�%'y� S.'�.' .rr:�'.'KG,'„ "✓•..�",.,-'.s.�r.r,r a� °':Ja•'@ i7• .L .N..ni I ,�- i5^'`�1�p•�� "*-.'C �" �lr<,•...'.^ ♦f A6, . ^!-.�4__ ,Jto;i:b:";r�:N•r ^-q ',+,+1.. .v,...:Y,«!o-E'.rliti:',YC :.^>`+`'b nn•::v�?�=(?:- a'i� �h .,',x G u:Y,.Y "li'r v"„fi',# ;,w.;,7. ..,lr,. 1•w - i..i,'#'r�. t;,'^:.3. y' .,,r �``Y>-` `+L�r:.'`' - ^.^:s"' =t�'�' o d ,t��-. '1�k#.•,,sv��,tc�:.,:i'::� .fir�':t; $�i� C vt' a' -� i^7`r-A. .:� •_i*�., r-Te>'r.»t rr-s.. �,i,_ • „'� . -:s•e t-' `ex vim}'- ',r ,3_ ...4�y, r ' r.ca-�-: lf;--: c;- .`�.,« ;7,x.. �:� h, ;.�.-N:`i`�,-., x '* � - ..3: 3 � _ y>. <: ,.� xrdr., e- aid ",r s• s,. :'��;.YS? �;r., r.F"f cv;^-!,Y:,w,. ,�3-';r:.;a Jnr. ,..JK.,•f'A""•: a=:s(-e`.-. .. d-. •'`'r' iifh .r•3T .K.,. ,.•,h- ,..�/, �.€'t.- r. 4. -�,' .s+�J..:.GF>._...t ..•t'`u-�.'_;,�+{'�>,.,�t.,-tr'dr:"•� c•„>> r- zsxY _:Y•�, l T� p'Ei ''*1= �ir'" 'v: ..::��,. 'Y-�.,, ,'^,'<S. ,:Y,.:j i'i':ttM.x�< ..., ,_r , k- x'✓.du7:rt.< '..rr>, ,;�'�� _�S - r':�`,�'.�;'1',.e*�iy..,.. •4: ds.,... >.RC,�: to:. �I,�J:' ::f '' r: :. �,,... T':;r �:ba a. ^v,_s.S.v'. ,1."•,ax,; ..'i'` r't ,ra, �- °.`ice:Cr�e•^y� v,}"r` �SY' rik•>., T.Y •RaT.,d 't- a ,G':�ti ,.ikr:� wh �iF,''".:-. � . ., %'�:a�T-" _ a x' �.:.rr�`5t MOM?i'.'` ' ",trt :r:YE ��T�-•l,.•r• .r,,; r. _.tc,..i t..,• �� ".4 ,,c��E^ii'�, ,�a,-��_ +� :=i'3.., v, i--. ,,,,..y.t�,r �Yt'a.'sY•'. .T '.ez, -�+_4,rb3.,..br_t'N_^s-^ ��i; /�� .ur_s':'7:'•u f,.:j�? mn:..t,.}.,,..,.,- ry,-' .1.,._..F.wx:i�.~. �"'";?t. •zi i- F+; :irr' r.:r�, ': w,,.,, .i' .• f .-.3'r-:, � ,?`t,a Y{t.J,t;�':>V�`� rc.� A,. ;.<•:4's,.,.xi';.:>r.'-•�' _ -^,Stt,>r,e'\,.' '" }: ,F"x'• a `1,.,•xL y,3�*-ti t.r=.rd' z + rQ -�:SaT>`u.^-e 2: ' ',}`i F`�itl,,.,",w_ .r:r:? .r• �3�:- 'X-cxt'+•�" ..;4-;�.:a�3F.�S' �!f�r p � i�:r;;. e•, :-E:.: rn' r--s=: r•F .3f'' .rr, .�.:. -«'['�� �•C� ,t�a:�' ;-,i,,-.ims:r; .�r'�,.K�. ..� -- -- .:�r�iF?`_. `�,z.r..[: eil�-,5.r'1q..d'•:i^,. .T 4;.-. ':T. - .U. .b' -,L-�. �°:T,T� .A' �_ ,,W ,7 "'+'t?°, _:�'<i�a.5`-s-s� 'id fit� �5>`•rs�''._' •a�ss�,yy��c�:` r<€ire -„S. i ,- .'•.- '::`>., J h:. . - �'r....w ,$-r-.. :ts :u,"--`-5i4%-_ ,�.�t.,r''6. .+L', .. , _• .. � %it�zx,•.�':i}IW_�yjI,',.,�z...'iz.;'..,yar.3,.,`.r•n,:;.:�s,rl.•."F.•i"F<d:.e;v,3'.5-:5t':5.:Fv:-yy;r..'t�rr::';..�i.i:'a"r.,,,'=+'2r-f-c'.fi..+r3,a`h>,r:T.:x£T�...'.r'°,tf'<:2'.,,.ry•'��:::•^<l>'•�`.S;..�_.>q,ia,.W;-.cS.�:,:ri,rm�_a'..�t'," TF=J,,bL',:��,i,r,_,a.$'t,t-F•�tki,'.:r,F S,y'n:..'iir�',.vy�%.,,,:::,�::3��.u31'�.�,'..;39r3.5 Ls.yvi:..7.:+>,"�..•.a,}'r�1-'-''G"S.-r.,}r.4l.t._:?,:r:'9.�V�_•<�4,;("c�.;A.-•rx,mJ.-�rl,1if-'.u�>'✓r>.(='•".'`rt:.tYi-"�rk,:�i.v.',A-•�v!-.cN,,,i.A.'4r.'4+5S3''.'.'£a�!�'.;r1..r xi�•G,•,e•�,iar':[t%.•,.'�-f'p.riir`i.�rK:¢.".:,r..1..¢�Md._::n:L.:r�.'--c&,>�'s'w..Y>,<pxy�..h1y,.t.r.'.,,,,.F<.ale�'•nn,n':4r r:';�Mt..,.tis;�:x=��t`,7LJ�•:.7<x\}.e-•,'k1�r.�ti„.:.l+R1 i.�i"=.,t.+,-,^..:,.>-s'"..;f`J�v�--+./.'/s/9a.,�id,":`#u,=`f".'„�Y'.<%`�#w`v'+r`„''4k."d.,,.;6.na-,.��'.T:,`.&:;+va-,?--t'^'E��a��_+"i<<�_h`-z:s:�_tmair.1�^+c',';.r;.,`?.�w�'<^'k%',"•Ee.•<hs`c,-�'.E}'w;.r.»•Y.,�.-".,;t�,,r'..?^'t..Lat,.?9ab.ra'�?�r•L`rf,..2.,.u,.:.?r,a'-�.'.3SV1'�f,--.a,>,%:-_,>.�'[::'rFIr.-.'>-7l`Z''}.1��_»r�'�..n:'.!''..[,.,-�tr::r•>-..KF.,..�C.{,.),.n'.;T:'x;�.:`r.._r:-'.):c_,Ri,".'?u,'iEz <;.n,yTr'o5r:=�;'Yc-sa`,';�:r:s<�;cw•xF�rF:.,.-��r.,•.;.r'_�•G3J°t-yw."<;.'r1Jlr,J,:'+-,.l,-:.,,;;t,i.$i.'A•(>.:>�<'3:_.?.:-R*�t't"�...)£`>./-''�''.,,"'.',eYr,�r'tFh"•'cx;"J+,`:'"'`y.„tr�-'r^'n-i-YFiN,:3' R,"+e"..r. •a�r1 .W � ��l{a .x�.l.z,.rr'.•�...l..- � ? ,- $.� +,: .f�;�„>,>;;rt;, rs -•' �'�. "':�1.'.�.; �;x:n,, , ,k t;,r,:.�t r, ^:'�-,..•y, ,.w1r.3a r:+t dr',}. ,.�; 'CT• �fr...i' - `d(:ri.�,i jek.�..7 ';4 ✓'• --'�<"Mr ��v ...r. ;, +'�"^.., � - ;Tu3' ':W.^' -�-. ::H-�4g;o'^ rR:n- �'u.�s.:.Fp,%-;Y �`,. f1?„inr, '.a4ta`. -'•,... - Pit+" �. -E '3,.d' � ,i,',.,"'. ''• , - �(�. ay.. �,:?, .y,g�s�,.�yn�'eF••".�;r.,�i-:B`:'yi. �a>;�,ts�•�.'.',3 c .;�r�iur'':?','>. .,sr :'.fir. _ ;;•+s��'1:.� ss,?t..� ,,S _. - ='•'fyb �s .a=C, s s`i• � P.G:;r. .'�,zr;("�,- `{y�:r -. .'�"" ,•se. -x�al,. "�z3.,,�y'4=;,.w:1,`., ..F,'x'--"'`!^ra{....�: .i., f f"s 3�- ,;:�!'ti. .. , ;�. -F:,L., C�, :ax..,,i,.p-Tr'1 .,£r, ,j?,".�'r,-. .k'S„�i;`."s' ^.ter �m ra '.+r h-Wr•'±zv.a,;�--:.��a:y,.. j�;`�` ''�S'`:. AiY..yrA `�� ':r`.'ti: s,Y. ?` J c.'.a f.:�Y-7,,.Ii:...�, tT�'+' >r v.,N::firs.z:' ,��•.'r." Cr ^.1<r,: y?#:'i> �?�''. 4,.... 4.r,..i �.i.,) ary''{ ) .J,•:r�5> ,:L'Ea '�c>'''.,')i`a1X ��r.. ♦,Y ?' -#:H'T h;IJ�'%:i':.!v,+,Y.- 4 - -,:r ',� .. ''�u��},y c-� ..ar�.- ..«fix,,,>•'rs.3s.-±/�- 4,�y:'�c.'1, k�.`t,�:y3o-", -SM .sl;. � '-•.,s .t}'S.,:�%Ht:,, .� y<:t �r1r.- y •3�y �v --r� -�,,.c ":,,, :;y::,- - A+ i,:. • �4:4•+i:r _ r.?��'�vj-• },1' :;L 'r.;�^1lLe-F ..�IFwo j, �.."Sa'� t�i32.-;- _ W�-t'. �7''y,f.'al L ,.F�x. .� ..r, '•��Y.�''G' .! �•••�._ftgv r� �+•' ':?+�',"�._'c e7 a'S''�' �::.. .,t: d'. �.> y- dC``-,�-' <5c,-[S'�. t. -> a: •r,:,.t ..s.: ',.�Y '"'t'',,.r..^i.•,.,. .r,.,2` _.�.�' -,�_ ?T-...t ttgsr"'-:l•, ur w, ,.nsr.. -:a'6S t=-• �-:X�= +�, ;fd *„u'.>,',v,':Y>-.,:•,.u: a° is�'. .'r•�..�4' ..1�x, L ..a' .,�,,.,L•-s;",:�:.r,aa+>i-iYa; •KrsL-?a+ vr' ::I'.. +-az+`•l'ztp2.�-c?�'r-,:.SB�.::.£.x�..;C�C'��y:'• -t�,�?[�s:,��•'k. �'•',.:,,,tr_`•'= �7,Sf-x._. -`>"v'd�� '���`•• ,�"t1:.� �sx'4�.tt.'."t5 .:.;,fi.F `�.-,_.ti'��9;�_..,r.,,,..-.s.ra,-F_.>-'7 � _ .. . ., �Y ..'S. R:H.F',�r.',. ,yv;Srei}`w:,ar:S�•s:.�Y:f�;6,,,'S-...`'"`...,� n�.,. - .�,z:.=-,+-•".��>,'�.'.�r.•_ :sY._,,.. c,,,n:':k:. z. Rv,-..� 0 ml 0.2 0.4 0,6 0.8. 1 Copyright O 1988.2001 Microsoft Carp.and/or Its suppllam.All fights r'eseived: http:/hwvw.mlcrosoftcom/streets All rights reserved.O 2000 Navlgatlon Technologies.All rights O Copyright 2000 by Geographic Data Technology,Inc: reserved.This data Includes information taken 4h permission from Canadian authorltles O Her Majesty the.Queen In Right of.Canada.0 Copyright 2000 by Compusearch Micromarketlng Date and Systems Ltd.. PT. SEC. 22 9 23 T 19 N, R. 4 E. M. D- 8. 8 M. JN . . 4 T3PP 1 J °E _,A EIO.QQ 4!Z 'C7}' �� I2 I - ___ - fpl_ U 1%400' I ulOAC ° f0 "64RAC ( ' P01 P6 ® M " 8 AC I � �� • r/was•ao � I POW 46-30 /d Ps 4JOAC. --R .• • I•e ldb a N cry 4242*0SH E IM-4-54.4 _ _ _ r_ 1141 �O�N� COPVN ACRES A1• Aeoa.0 a a h I leen N PHA E / coral-AC N E aoR PCL w� 1 Qa 1> dulAf 1 MORA L2B �.6 _- 4pP B fA pNl I S9 PM•9Al9 �. L SNI '1W�e�w a yV.R i r- 76- B/ 60 62 I Pry V L.-- J na aooac 0 80 a .e7 ® O ►\ea OOMILL ACRES • a,aA. ap to y sl/BO/V/S/ON �� 47 Pw73-49iCY ACRES SU HI 43 4P N Jg Assessors Map No. County of Butte,Calif. REVISED: 2-e9' Zoned A-R(Agricultural Residential, 6,500 sq. ft. parcels when connected to public sewer and water) Low Density Residential General Plan Designation In Oroville Urban Area In City of Oroville Sphere of Influence Not in FEMA flood zone Not in Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Negative for California Natural Diversity Data Base Not in deer herd area No CLCA on property or on surrounding parcels / No surrounding p lm parcels zoned for agricultural uses or have a General Plan land use designation of OFC or GOL Not in an airport compatibility zone ell- Very i V y H gh fire hazard area; in SRA High soil erosion potential Blue oak woodland/Montane hardwood vegetation habitats. Oak tree mitigations. Setbacks from creeks. Secondary access will be needed. NEEDED Archaeology survey Botanicalibiological surveys i VJ o S V ZJWI 7/�Qj Y1D 1 9 S07 s-ar5 0 Xjllfp�- tvbt?)o 10 /I j-a -?I- , U b/1�r U O � ?VW JA V ( bM t _ W?-) D u lb � Q u� o savuof-� rS-�vV101 1 �- O J b7ph, V ! O V I S'b7D Qi-- 6v I i J�- -b.3 0 VID I—Ss bC�1—U av�A� J �V06 i - - -- -----14 { BUTTE COUNTY JUL 19 2n04 June 1, 2004 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I write this letter both as a member of the Ophir Neighborhood Association for Quality Development, and as an immediate representative of my own family. My husband and I purchased our home on Melrose Avenue in Oroville, California approximately 1 V2 years ago. We evaluated the neighborhood as quiet, with relatively low traffic, low crime rate, and surrounding upscale housing developments. We invested our life savings in the property, which includes current, extensive remodeling, and have been very pleased with our investment and the local realty value. That being said, we are appalled by, and adamantly opposed to, the Rancheria Housing project. This project proposes to plunk a 60 unit low income, modular housing development right in the middle of our existing, high end housing development community. Our community members have no intention of watching our hard earned investment devalued, as we know it will be should this project be implemented as planned. This project has been weakly advertised as a community boon for a select group of disadvantaged individuals. Yet, how can the rights of the existing community members become readily sacrificed, or on any scale to be considered any less valuable? Simply put, this issue has nothing to do with denying the disadvantaged, and it has nothing to do with ethnicity. The bottom line is simply that this project will inevitably increase traffic, illegal activity, and sharply decrease the value of surrounding realty and these are all of the factors we chose to carefully avoid when selecting our present location in the first place. Personally, I have worked as a county employee for the past 15 years, 2 years of service within the county welfare department, and the remainder in a law enforcement capacity. I have worked long and hard to serve my local community and the majority of that clientele has undeniable fallen within the low-income bracket. Therefore, I can honestly'say that I am not an elitist, I am simply realistic in regards to how this project will severely and negatively impact our existing community setting. Some would have you believe that this project would positively develop the area by virtue of implementing such things as a fire department and a recreational area... Do not be mislead! One has only to look at the local "South Side" area as an example of low income housing inclusive of a recreational area and a local fire department. The park does not offer a safe family/community environment. Instead, it is better known as a hub of illicit activity, including extensive ongoing drug dealing. In fact, the play ground itself is often riddled with discarded needles of drug users. In regards to the fire station, how does the Rancheria propose it will be manned? t 1 • t Volunteer staff, paid staff? And who will assure how it remains manned? A prime example again can be seen in the fire department that covers South Side. Once manned by many personnel. They currently pay staff a mere $6.75 per hour. No one mans the station after 5pm or on weekends, and they often operate with only one individual on duty, causing extreme safety issues to the fire department personnel and the community they are attempting to serve. I know all to well that this is true as my very own brother works there to provide what services he can to the local community. All the while knowing their future is bleak with inevitable cut backs that may someday soon, force the complete closure the station. While establishing a fire department sounds great in theory, it obviously can be tossed aside as nothing less than a community token. Once again using South Side as a familiar, nearby example, the surrounding area is wrought with domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, drug sales, property crimes, unsightly yard cars, garbage, and dilapidated housing just to name a few issues. One has only to drive through the neighborhood to realize that the local fire department and recreational area has had no magical effect on staving off the decline of that particular area. Assuredly, this community transformation did not occur overnight. But the message is clear, the decline is inevitable. What about law enforcement in the Rancheria housing project? How effectively will that be operated as well? How will it impact our already strained, local law enforcement resources? Clearly, we are overwhelmed with concerns that cannot be alleviated. Some may attempt to justify the Rancheria project by suggesting that a specialized code enforcement department would maintain responsibility over the housing development, thus insuring on-going maintenance and a quality environment. This is simply an unrealistic pipe dream. With low-income housing, we have all witnessed significant deterioration over time. This is the expectation, not the exception to the rule. Avery similar example of this can be seen in the local housing project near the recent Gold Country casino development. You don't have far to go to witness unkempt shacks, shanties, and home made room additions in the form of lean-tos. Where is their standard of community development? Would you choose to live in such a neighborhood if given the opportunity? If not, I then ask that you not stand idly by while my family and my neighbor's families are forced to do the same. As we know, our own county government has a code enforcement department staffed by individuals who work hard at maintaining the community. Yet, we can see that it appears to be a losing battle. Having worked in this community in a law enforcement capacity, I have witnessed many areas that are dilapidated beyond repair, full of yard cars, drop cords dangerously supplying power to illegally occupied camp trailers, drug labs,... Even after code enforcement action ' J has been taken, it generally does not take very long on the average before the property has been returned to its previous state of disrepair. It is unrealistic to believe that the Rancheria will have better success and higher standards of care (again I reference the Gold Country casino housing development as an existing example). Further, the Rancheria can easily make a multitude of promises in order to achieve their ultimate goals. But, who will actually hold them accountable for keeping their promises? An already overworked, overwhelmed, local government system that cannot even effectively maintain their own community projects? In addition, the issue of jurisdiction comes into play. Ultimately, what real teeth could we expect our already overburdened local government to maintain regarding enforcement of code violations in regards to Indian Tribal Council property for i which they maintain no jurisdiction? Even if promises are made, reality will surely I prevail, and the concerns expressed today, will rapidly and most certainly become a moot point. I for one, do not intend to be lost in that shuffle. This project will also dramatically increase the flow of traffic and over exasperate an existing burden. Regardless of their proposals, we remain opposed. It is our desire to maintain the quiet, non-congested neighborhood in which we currently reside. It is also our desire to maintain a secure, safe neighborhood. Our area is already impacted enough by virtue of it's close proximately to the casino. As it is, we often witness vehicles that are not recognized as being familiar to the neighborhood, drive through as a shortcut to the casino, and I am unsettled by it. Law enforcement personnel are well aware that a strong criminal element has historically remained attracted to casino grounds, and associated property crimes are a commonly reported occurrence. It is not a difficult stretch of the imagination to realize that related traffic invites an enhanced opportunity for those with a propensity for criminal behavior to victimize the neighborhood. Drastically increase that traffic, and expect to simultaneously increase this risk as well! This project is simply a wolf in sheep's clothing. The eventual expectation is that within a minimal ten year period, the development project might readily become the site of a new gaming casino. No jurisdictional leverage will exist over the Indian Rancheria project.to stop it. How can anyone justify even taking that chance, fully knowing that this land site is located smack in the middle of a quiet, rural neighborhood and worse yet that it is planned to be placed in the immediate vicinity of the community school! The welfare and safety of our children alone should supercede even the idea that such'a development will be tolerated. We stand together on this issue in the hundreds, and we ask that our voices be heard. As the existing community members, the coalition of the Ophir Neighborhood Association for Quality Development, we do not expect you to deny us in our fight to reasonably maintain our current community standards and safety. Thus, we entreat you to aid us in our cause to defeat the Enterprise Rancheria's housing project proposal. Please understand the urgency of our request, time is certainly of the essence as the property is currently in escrow. Thank you in advance for your much needed assistance. We welcome your thoughts, expertise, added insight, community project efforts, or whatever you can commitment to the furtherance of our cause. Your prompt response is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Connie Vasquez 80 Melrose Avenue Oroville, CA. 95965 Victor Vasquez 80 Melrose Avenue Oroville, CA, 95965 CO� Stephen BettsJul ' 9 June 1, 2004 Butte County Senior Planner 2n04 7 County Center Drive DEVELOPMENT Oroville, CA 95965 SERVICES Dear Mr. Betts: My wife and I live on Melrose Drive in the Copley Acres subdivision in Oroville. As homeowners adjacent to the 63-acre property (APN 036-540-010), now in escrow by the Enterprise Rancheria, we are extremely concerned and are in strong opposition to this acquisition. Our neighbors and we are united in our belief that the proposed low-income residential housing project is inappropriate for the residential development in our area and may well create serious increased traffic congestion and crime problems for the adjacent elementary school, as well as the established local residents. We are anxious that once the property is in trust, the development won't be required to meet otherwise mandated state and local development requirements. Once designated as a federal Indian land trust, the extensive development will not pay any taxes and therefore will result in negative impacts upon the community due to the associated increased infrastructure requirements including but not limited to police, fire/ambulance, roads, schools, and other county services to be born financially by the Butte County taxpayers. We will bear the cost, but have no jurisdiction. Of further concern is the likelihood that the proposed project is in reality an organized attempt to build another casino in Oroville. We already have two casinos and certainly won't benefit from a third. It's a fact that the Enterprise Rancheria is already actively pursuing the building of a casino in Yuba County. For our relatively small Oroville community the long-range future impacts of so much local gambling activity, and all the inevitable inherently related problems, may well prove to be devastating. If this acquisition is allowed to proceed, once in trust, the project will be unstoppable and the negative impacts cumulative and irreversible. My wife and I feel that we speak for all the long-term residents of Oroville and Butte County in proclaiming our strong opposition to this project and this acquisition of the 63-acre parcel by the Enterprise Rancheria. We respectfully request that this land acquisition be stopped, before it's too late. We thank you for your time and assistance in this matter. Please don't hesitate to contact us should you have and questions or would like to speak with either of us. Sincerely, Mr. '&Mrs.`David Masse 105.Melrose'Drive, Oroville (530) 533-5012 cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henro Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff/Butte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk/TNT Realty. ' BUTT11�T1r�LJ COUNTY June 3, 2004 JUL 19 2004 Stephen Betts DEVELOPSERVICESNT Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We live in Copley Acres and it has come to our attention that a 63 acre parcel of land close to us is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria. We are very upset and strongly oppose this development. We understand that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust,where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. We also hear that the Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. Another concem we have, the property is very close to a grade school and if and when a Casino may become a reality on that property we would be strongly opposed to that situation. We ask that you not approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Sin rely, arum �g Jack and Marie Bottom 127 Hart Lane Oroville, CA 95966 533-6030 Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, We QWP/South Fejther Water&Power, Henri Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff/ButteCounty Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty BUTTE COUNTY JUL 19 2004 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 3, 2004 Mr Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are residents living near the 63 acre propety (APN 036-540-010) that is in escrow with The Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County. We are strongly opposed to this land ac uisiton and P tY 9 Y Plm q believe it is in direct conflict with the residentail development in the area. Our understanding is that the Rancheria will put this property in trust and thus will not be subjected to local and state requirements. We are afraid that this property will turn into another casino. We currently have 2 Indian casinos in the Oroville area and question why we need another one. We personally have been burglarized since the Gold Country Casino was opened and when we made a report to the Butte County Sheriff, we were told that these casinos attract criminals. This is a quiet residential area and we love living here because of that. The Oroville area has been enjoying some new development that is consistent with what is already here. Directly in front of our property lies the Ophir School. With the Enterprise Rancheria planning to develop land so close, we are concerned with the increased traffic. Also, the roads they are considering for access are currently narrow and not accommodating to heavy traffic. Please consider what you may be able to do to stop this acquisition so that this neighborhood may continue to develop as a middle class residential area. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, &&Kr&x'"e Martha Buxton and Gordon Wright 74 Gopher Road Oroville, CA 95966 Marbud@cncnet.com cc: Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Ann Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Supervisor Bob Beeler, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle,Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, South Feather Water &Power, Butte County Fire Dept, Butte county Sheriff, Stand Up for California - Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty . •;.�r _.y.. Y +.'ti . . ,. . l �f� i,,•- .,:,� �i.. �t G =:'v ,- F i.L es+ lh�.. i` •J f 1 � rl' r � . .�N .S .l ,. ,i'?. 1 .... ,' .�lr..i�;'. � •�S t i�.i. ... J r i, . r t ... 'yi°.. ,�, ,. _•f'• i _..� ��... �< ''i.'. -'..i i. .1 a `i., .:�" _ .. �.t Ct •1 �' J f�l� .. .. 's 1- ...+ i.tT �+ ,. Vit,. ,y •" .., r :'y :f ..f r1��, tfi „� t, �t ,ti t• :+ �.} �� 1_±• .. ... (� r'. r'. e�. �l•a �� r.' :�". µF.,• r;., f .!.l1:;'kjr� i.-.r . ,.,(`,�• y, y t,.e:; moi: .. •.t s .. �,a rt.. . � .-.�... p.',, f;l. l�-,, +S ` ". '� .`{ r,.fi. .dJ t,f��,'( `� ..'S+ :5 ��,T,',t,•�r _. ., tf :"t .rr }- i .. '�. 4 cY'ar�i �a !� rJ♦`, �'.�lTi +i 1( f. .. •t(• til �,� { � t A1'• � r" tom+ li. a A4Y '/W -aV+VWt/P-M�--J� Pill"o ei'.rW -Y;7� W-- -V� '7W7 '7W r(r7 �7tv 4'� a� o ods 9F �Nd�.� �''��✓ ''�?7 � 9 �� "�� �''? -� � SUTAH s suZWaOlaAaa moz 6 1 lnr �V/ = � �1 a 'I 17 0 p a Loqi dF, i fr, ��■ 0, l t oil 11 v ( 1 i AL - ■ f J •amu +� '�'. it lid !� I I t I -- � � 111/11111■ •l!��i � � i ,�• .� ,►' 11 � 11 it � ��j �� ' May 28,2004 BUTTE Stephen Betts COUNTY Butte County Senior Planner JUL 19 24 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 DEVELOPMENTSSERVICES V • S Dear Mr. Betts: We are residents living near the 63-acre property(APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County. We wish to express our strong opposition to this land acquisition. We believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in this area for the following reasons: 1. We have been advised that this property will be put into a trust by the Rancheria and they will not be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a back door attempt to bring in another casino and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2. The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or other County services. 3. The local community will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4. We have been told this Rancheria is under investigation by the FBI. 5. The proposed development is too close to an elementary school. 6. Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Si erely, Glen and ally Miller 225 Fairhill Drive Oroville, CA 95966 530-534-1282 cc: Butte County Supervisors: Bob Beeler,Jane Dolan,Kim Yamaguchi,Mary Anne Houx, Curt Josiassen,Oroville Mercury Register,Butte County Planning Commissioners:Richard Leland,Fernando Marin,Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs,Mike Glaze/South Feather Water&Power, Henry BrachaisButte County Fire Chief,Perry ReniffButte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty. "�. -_i .. � .' r ,r � ^ t�. '' .1.� " �. t ' •r _ -- .. a .( � ( . � .. .i .' '. r. -� t . � t. ,'r �` t � ' *� ' ' �I . � • �i'. h . i + r i Y ► t +• BUTTE COUNTY Linda Perry JUL 19 2004 180 Parson Lane Oroville, CA 95966 DEVELOPMENT (530) 532-1848 SERVICES May 31, 2004 Henri Brachais Butte County Fire Chief 176 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 RE: 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County Dear Mr. Brachais: I purchased my home in what I thought was a stable, SAFE neighborhood. I would like to see it stay that way. As a resident living near this property, I am strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. 1) 1 have been advised the Rancheria will put this property in a trust where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a -backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2) The Rancheria will not play any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or for other Butte* County services. 3) We, as a,local community, would lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4) 1 understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. To me, this is very frightening. 5) The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 6) Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Do you want the additional worry of a totally unsecured area? Thank you for your time and efforts in,doing what your are able to oppose.this acquisition. ; . ` BUTTE COUNTY JUL 19 2004 May 29, 2004 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Ben & Carol Clark 65 Hart Drive Oroville, CA 95966 Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are home owners in Copley Acres and are very concerned about the pending sale of the 63 acre parcel, APN 036-540-010 in Butte County, to the Enterprise Rancheria. We feel this sale would be detrimental and would adversely affect all of the property values in the area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust where they won't be subject to local and state requirements that other developers have to meet. They will not pay taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or for other County services. Once the land is in the trust, we will have no control if they decide to put in another casino which Oroville certainly doesn't need or want, particularly since the property is very near an elementary school. There are other issues of wetlands, access, traffic congestion, etc. that would be adversely affected. By their own application,they are going to build low income housing. Since we have lived in many other areas and have observed how suph housing,deteriorates after.a_Xery_short period of time, we feel that this type of development does not belong on this parcel:,. Thank you for your consideration. Ben S. Clark Carol L. Clark Cc: Bob Beeler, Jane Dolan,Kim Yamaguchi,Mary Anne Houx, Curt Josiassen,Butte Co: Planning Commissioners,Rick Keene,John Doolittle;,Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs, Henri Brachais;Cheryl Schmit-Stand.,Up for California, Tom Turk-TNT Realty J BUTS COUNTY June 2, 2004 JUL 19 2664 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Henri Brachais Butte County Fire Chief 176 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA-95965 Dear Mr. Brachais As residents living near the 63 acre property(APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County—we are strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in this area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust—where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. There are several other reasons that this should not be approved: 1). The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or an, oL ther County services. 2). We as a local community, lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 3). We also understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. 4). The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 5). Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please, help us to retain the same quality of land development and growth standards. Thank you for your time and support. Sind, c�2.. Tom and Veronica Cox 60 Deerwood Drive Oroville, Ca 95966 530-534-3023 �j Tf stn ,1 *� ` r B V i l E COUNTY JUL 19 2004 44 Hart Drive DEVELOPMENT Oroville, California 95966 SERVICES June 2, 2004 Henri Brachais Butte County Fire Chief 176 Nelson Avenue Oroville, California 95965 Dear Mr. Brachais: As residents living near the 63-acre property (APN 036-540-0) in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County, we are opposed to this land acquisition and believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust and will not be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may well be a backdoor attempt to bring in yet another casino and for that reason alone it should be denied. Other concerns we have related to this land acquisition include: ➢ The Rancheria will not pay taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or other Butte County services The local community will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Native American land trust We understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation The proposed development is too close to an elementary school The traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed We urge you not to approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time and effort, Charli Nugent Robert Rucker BUTTE COUNTY JUL 19 2004 DEVELOPMENT Stephen Betts SERVICES June 3, 2004 Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA. 95965 Dear Mr. Betts, . .- ., s;. a �,. t 'e•. ., ;a - .. ..§ ..r-. .. _. ,.,.r +:. i As a resident living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County—we and our neighbor's are STRONGLY opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. We've been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust,where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. We feel that this is a back door attempt to bring in yet another casino to our small town of Oroville, and the possibility of a third casino in our town is distressing. It is our understanding that purchasing property for the"Only Purpose to Build Homes"was use by the Gold Country Casino on Olive Hwy. We now have homes, a casino,bowling alley, and soon to be completed a high rise hotel. This 63 acres must be looked at as NOT just the building of low income homes, but as a REAL possibility that our beautiful neighborhood will have a casino and all the-problems that will occur from one. We have also been told thafthe low income homes will be HUD approved modular structures that will not begin to fit into our neighborhood. Thus,we can expect that with all of the possibilities facing this neighborhood that the value on our homes will devalue immensely. We have also been told that these low income homes will be subject to what the family makes. If the family make more money they will be removed and a new family will come in, thus causing a possible revolving door community. For all the reasons stated we hope that it is denied. There are additional reasons that we object to this 63 acre acquisition to build 30 homes. The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees,police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. We as a local community,will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. We also understand that this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. Another major point is that this Rancheria will be adjacent to Ophir Elementary School where the safety of our children could be at risk due to intense traffic, and congestion. This would flow through out our neighborhood and make our quiet community of homes intolerable. There are also environmental impact issues that still need to be addressed, as well. i i r ! i �(' •' S+, r. " � t' . i . � .r.(+ :YDS .r `ori . ��; jrt. '. if. r,r • 1. •• 1. i. .t i r. '•r' Y r i :Y (-il�r r.r: ,'. r!tl � ri:r:.l• (, .�.. r r r i. r It is our understanding that Supervisor Bob Beeler was invited to attend our first community meeting at Ophir School last Thursday, but we were sorry to see that he did not attend or send someone from his office. We will be having another meeting on Thursday June 10, 2004 at Ophir School at 7:00 pm. It is our hopes that Mr. Beeler and our other official's will find the time to attend on June 10`h concerning these important issues. In closing we STRONGLY request that you do NOT approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, i `�'C►kms ��- �.�,I-la.�� Mike & Kathy Mendenhall 27 Hunter Lane Oroville, CA. 95966 i i Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register,Butte Country Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressmen John Doolittle, Wally Herger, Doug Ose, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze-South Feather Water&Power, Henri BrachaisButte County Fire Chief, Perry ReniffButte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk/TNT Realty. I APR-28-2004 13:40 CALTRANS D3 PLANNING 530 741 5346 P.02/03 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 3 703 6 STREET P.O.BOX 911 MARYSVLLL,E,CA 95901-0911 Flexyourpuwer! PHONE'(530)741-4025 Be energy efficient! FAX (530)741-5346 TTY (530)741-4509 April 28,2004 04BLTTU013 03-BUT-162,P.M.20.490 TSM Pre-Development Review Application Mr. Stephen Betts Butte County Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Orovi l le,CA 95965-3397 Dear Mr. Betts: Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the pre-development application submitted by the Enterprise Rancheria to divide a 63.3-acre parcel located west of Oakvale Avenue, and south of State Route (SR) 162 and the City of Oroville into thirty-two single-family residential lots and three 15.9-acre parcels. Our comments on the application are as follows: • The development of the single-family residential lots should not cause adverse significant traffic impacts along SR 162 and at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. • Development of the three 15.9-acre lots in conjunction with the residential lots and additional projects being proposed in the area may cause a cumulative traffic impact to the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. We recommend that if a formal project is submitted, the environmental document prepared for the project address this potential cumulative traffic impact and include mitigation measures. • Lengthening the SR 162 eastbound right turn lane to Oakvale Avenue or by installing a traffic signal at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection will reduce this potential cumulative impact to a Less than Significant level. We suggest that if a formal project is submitted, the County require payment of traffic mitigation fees to help pay for the "fair share" costs of these future SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection improvements. e At this time, it is unknown if the related housing facilities such as the proposed park, cultural center, housing administration office building, maintenance center,fire station, storage units, and recreation facilities will be developed only for use by residents of the subdivision or for public use. The use of the related facilities will alter future traffic volumes in the area; therefore,the use should be clarified in any formal application. U "Calfsm improver mobility acroxx California" D . l APR 2 8 2004 BUTTE COUNTY APR-28-2004 13:40 CALTRANS D3 PLANNING 530 741 5346 P.03iO3 Mr. Stephen Bens April 28,2004 Page 2 • If it is anticipated that the proposed land use on the 15.9-acre parcels may change in the future from Low Density Residential to a more intensive land use,then a traffic impact study may be needed that analyzes the intersection of SR 162 and Oakvale Avenue. Please send us a copy of the formal application for review when available. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Rick Helman, Local DevelopmentfInter- Governmental Review Coordinator, at(530)634-7612. Sincerely, BRUCE DE TERRA,CHIEF Office of Regional and Transit Planning "Caltrayu Improves mabiliry arross California" TOTAL P.03 0�O T rF 0 Butte County Department ofDevelopment Services 0 o Tim Snellings, Director www.buttecounty.net/dds 0 0 o - .__ -. 0 7 County Center Drive o o Oroville,CA 95965- c�U N'�y (530)538-7601 Telephone (530)538-7785 Facsimile ~ ADMINISTRATION*BUILDING* PLANNING FACSIMILE COVER SHEET DATE: December 16, 2005 TO: Elizabeth McGie FROM: " Sherry L. Viernes, Development Services SUBJECT: Mary Anne Houx Number of pages (including this cover sheet) 3 Fax Number (530) 538-6891 If you do not receive all of the pages,please call (530) 538-5260 as soon as possible. Special Instructions: Please confirm receipt by return Fax at (530) 538-7785. By: Date Fax Received Time: Comments: Thank you K:\planning\forms\fax cover 07 05 MARY ANNE ROUX SUPERVISOR, THIRD DISTRICT •t0; 'N. %, J `�: 196 MEMORIAL WAY CHICO, CALIFORNIA 95926 •'-�' '• TELEPHONE: (530)891 2800 •'•:,,COON •••• FAX: (530)891-2877 June 7, 2004 Mike and Kathy Mendenhall 27.Hunter Lane Oroville, California 95966 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mendenhall, I am in receipt of your letter regarding the potential acquisition of land near Copley Acres by the Enterprise Rancheria. I have received a number of letters expressing concern about this transaction. I appreciate your concern and this opportunity to address you on this issue. Many have expressed concern about the potential sale of this land and have suggested that I, as a County Supervisor, step in and stop or in some manner, block this sale. A County Supervisor can do many things, but stopping or blocking a sale of property between a willing buyer and a willing seller is not one of them. The current owners of the property have the right to sell that property to whomever.they wish. There have also been a lot of concerns expressed about the potential development of affordable, or low-income; housing on this'property. First let me point out that simple ownership of the property by the Enterprise Rancheria does not mean that this land would be taken into trust nor, even if taken into trust, that a gaming facility could be built on it. The Bureau of Indian Affairs decides whether or not land is taken into trust and for what reason. In order to build a gaming facility, the Rancheria would have to obtain a compact with the State of California and be authorized by the BIA to have a gaming facility on that site. Neither step would or could happen without the opportunity for significant public input. It is my understanding that the Enterprise Rancheria intends to purchase the land, but not put it into trust. They intend to develop the property, but I have not seen any map or other information to describe how they would intend to develop the property. It is important to note, though, that any development .of the property would fall under the Subdivision Map Act of California Statutes and would require environmental review, zoning review, and land use review by Butte County. These reviews would be conducted by the Butte County Development Services Department after a complete application was received from the Rancheria. r The process of project review can take a considerable amount of time, depending upon the complexity of the project. Ultimately, the recommendations of the Development Services Department regarding the project would be heard before the Butte County Planning Commission and, perhaps, the Board of Supervisors. There will be more than ample opportunity for concerned citizens, such as you, to have input into the review process. Legitimate concerns regarding environmental or quality of life impacts will be taken into account by the Development Services staff, and potential mitigation measures specified through conditions placed on the map. During this process, the Rancheria would be treated no differently than any other applicant seeking to develop their property. If.you would like to be advised, as an interested party, regarding review periods and hearing dates on this project, once an application is submitted, you should contact Joe Baker, Planning Manager to have your name and address placed on the Interested Party list. This will ensure that you are contacted at each step of the process. To do so, you should send a letter to: Joe Baker Planning Manager Butte County Development Services Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, California 95965 Be sure to include the project you are concerned about. Let me close by thank you again for sharing your concerns with me on this issue. I am confident that the interests of our community and the interested of property owners can all be protected.as we move through this process, should the Rancheria apply for a subdivision map. Sincerely, Mary Ann oux County Supervisor District Three Cc: Yvonne Christopher, Director,Development Services 0 Betts, Steve From: sjasco@digitalpath.net Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 12:31 PM To: Betts, Steve Subject: Letter regarding Enterprise Rancheria J BettsPreDevMeetin g.doc(31 KB)... Dear Mr. Betts: Please find attached, a copy of a letter faxed to you today regarding the.Pre-Development Conference for the Enterprise Rancheria scheduled for Thursday, April 29, 2004, at 9:00a.m. Steve Jasco 1 ' Butte County Department of Development Services April 27, 2004 7 County Center drive Oroville, CA 95965 530-538-7601 /530-538-7785 Fax ATTN: STEPHEN BETTS RE: Pre-Development Conference for the Enterprise Rancheria Thursday, April 29, 2004, at 9:OOa.m. Dear Mr. Betts: I am a property owner very close to this proposed development. I am NOT in support of this project. There are a number of reasons why this project should not be allowed. Here are just a few: 1. This is a beautiful and growing,medium to upper income single-family neighborhood. This project does not fit in this location and will cause an immediate stop to future housing development in this area. 2. A project like this does NOT belong close to a school filled with young children. The possibility of the Enterprise Rancheria's ability to obtain sovereignty at some point in the future and then build whatever they choose,IS REASON ENOUGH to deny this type of project in this location. 3. The roads proposed(Crane Ave/Tucker Ave)through the existing neighborhoods are NOT sufficient for a project of this size. And again, should Enterprise Rancheria obtain sovereignty, the ability of Butte County Planning to protect our quiet, upscale living environment in this area,WILL BE LOST FOREVER. If Enterprise Rancheria is truly concerned about their low income elders and homeless Tribal Members, why are they willing to spend so much money on a property and guaranteed legal battle with all of us as a neighborhood who DO NOT WANT THIS PROJECT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. It is my opinion Enterprise Rancheria obviously has a hidden agenda. There are many other properties in Butte County, and other counties, which are better located for this type of project and would be much less money and much quicker to develop. Since Enterprise Rancheria recently tried to buy property in Yuba County to build a casino, it concerns me that now they claim they only want to build 15 —30 houses on a 63-acre parcel. They need to find another parcel,which does not destroy an existing neighborhood. Please advise the applicant that legal council is being pursued to keep this Enterprise Rancheria Project out of our existing neighborhoods. Protecting our children and property values leave us no other alternative. Any questions please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Steve Jasco Property Owner: 270 Oakvale Ave Oroville, CA 530-521-5859 E C [ra =. APR 2 8 2004 BUTTF 0.007 PETITION OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED HOUSING DEVE O • ,"�V-.-ENTERP RANCHERIA The Enterprise Rancheria is requesting permission to move forward with a housing development of which would be located at the west ends of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue, in the east Oroville area identified as APN 036-540-010(see map below). According to the Butte County Department of Development Services"proiect description"the goal is to provide safe,sanitary and affordable housing for tribal members who ars low to medium income. Enterprise Rancheria proposes to purchase land and build 15-30 for homes for 60/120 elders and members who are living in dilapidated, unsanitary conditions or are homeless. Possible land uses are a Community Center, Housing Office and Maintenance Department, Fire Station, Storage Sheds, Gymnasium, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts, Community Park and Picnic area for all Tribal Members and other outside athletic activities. Or SEC. 22 s 23 T. /9 N. R. 4 E. M A S. if M. i FOS 1 /3 a 2 AC 0023 ro a.9e�a 4528 '� D9.»AC EC4lAC 4A m IdPM9a-ro 1935. - 11A36 N — SBfIl3-4-34-- - - - - - - — /L4-( CORN, —.. - - - - — - - - - - - --- 17 i— e7 act 0 AN V11000, 0 SJiA Pett tr 8� 41 .Q7 dApAtti UOTNh OLam` a 9.r9ar R 4 'to �• DM71-49' r r E-47 T- 42 _ a w The following are the objections to the this potential housing development: Traffic will increase greatly in the neighborhood on Olive Highway,Oakvale, Hilidale, Melrose, Deerwood, Fairhill, hence Foothill Boulevard, Oro Bangor Hwy, Lower Wyandotte, etc. At certain times of the day the traffic on Oakvale is already bottle-necked due to Ophir school traffic. The increased traffic through Melrose, Deerwood and Fairhill(Copley acres)will hinder those neighborhood residents' abilifty to move about freely in their secure and safe neighborhood. The neighborhoods in the immediate vicinity of this proposes housing development are aftluant homeowners thus the home owners will see a sharp decrease in the market values of their homes. The crime rate would most definately increase in the affluant neighborhoods bordering the proposed housing development. 17 19 ?L•_,1 cr •�?L--• -1ln?•••' i` �` OIL h t:�--ZZ v _ 1-777.7 L Gv7M- v J .. LV ZP T :ri:� 5-0 N9 / 1171/s' 11 1 25f5.£f Twp SO4s,3 -c)ZC'f lq Sai+(t' r cl ZY s- �� ar vr r., J �! 010 1•F� 1�bX ted. ! �a�,�y, �,w�� `moo .F h 90 ll- �S ion T�q,Q d ����f►S � Md?so� 1,Q £Z , —E £ i.7 h ..� v,A I 7177 - s R-2-7„P' p Qtr -- 7 Z - E� ■ ■ ■ r 1 . .� ■ i of f a ` ` 0' ! jKli ' �� r to I t I L�1■ ■ rw _ bp a- r Vwo ;h 7y � P fl IIQ-A7 CS { c 17 ,�► ,y) I-c�?�-�f S j(j 7 7,77 � nay/ C ` l , 1. C elk � 3!DVd - ■ r __ ■ 1 - i ' I Tj n - 7 F7 5/l O 7 OZ/ vro A P - 2 1, PAGE-.. -d q Gb (lay I jM a q-14 0 It.i, C S 1 E�r _-Is P- r 4-a7-vq E,-cEn! ,NAA c-m /,zo Lenw- �sR Apr 27 04 12: 16p Steve Jasco 530-345-6678 p.2 Butte County Department of Development Services April 27,2004 7 County Center drive Oroville,CA 95965 530-538-7601 /530-538-7785 Fax ATTN: STEPHEN BETTS RE:- Pre-Development Conference for the Enterprise Rancheria Thursday,April 29,2004,at 9:00a.m. Dear Mr.Betts: I am a property owner very close to this proposed development_ 1 am NOT in support of this project. There are a number of reasons why this project should not be allowed. Here are just a few: 1. This is a beautiful andgrowing,medium to upper income single-family neighborhood. This project does not fit in this location and will cause an immediate stop to future housing development in this area. 2. A project like this does NOT belong close to a school filled with young children. The possibility of the Enterprise Rancheria's ability to obtain sovereignty at some point in the future and then build whatever they choose,IS REASON ENOUGH to deny this type of project in this location. 3. The roads proposed(Crane Ave/Tucker Ave)through the existing neighborhoods are NOT sufficient for a project of this size. And again,should Enterprise Rancheria obtain sovereignty, the ability of Butte County Planning to protect our quiet,upscale living environment in this area,WILL BE LOST FOREVER, If Enterprise Rancheria is truly concerned about their low income elders and homeless Tribal Members, why are they willing to spend so much money on a property and guaranteed legal battle with all of us as a neighborhood who DO NOT WANT THIS PROJECT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. It is my opinion Enterprise Rancheria obviously has a hidden agenda. There are many other properties in Butte County, and other counties,which are better located for this type of project and would be much less money and much quicker to develop. Since Enterprise Rancheria recently tried to buy property in Yuba County to build a casino,it concerns me that now they claim they only want to build 15—30 houses on a 63-acre parcel. They need to find another parcel,which does not destroy an existing neighborhood. Please advise the applicant that legal council is being pursued to keep this Enterprise Rancheria Project out of our existing neighborhoods. Protecting our children and property values leave us no other alternative. Any questions please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Steve Jasco Property Owner: ' 270 Oakvale Ave Oroville,CA 530-521-5859 (� a D �Vj APR 2 7 2004 g E Wu"'" PANNING DIVISION Apr,-28-04 02: 10P Golden Valley Home Health 530 532 8369 P.02 April 28, 2004 Butte County Project Planning Department Steve Bates Stu Edel Dear Mr. Bates & Mr. Edel: This correspondence to your department is regarding the proposed Enterprise Rancheria Subdivision for the areas between Oakvale, Crane and Melrose Avenue in the County of Butte. As homeowners in the Copley Acres Subdivision, we wish to express our disapproval of this proposed low income housing subdivision adjacent to our neighborhood. Our concerns include the devaluation of property values in this area, the increased traffic flow onto our streets that have no sidewalks, safety issues and devastating environmental impact. We fear that once this 63+ acres are purchased what is to stop further development of a sovereign nation from developing another casino or other such projects that will increase crime and congestion to our area. We respectfully request that this area in question not be rezoned for this proposed project or to be allowed to proceed further. We also know that Indian sovereign nations are not subject to the same restrictions, codes, and laws that we are required to abide by. For all of these very important reasons we strongly urge you to deny this application. Respectfully, Phil & Lynndee Caput 37 Hunter Lane Oroville; CA. 9695 Mike & Kathy Mendenhall 27 Hunter Lane Oroville, CA. 95966 re 0 U E WedMemy,April 26.2004 Anwrfea Owim:-MkMed,,. Vagr. 1 Li APR 2 8 2004 BUTTE WATY t 12/20/2002 23:24 5305333253 CASH PAGE 01 Steve Betes 4-29-04 Butte County Planing Dept, Fax 536.7785 Dear Steve, The last 2 years have brought some positive development to the area ofCopley res. Castle Creek and many other affluent type homes have raised the property values and standards for the area. The only determent hasteen the 2 casinos and reservations that developed on each opposite end.Upon there coMpletion we have had a huge increase in trafPi and crime. On a daily basis we are asked direbtions by individuals looking to cut through F airhill Dr. to Hilldale. They tell us they are looking for the casino.We pick up trash daily and five in constant fear of leaving the garage door open Jiving the opportunity for crime.We constantly yell at them to please slaw down as they sped thrpugh the neighborhood. I am very concerned about the r*w development proposed in my nei by the Enterprise Rancheria The area proposed has got to be the most unlikely I on in Butte County for this type of use. The Orovtifle area does offer plenty of other land that d ccriform to the type of project proposed. The fact that the location of the other two rancherk s north and south of us has impacted us so,mak6s the development to the east an unacceptA e plan,as it basically surrounds Copley Acres. Sense the construction of the Gold Country Casino and the removal of trees vva w can hear the traffic of dive highway as well all the concerts they have. The Feather Falls asino lights up the sky over my home with search lights in case we are not aware of their p e. All the above problems are due to- poor planing and lack of enforcement. I no future increase in furring for enforcement being provided by this project and the - rtunity for responsible planing is your responsibility. Besides the existing problems this project would require a huge change in the xMem and character of the existing area Look at the new homes on Crane, Oakvale, HMale, Copley Acres, and Castle Creek. These homes are valued at $290,000 - $4.50,000. in Copley Acres now sell for$55,00D$65,000.this is due to the setting and the pattern of ne homes. The adjacent properties have views of the land the ranchena wants to put ing for the indigent and homeless, as well as offices, gyms, and the ambiguous" maint ce sheds" upon.These views now are of dense trees and vegetation that block the noise of r School. The property is very hilly and has been used sense my childhood as a mountain a area and contains trails. I fished the stream 'and ponds as a child and my children also. The property is home to abundant wildlife-such as raccoon, turtle,deer,our residentley that visit the homes on a ruler basis. The ponds are full of bass, bliegill, and aquatic We This would be distroyed if not left as is. The natural setting would not survive improvement. Plan tNs area fora boo ar use that conforms and to improves the neighborhood. Thank You, Cash Colby 285 Fairtrili Dr. � � � a �n Orovifle,Ca 96966 V APR 2 8 2004 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION Page 1 of 1 Betts, Steve From: David Burris [daveandcristi@earthlink.net] Sent: Friday,July 02, 2004 9:18 AM To: Betts, Steve Subject: APN 036-540-010 Mr. Betts, 1 am the president of the Ophir Neighborhood Association for Quality Development and I have been presented with a preliminary title report and various copies of grant deeds for this property. If possible, I would like to get an hour of your time next week to get your professional opinion on the contents of these reports. I can be available at your convenience and can be reached at 538-9448. Thank you, David Burris RECEIVED JUL 2 2004 BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7/2/2004 ... ....__ .. .._ ......._...� _��.... ,..- r.. .� V) 50 Do N �Aj tIX c' . 00 ------- .ON 9Of 'd.>IHO 92-0319401 'Dotal . 00 1 Recorded 1 Official Records I County of 1 RETURN T0! butte 1 Public Works Candace J. Grubbs 1 Land Development Section Recorder 1 8 02se i6-Sul-92 I CONS NP 1 NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE Issued to: Robert and Beverly Hesselton P. 0. Box 2748 Oroville, CA 95965 This Notice of Compliance is hereby issued by the County. of Butte to certify that the conditions imposed on the Certificate of Compliance, recorded on February 6, 1992, under Recorder's Serial Number: 92-05185 have been fulfilled 'to the satisfaction of the Subdivision Violation Committee on property identified as: a. Assessor's Parcel Number: 36-05-164 b. Property Location: on the south 'side of Tucker Avenue approx. 1700 ft. west of Oakvale Avenue. East Oroville area. DESCRIPTION: All that certain property located in the County of Butte, State of California, more particularly described as follows; Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 2S: thence 506th 01• It' 09" West aa'ong tho Most lint of said Lot 13, 659.81 tart to the southwest corner of said Lot IS: thence north SO* 53' ST' fast along the South line of said Lot 15. 333.36 teat : thence leaving said South lint. North 01. 08' 66' East. 659.56 feet to a pointon the North line of said Lot is, thence South 88• S1 ' 39' hest along said North lint, 331 .S6 feet to the' poLat of beginning and the end of this daaerl3rtion. Containing S.03 acres more or loss. Together with an easement 60 teat in width over Tucker Avenue as shown on said Subdivision Map. The Basis of Hearings for thin description is the same as obown on the Parcel Kap recorded in book 46 of Pups at Pago 28, sttte Cotety _ Recorders office. Issuance of this Notice of Compliance is pursuant to Butte County Code, Chapter 20-167. t * 1 f County of Butte +� � Subdivision Violation Committee C .Y • • BUTTE COUNTY JUN 11 21104 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive <�- Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: As residents living"near the 63 acre property (APN 035-540-010) that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County--we are strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. 1). We've been advised the Rancheria will put this property in a trust—wherethey won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a' backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2) The Rancheria will not pay;any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. 3). We as a local community, any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a' Y federal Indian land trust. 4). We also understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. 5). The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 6). Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thanks for your time. Please free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Your Name ere Address c,!©o G /��//dh l e �/-� �� 11j//A-- (/� �J �y6 6 Phone• -59;1L _0 3 93- Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor)ane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henri Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief,-Perry Reniff/Butte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty Or 407 �.�.�-,•L� ray ���'`�� �`�' Qn /''��'off" �o'�'�� � ���-s�2�-,�; ����� ��' °'' (�''� �I•� � From the desk of DON W. PEDERSON JR. is TRACY L. PEDERSON 97 Oakvale Ave. .Oroville, CA 95966 BUTTE June 4,2004 JUN 17 2PO4 Mr. Stephen Betts Senior Planner DEVELOPMENT P Butte County Planning Commission SERVICES 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts, As residents living near the 63 acre property(APN036-540-010)that is currently in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria,we are writing to implore you to reconsider your approval of the sale to this group. Please take a few minutes to understand our position, and explore all of the available options. Having grown up on this street, and living across from my family,which has resided here since the 1940's,I have watched this area.of Oroville evolve into a prime destination for families and relocation for the ease of a relaxed lifestyle. Many of us have or are in the process of building our dream homes, take great pride in the style and benefits of rural living, and have a highly sought after elementary school located just down the street. Should this acquisition be allowed to continue, and with the proposed use of the land, we feel this will be detrimental to our community and the livelihoods we now enjoy. It is our understanding that once the Rancheria finalizes the purchase,they intend on putting the land into a.trust. Once the land is placed into a trust,they become a `sovereign nation',whom will not be subject to any local government regulation or control, and, no taxes are paid into the local taxing authority,yet usage of services like fire/rescue, law enforcement, schools, and other county services will still be provided. This will also have an adverse impact on traffic and the environment, as the proposed access route is off Oakvale Ave., a short distance past the school. Currently on school days,the amount of school traffic alone makes it nearly impossible to leave our driveway. Since this housing is proposed to be modular in nature to house the elder, homeless, and members living in dilapidated and unsanitary conditions,we feel this will ultimately become transient housing. Should this occur, this exposes the school children and residents in the area to an increased risk for their safety and could lead to an increase in crime. We also strongly feel that this will ultimately lead to another(third)casino being built in this area,which if this does occur,would place the casino directly adjacent to the school; immediately behind the Gold Country Casino,which also has housing for members, and is currently in the process of constructing a high rise hotel-casino-conference center; and only minutes from the Feather Falls Casino. It is also understood that this organization is currently being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and an attempt to secure land in the Sutter and Yuba county area was recently denied, for suspicious reasons. In closing, we as individuals and as members of the community, ask that you strongly oppose approving this pending transaction, and encourage the seller to seek an investor who has the good of the area as their primary goal, and not a group who will likely forgo all consideration of their surroundings, and proceed with yet another source of revenue which offers no benefit to the surrounding area or community at large. Should you wish to contact us regarding this matter, please feel free to do so at the above address or telephone number below. Sincerely, Tel.530.533.5183 E-mail.Bolo4u@sbeglobal.net Fax. 781-998-3063 TTE June 3,2004 COUNNTY Stephen Betts jUN 0 7 2G34 Butte County Senior Planner DEVIELOPNIENi 7 County Center Drive s);Rv10Es Oroville, Ca. 95965 We are writing this letter today totally frustrated with the traffic situation in and around Oakvale Ave. and Olive Hwy. This is a situation that is becoming down right dangerous! This area has traditionally been rural and the reason we still live here. However it doesn't take a person long to realize that the county hasn't or can't keep up with the traffic flow(actually lack of). Ophir elementary school is on Oakvale Ave. when school starts or ends the traffic on Oakvale is horrendous. Can you imagine small children walking where traffic exceeds 45mph? If you leave your home between 8:00am and 6:00pm and try to merge onto Olive Hwy. (West) you have a wait period of at least 8 minutes(minimum). With a song and a prayer you dart out into traffic going 50 plus mph in both directions! It is steadily growing worse. We respectfully ask that you heavily monitor the traffic situation in our area. The best answer for Olive Hwy. would be a four lane road with a middle turn lane,from Oro Dam Blvd past the Gold Country Casino. Have you or any of the Supervisors been to our neck of the woods lately? I think I speak for many when I invite you and the Supervisors to have dinner at one of our many fast food places on Olive Hwy. (Oroville is loaded with fast food apparently the board approves quite a few for us)then try to head home. What should take a few minutes will try your courage and your patience. I promise you a ride of a life time! I don't know of any other small town that supports two Indian Casinos and now I understand that another tribe is looking towards Oroville to call home. More specifically; at the end of Crane Ave. 200 yards or so from Ophir elementary school! Their proposal suggests they just want to build HUD homes for the tribal members. . .isn't that exacts how Gold Country Casino started? Once they get the land,they are considered sovereign: possessing supreme/ultimate power, acting independently and without outside interference. What are we to do? Will our supervisors look out for our best interest? Will we continue to put up wiih flus traMc and Then a116-w more congest;on t owe nee -"tter 'fft ent representafion l—- These are questions that need to be addressed and answered. I believe that Oroville needs to pull up,take a good look around and make educated decisions on what kind of growth we should allow. After all an area of fine homes in harmony with nature sounds good to us. Respectfully, Mr. &Mrs. Bob Jones 350 Oakvale Ave. Oroville,Ca. 95966 (530) 534-5312 Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register,Butte County Planning 1 Commissioners: Richard Leland,Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle,Trustee Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs,Mike Glaze South Feather Water&Power, Henri Brachais Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff Butte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk- TNT Realty,Ophir Elementary School Principal, Butte County Board of Education,Butte County Superintendent of Schools,Butte County Grand Jury. BUTTE COUNTY JUN 0 9 2004 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 6,2004 Stephen Betts Butte County Senior .Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts, We are residents of the Copley Acres subdivision. We are strongly opposed to the developement that has been purposed by j the Enterprise Rancheria on parcel number APN-036-540-010. We sold our home in the Folsom area and built a home in Copley Acres because it is an upscale neighborhood. Putting mobile:ihomes_,ini,the center of this neighborhood will devalue our homes. We have no objection to taking that 63 acre parcel and divide it into # acre lots and build three hundred thousand dollar homes. That would compliment the area and keep the value where it should be. 'Thank you for your consideration. incere , Richard and Patricia Prenatt 126 Hart Lane Oroville, CA 95966 530-533-6274 Cc:Supervisor Bob Beeler,Supervisor Jane Dolan,Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx,Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register,Butte County Planning Commissioners:Richar Leland,Fernando Marin, Michael Evans,Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene,Congress- man John Doolettle,Tfustee Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs,Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henri Brachais/Butte Fire Chief,Perry Reniff/Butte County Sheriff,Stand Up for :California/Cheryl Schmit,Tom Turk TNT Realty BUTTE COUNTY JUN 01 2n04 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 3,2004 Stephen Betts Senior Planner Butte County 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr Betts We have formed a group of very concerned neighbors calling ourselves Ophir Neighorhood Association for Quality Development. We have schedualed our second meeting to be held on Thursday June 10th 2004 at 6 pm. The meeting will be conducted at Ophir elementary school. We realize you have a very busy schedual.We cordially invite you and your staff to attend. We would very much appreciate your attendance and input at this very important citizens meeting. Sincerely, Gordon R Wright Jr 74 Gopher Road Oroville,Calif 95966 marbud@cncnet.com June 3, 2004 Mr Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, Cao 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are residents living near the 63 acre propety (APN 036-540-010) that is in escrow with The Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County. We are strongly opposed to this land acquisiton and believe it is in direct conflict with the residentail development in the area. Our understanding is that the Rancheria will put this property in trust and thus will not be subjected to local and state requirements. We are afraid that this property will turn into another casino. We currently have 2 Indian casinos in the Oroville area and question why we need another one. We personally have been burglarized since the Gold Country Casino was opened and when we made a report to the Butte County Sheriff, we were told that these casinos attract criminals. This is a quiet residential area and we love living here because of that. The Oroville area has been enjoying some new development that is consistent with what is already here. Directly in front of our property lies the Ophir School. With the Enterprise Rancheria planning to develop land so close, we are concerned with the increased traffic. Also, the roads they are considering for access are currently narrow and not accommodating to heavy traffic. Please consider what you may be able to do to stop this acquisition so that this neighborhood may continue to develop as a middle class residential area. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, AtfMartha Buxton and Gordon Wright 74 Gopher Road Oroville, CA 95966 Marbud@cncnet.com cc: Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Ann Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Supervisor Bob Beeler, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin,'Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, South Feather Water &Power, Butte County Fire Dept, Butte county Sheriff, Stand Up for California - Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty . ,�.` t [:.� � � � . .' � � is+ire . ey fY • � -f � 'r. .1i �� { .. i � .e a •• a :F �..#} ' � � r. l ,f a e,e f.. e e ' �� • t♦ ems. �4� e •� • L .. � e f e � ,. 1 C. �. .C' �. .. . e, +!-. t. a �, .fG.i. ... .. a '.. _ ... ! � '�' - .. a. c •. � �l� .. e e t' 4 ' ft e` .. .! �. a a{� � .. ., �_ a '� � -... a�, a .. .� � H, e� •' o �' � .. �� re� " BUTTE COUNTY June 3, 2004 JUN 0 7 2PO4 Stephen Betts DEVELOPMENT Butte County Senior Planner SERVICES 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We live in Copley Acres and it has come to our attention that a 63 acre parcel of land close to us is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria. We are very upset and strongly oppose this development. We understand that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust, where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. We also hear that the Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. Another concern we have, the property is very close to a grade school and if and when a Casino may become a reality on that property we would be strongly opposed to that situation. We ask that you not approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Si r ly, Jack and Marie Bottom 127 Hart Lane Oroville, CA 95966 533-6030 Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze/South Feather Water& Power, Henri Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff/ButteCounty Sheriff, Stand Up for Califomia/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty r _. _ .. � , . t � ,..:fie. 1 .:. . .r• . � .� - '� ^r � . ' � .�`i'. ' .. r. v , - 9-75 o-�� , a� 10 Nnr KIYOURE �� z�. BUTTE COUNTY �. JUN 0 4 2004 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES As residents living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010) that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County--we are strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. 1). We've been advised the Rancheria will put this property in a trust—where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2) The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other 1 County services. j 3). We as a local community, lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4). We also understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. 5). The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 6). Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thanks for your time. Please free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, , '1 Deborah Riggs 250 Mount Ida Rd oroville,CA 95966-7711 BUTTE COUNTY 44 Hart Drive JUN 0 4 2004 Oroville, California 95966 PMENT June 2, 2004 DE ERVICES Stephen Betts Senior Planner Butte County 7 County Center Drive Oroville, California 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: As residents living near the 63-acre property (APN 036-540-0) in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County, we are opposed to this land acquisition and believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust and will not be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are-,mandated to meet. This may well be a backdoor attempt to bring in yet another casino and for that reason alone it should be denied. Other concerns we have related to this land acquisition include: ➢ The Rancheria will not pay taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or other Butte County services The local community will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Native American land trust We understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation The proposed development is too close to an elementary school The traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed We urge you not to approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time and effort, Charli Nugent Robert Rucker z Stephen Betts June 3, 2004 Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA. 95965 r BUTTE COUNTY JUN 0 4 2004 DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr. Betts, As a resident living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County we and our neighbor's are STRONGLY opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. We've been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust,where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. We feel that this is a back door attempt to bring in yet another casino to our small town of Oroville, and the possibility of a third casino in our town is distressing. 'It is our understanding that purchasing property for the"Only Purpose to Build Homes"was use by the Gold Country Casino on Olive Hwy. We now have homes, a casino,bowling alley, and soon to be completed a high rise hotel. This 63 acres must be looked at as NOT just the building of low income homes, but as a REAL possibility that our beautiful neighborhood will have a casino and all the problems that will occur from one. We have also been told that the'low income homes will be HUD approved modular structures that will not begin to fit into our neighborhood. Thus,we can expect that with all of the possibilities facing this neighborhood that the value on our homes will devalue immensely. We have also been told that these low income homes will be subject to what the family makes. If the family make more money they will be removed and a new family will come in, thus causing a possible revolving door community. For all the reasons stated we hope that it is denied. There are additional reasons that we object to this 63 acre acquisition to build 30 homes. The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees,police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. We as a local community,will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. We also understand that this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. Another major point is that this Rancheria will be adjacent to Ophir Elementary School where the safety of our children could be at risk due to intense traffic, and congestion. This would flow through out our neighborhood and make our quiet community of homes intolerable. There are also environmental impact issues that still need to be addressed, as well. " .•; r i. .. ?, .+ ' .,11 ( r � ,. i i� :.� f r It "P,..{ !fit J-'Yr'::1"ii1 fit. . ' r: r , 'r. s '• / 1 efr C1 9..1] ,J'.L i 1 1'e [• .tJ!, i.� t . . .r .t ! 9'r ' [- s 71/.. 7 •f'i'. .1fo t - It is our understanding that Supervisor Bob Beeler was invited to attend our first community meeting at Ophir School last Thursday, but we were sorry to see that he did not attend or send someone from his office. We will be having another meeting on Thursday June 10, 2004 at Ophir School at 7:00 pm. It is our hopes that Mr. Beeler and our other official's will find the time to attend on June 10`' concerning these important issues. In closing we STRONGLY request that you do NOT approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, ryA Mike &Kathy Mendenhall 27 Hunter Lane Oroville, CA. 95966 Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte Country Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressmen John Doolittle, Wally Herger, Doug Ose, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze-South Feather Water& Power, Henri BrachaisButte County Fire Chief, Perry ReniffButte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk/TNT Realty. . e NuTrE COUNTY June 1, 2004 JUN 0 4 2n44 DEVELOPMENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, SERVICES I write this letter both as a member of the Ophir Neighborhood Association for Quality Development, and as an immediate representative of my own family. My husband and I purchased our home on Melrose Avenue in Oroville, California approximately 1 1/2 years ago. We evaluated the neighborhood as quiet, with relatively low traffic, low crime rate, and surrounding upscale housing developments. We invested our life savings in the property, which includes current, extensive remodeling, and have been very pleased with our investment and the local realty value. That being said, we are appalled by, and adamantly opposed to, the Rancheria Housing project. This project proposes to plunk a 60 unit low income, modular housing development right in the middle of our existing, high end housing development community. Our community members have no intention of watching our hard earned investment devalued, as we know it will be should this project be implemented as planned. This project has been weakly advertised as a community boon f6r a select group of disadvantaged individuals. Yet, how can the rights of the existing community members become readily sacrificed, or on any scale to be considered any less valuable? Simply put, this issue has nothing to do with denying the disadvantaged, and it has nothing to do with ethnicity. The bottom line is simply that this project will inevitably increase traffic, illegal activity, and sharply decrease the value of surrounding realty and these are all of the factors we chose to carefully avoid when selecting our present location in the first place. Personally, I have worked as a county employee for the past 15 years, 2 years of service within the county welfare department, and the remainder in a law enforcement capacity. I have worked long and hard to serve my local community and the majority of that clientele has undeniable fallen within the low-income bracket. Therefore, I can honestly say that I am not an elitist, I am simply realistic in regards to how this project will severely and negatively impact our existing community setting. Some would have you believe that this project would positively develop the area by virtue of implementing such things as a fire department and a recreational area... Do not be mislead! One has only to look at the local "South Side" area as an example of low income housing inclusive of a recreational area and a local fire department. The park does not offer a safe family/community environment. Instead, it is better known as a hub of illicit activity, including extensive ongoing drug dealing. In fact, the play ground itself is often riddled with discarded needles of drug users. In regards to the fire station, how does the Rancheria propose it will be manned? Volunteer staff, paid staff? And who will assure how it remains manned? A prime example again can be seen in the fire department that covers South Side. Once manned by many personnel. They currently pay staff a mere $6.75 per hour. No one mans the station after 5pm or on weekends, and they often operate with only one individual on duty, causing extreme safety issues to the fire department personnel and the community they are attempting to serve. I know all to well that this is true as my very own brother works there to provide what services he can to the local community. All the while knowing their future is bleak with inevitable cut backs that may someday soon, force the complete closure the station. While establishing a fire department sounds great in theory, it obviously can be tossed aside as nothing less than a community token. Once again using South Side as a familiar, nearby example, the surrounding area is wrought with domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, drug sales, property crimes, unsightly yard cars, garbage, and dilapidated housing just to name a few issues. One has only to drive through the neighborhood to realize that the local fire department and recreational area has had no magical effect on staving off the decline of that particular area. Assuredly, this community transformation did not occur overnight. But the message is clear, the decline is inevitable. What about law enforcement in the Rancheria housing project? How effectively will that be operated as well? How will it impact our already strained, local law enforcement resources? Clearly, we are overwhelmed with concerns that cannot be alleviated. Some may attempt to justify the Rancheria project by suggesting that a specialized code enforcement department would maintain responsibility over the housing development, thus insuring on-going maintenance and a quality environment. This is simply an unrealistic pipe dream. With low-income housing, we have all witnessed significant deterioration over time. This is the expectation, not the exception to the rule. A very similar example of this can be seen in the local housing project near the recent Gold Country casino development. You don't have far to go to witness unkempt shacks, shanties, and home made room additions in the form of lean-tos. Where is their standard of community development? Would you choose to live in such a neighborhood if given the opportunity? If not, I then ask that you not stand idly by while my family and my neighbor's families are forced to do the same. As we know, our own county government has a code enforcement department staffed by individuals who work hard at maintaining the community. Yet, we can see that it appears to be a losing battle. Having worked in this community in a law enforcement capacity, I have witnessed many areas that are dilapidated beyond repair, full of yard cars, drop cords dangerously supplying power to illegally occupied camp trailers, drug labs,... Even after code enforcement action has been taken, it generally does not take very long on the average before the property has been returned to its previous state of disrepair. It is unrealistic to believe that the Rancheria will have better success and higher standards of care (again I reference the Gold Country casino housing development as an existing example). Further, the Rancheria can easily make a multitude of promises in order to achieve their ultimate goals. But, who will actually hold them accountable for keeping their promises? An already overworked, overwhelmed, local government system that cannot even effectively maintain their own community projects? In addition, the issue of jurisdiction comes into play. Ultimately, what real teeth could we expect our already overburdened local government to maintain regarding enforcement of code violations in regards to Indian Tribal Council property for which they-maintain no jurisdiction? Even if promises are made, reality will surely prevail, and the concerns expressed today, will rapidly and most certainly become a moot point. I for one, do not intend to be lost in that shuffle. This project will also dramatically increase the flow of traffic and over exasperate an existing burden. Regardless of their proposals, we remain opposed. It is our desire to maintain the quiet, non-congested neighborhood in which we currently reside. It is also our desire to maintain a secure, safe neighborhood. Our area is already impacted enough by virtue of it's close proximately to the casino. As it is, we often witness vehicles that are not recognized as being familiar to the neighborhood, drive through as a shortcut to the casino, and I am unsettled by it. Law enforcement personnel are well aware that a strong criminal element has historically remained attracted to casino grounds, and associated property crimes are a commonly reported occurrence. It is not a difficult stretch of the imagination to realize that related traffic invites an enhanced opportunity for those with a propensity for criminal behavior to victimize the neighborhood. Drastically increase that traffic, and expect to simultaneously increase this risk as well! This project is simply a wolf in sheep's clothing. The eventual expectation is that within a minimal ten year period, the development project might readily become the site of a new gaming casino. No jurisdictional leverage will exist over the Indian Rancheria project to stop it. How can anyone justify even taking that chance, fully knowing that this land site is located smack in the middle of a quiet, rural neighborhood and worse yet that it is planned to be placed in the immediate vicinity of the community school! The welfare and safety of our children alone should supercede even the idea that sucha, development will be tolerated. We stand together on this issue in the hundreds, and we ask that our voices be heard. As the existing community members, the coalition of the Ophir Neighborhood Association for Quality Development, we do not expect you to deny us in our fight to reasonably maintain our current community standards and safety. Thus, we entreat you to aid us in our cause to defeat the Enterprise Rancheria's housing project proposal. Please understand the urgency of our request, time is certainly of the essence as the property is currently in escrow. Thank you in advance for your much needed assistance. We welcome your thoughts, expertise, added insight, community project efforts, or whatever you can commitment to the furtherance of our cause. Your prompt response is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Connie Vasquez 80 Melrose Avenue Oroville, CA. 95965 Victor Vasquez 80 Melrose Avenue Oroville, CA, 95965 BUTTE COUNTY Vie;'•" . May 11, 2004 MAY 17 P34 DEVELOPMENT Stephen Betts SERVICES Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive i Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: As residents living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010) that is in escrow with . the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County--we are strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. We firmly believe the Rancheria is planning to build more than low-income housing on this 63 acres. We've been advised the Rancheria has plans for a casino – as soon as they can get the property in a trust—where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. More important, they will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. We as a local community, lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. We've already seen two local Rancherias negatively impact the area with increased traffic congestion and crime --and studies show this will get even worse. Gold Country Casino—originally promised to be a housing development too—and now we're all living with the impacts. Attached is a copy of a recent news article about the Enterprise Rancheria being investigated by the FBI, along with other articles that have been written by the media about the impacts of casinos on communities. We urge you, our Planning Commissioners and County Supervisors to vote against this land acquisition. Thanks for your time. Please free to contact us with any questions. Sincerely, Rich and Lisa DeLaby 145 Crane Avenue Oroville, CA 95966 530-533-2775 Cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Building Industry Assoc., Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henri Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff/Butte County Sheriff, Tom Turk-TNT Realty I News >FBI investigating Enterprise Rancheria in Calif. Page 1 of 2 j Fri tite"S NtountalialRortR _ Search: i News Home > !News > Headlines More headlines W printer friendly version Feature Story: FBI investigating Enterprise Rancheria in Calif. Dawe Andersoi THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2003 Washington bi(5/13) The FBI is investigating the Estom Yumeka Maidu Tribe of California. Feature Story: Trust reform r The FBI has served grand jury subpoenas to the chairman and four costs panned 1 council members, the tribe's vice president said. The five were the subject Feature Story: of a failed recall in September and are leading an effort to disenroll 70 Audit: BIA em. tribal members. money misuse In The Hoop C The investigation was disclosed by vice-chair Robert Edwards, who is Indian Gaminc being threatened with disenrollment. Edwards has been critical of the other tribal leaders for their actions, including plans to build a casino in House hearing Yuba County. BIA-OST reorg (5/13) The tribe is based on the Enterprise Rancheria. ' . White Mountai defends mass Get the Story: Wisconsin Sup Setbacks hit casino (The Marysville-Yuba City Appeal-Democrat 11/13) invalidates gai News in brief from Northern California [see third item] (AP 11/12) (5/13) Column. Florid Related Stories: compact with ; Calif. tribe threatens to disenroll dissidents (09/29) (5/13) Copyright p 2000-2003 Indianz.Com Montana coun bias against N (5/13) Chevenne-Ara notice of land Oklahoma HoL tribal-state ga Opinion: India 'boon' for CaIii Arctic Slope sl for chairman's Eastern Chero bilingual with (5/13) Michigan tribe accord with st President of K target of recal Navaio Nation http://www.indianz.com/News/archives/002501.asp 5/13/2004 Tribal recall: Members disenrolled after financial dispute Posted: December 08, 2003 - 2:51pm EST by: -James May/ Indian Country Today PALERMO, Calif. - After unsuccessfully trying to recall their tribal council, 70 members of a Northern California tribe, including the tribal vice- chairman, found themselves the victims of recall by that same tribal council. The disenrolled were members of the Estom Yumeka Maidu tribe of the Enterprise Rancheria a formerly 214-member tribe whose home base is among the sprawling foothills of Butte County near Chico. Former vice-chairman Robert Edwards claims the problems began when the tribe received the first payment from one of two trust funds set up by the gaming compacts. The fund is paid into by tribes with large casinos pay to be distributed to tribes with small or no gaming operations, of which Enterprise was one. Of the funds that Enterprise received, it was agreed to that 60 percent would go to the tribal government and the remainder would be for cultural needs. According to Edwards, from that money the tribal council established a Human Services fund totaling $50,000 for tribal members with emergencies who needed the money. Individual tribal members in need were allowed to draw on as much as $1 ,500 annually for emergencies. Edwards claims that tribal Treasurer Glenda Nelson withdrew the maximum yearly amount twice in a four month period and others in the tribal council followed suit ultimately draining the emergency fund dry. Edwards also cites incompetence by the tribal Housing Authority in expanding the tribe's base by failing to purchase additional acreage to the tribe's existing 40-acre parcel in the Sierra foothills and claims that the Housing director was illegally taking further money from Housing Authority meetings. Additionally Edwards also claims that the tribal council on numerous occasions violated the tribal constitution. For example, Edwards alleges that the tribal council set up a judicial system or tribal court with tribal consultant Gary Montana of Wisconsin as the tribal judge. However, Edwards says that it had to be voted on by the general membership as stated in the tribal constitution. Adding fuel to the fire were rumors of a FBI investigation into the tribe. Though they could not give specifics, a special agent working at the Sacramento FBI field office confirmed that the Enterprise Rancheria was currently under investigation and that "subpoenas have been is in the case. However, it is not clear nor could the FBI comment on whether the investigation was related to any of these charges. Edwards said instances like this led to the ouster of former tribal council member Ricky Wilson who had complained about the alleged corruption within the council and the illegality of their actions. Thus began the recall drive, which was certified as valid on Sept. 6 and contained 70 signatures. Less than a week later, the 70 signers of the recall petition all received notices that they were being disenrolled. "It was a clear case of retaliation," says Steven Mills, one of the disenrolled members. During the period between the recall certification and a late October disenrollment vote by the general tribal membership the tribe added 21 members and disqualified the members facing disenrollment from participating in the recall vote. Edwards claims that the new members were connected in some way or another with tribal council members. The recall vote failed. Only 13 members showed up, which is below the quorum of 18 established by the tribal constitution and Edwards said many feared they would be next for disenrollment if they attended the meeting. Two additional tribal members also received disenrollment notices after they spoke out against the tribal council actions bringing the total number to 72. After the recall the council changed the tribal constitution to require that tribal members be 1/16 Maidu to vote, which Edwards said was a way of eliminating potential allies. During the actual disenrollment vote, Edwards claimed several tribal members were barred from entering the meeting hall including tribal members whose own children were allowed in. "It was a stacked deck," Edwards said. The members facing disenrollment only had to receive 25 percent of the vote to remain in the tribe but lost by a total of six votes. The two members who were added to the list after criticizing the tribe face a similar general membership vote in December. Though the Enterprise Rancheria does not currently have a gaming compact, they had one in the works that would have included a,large casino near a large outdoor amphitheater, which features many major rock and roll acts that come through the Sacramento area. If the deal were to go through, fewer tribal members would mean larger gaming revenue dollars for the remaining members. Edwards and Mills both said that much of the tension stems from what they term a "hostile takeover" of the Enterprise Rancheria, which at one time was split into two groups who simply labeled the separate tribal land holdings as Enterprise I and Enterprise Il. Enterprise II was flooded with the building of the Oroville Dam in the 1960s. Edwards claims that the family of current tribal chairman Harvey Angle accepted payment rather than relocation when the offer of either was made by the federal government while building the dam at the mouth of the Feather River Canyon. In the 1990s the Enterprise II group won a challenge and joined the tribe eventually taking most of the seats on the tribal council which has three members named Angle, all immediate kin to Chairman Angle. Edwards claims that the tribal council has mischaracterized the existing Enterprise Rancheria as Enterprise II in their amendments to the tribal constitution:He says that all 70 cut members are descendants of tribal members of the original Enterprise I Rancheria. Currently Edwards and Mills say that their group does not have an attorney though they are trying to find one. One of the problems they face is because of tribal sovereignty the BIA is largely reluctant to intervene in internal tribal affairs, though they can become involved if criminal charges are filed though they might not intervene on the membership issue. The disenrolled members have to act quickly though as they only have 30 days to appeal their dismissals and they say they are making as much noise as possible and have contacted several media outlets throughout the state. Valley Center crime increases By: JO MORELAND - Staff Writer VALLEY CENTER ----The crime rate, the calls for service and the population are spiraling up annually in Valley Center, but the number of deputies hasn't changed in 15 years. And Lt. David Herbert, commander of the Valley Center Sheriff's Substation, said in an interview that he doesn't think that is likely to change, in spite of requests for more deputies by himself and another station commander in recent years. The number of deputies assigned to the station hasn't increased because it is based on the community's permanent population of about 20,000, he said. Not included in the staffing calculation is the hundreds of thousands of people who frequent five area Indian casinos ---- businesses that draw a few crooks and lots of potential victims, Herbert said. "The casinos are definitely having an impact in the area," both in property crimes and traffic, he said. The Valley Center station has 12 assigned deputies. Two are community-oriented policing deputies who now primarily work patrol in order to meet the minimum staffing needs. Property crimes have gone up while violent crime has been decreasing, and the Valley Center crime rate increase coincides with three years of casino trade; Herbert said. Since 1999, the community's crime rate has increased 117 percent, based on major crimes reported to the FBI, according to the San Diego Association of Governments, which tracks regional crime. Last year Valley Center's crime rate rose 24 percent over 2002 to 28.2 crimes per 1,000 population in 2003. The percentages are big, but the actual number of crimes are still relatively small.The 14 percent decrease in violent crime was a drop from 92 reported in 2002 to 80 last year, Property crimes went up 34 percent from 406 in 2002 to 544 last year, including 116 stolen vehicles ----about one every three days. Valley Center calls for service in general increased from 5,589 in 1999 to 8,862 last year. Sondra Welch, a five-year resident, has noticed the litter, graffiti and other signs of lesser urban crime creeping through Valley Center as the population has increased to about 20,000. "I've had my mailbox smashed and graffitied,"Welch said Monday as she left a grocery store with her daughter. "That's a pastime, mailbox smashing. It's sad to see that stuff." Welch wasn't sure whether the growing rural community needs more deputies. However, if Herbert thinks so, said the owner of Valley Center Locksmith, "he's probably right." "In general,"Welch quickly added, "the whole community is awesome. I love it out here. Everybody's supportive. Everybody looks out for each other." Deputies and security at all the casinos are working together to try to deter crime, Herbert said. He said deputies are also working on crime prevention in general and using crime mapping computer software to pinpoint where crimes happen, so they can focus on problem spots. "Our problems on Pauma.(Indian Reservation) are primarily casino-related," Herbert said. "Virtually every arrest we made for that reservation was at the casino. It could mean that their security people are very good at calling us, not being willing to put up with anything." Starting last year, deputies began tracking reservation crime. Herbert said they found: - 123 calls for service at the Pauma reservation, 81 of them at the casino; 25 crime reports, 18 at the casino; 20 arrests, 19 at the casino. -700 calls for service at the Rincon Indian Reservation, 195 of them at the casino; 153 crime reports, 57 of them at the casino; 85 arrests, 32 of them at the casino. -542 calls for service at the Pala Indian Reservation, 181 of them at the casino; 133 crime reports, 57 at the casino; 54 arrests, nine at the casino. -361 calls for service at the San Pasqual Indian Reservation, 140 at the casino; 90 crime reports, 41 of them at the casino; 44 arrests, 27 of them at the casino. 109 calls for service at the La Jolla Indian Reservation, nine of them at the gambling arcade; 23 crime reports, five at the arcade; 11 arrests, three at the arcade. Contact staff writer Jo Moreland at (760) 740-3425 or jmoreland@nctimes.com Counties gamble on casino compliance By Peter Felsenfeld Contra Costa Times 5-12-04 American Indian tribes considering a casino can disregard fire codes, building standards and environmental restrictions, leaving local governments with no planning oversight. At best, it's a roll of the dice whether tribes will voluntarily cooperate with city and county officials, a panel of experts told Contra Costa supervisors Tuesday. "Right now we have the short end of the stick in terms of control," said Yolo County Supervisor Mike McGowan, whose county has one casino. "We're almost out of the picture." I Supervisor Gayle Uilkema of Lafayette organized the workshop amid word that several tribes had scoped out East Bay properties for gaming purposes. The county must have more regulatory authority before she would support a casino, Uilkema said after the meeting. "Unless I can guarantee my side of the coin, I couldn't favor a casino," she said. Supervisors in March considered a resolution opposing casinos in Contra Costa but delayed action to receive more information. County officials have no direct authority to either approve or deny a casino. That responsibility falls to the state and federal governments. However, the Department of the Interior will consider community sentiment before placing land into trust to create a reservation. Even with local support, tribes face monumental bureaucratic hurdles. The board's concerns about casinos are hardly hypothetical. A Florida-based investor group with ties to the Scotts Valley band of Pomo Indians bought 30 acres in North Richmond, an unincorporated area, for a casino complex. The tribe is committed to bringing jobs and revenue to the county and surrounding cities, said Eric Zell, a spokesman for the group. Tribal leaders, he said, are willing to waive immunity from litigation to ensure any agreements with local governments are enforceable. "We believe very strongly there are huge benefits to the local communities that far outweigh any impacts," Zell said. California voters cleared the way for casino gaming on Indian land through the passage of Proposition 1A in March 2000. Compacts approved under former Gov. Gray Davis demanded little from the tribes in terms of compensating communities. According to a study from the California State Association of Counties, there are at least 54 Indian casinos and 26 proposed casinos statewide. A comprehensive impact analysis of eight counties found combined road, public safety and other impacts of around $200 million, the study states. In return, the tribes agreed to pay local governments $21.4 million, While state criminal laws apply on tribal land, the tribes' sovereign status exempts them from land-use restrictions. Sonoma County Counsel Steven Woodside told the board a tribe there is demanding fire protection but won't let the fire marshal on its property. The county is home to one casino, with another under review. In California, tribes pay no taxes, are not bound by the state's Environmental Quality Act and. are not required to mitigate casinos' off-site impacts, Woodside said. Significantly, they are not bound by the county's general plan. "It was rather shocking when I figured that out," he said. "But it's true." Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is negotiating compacts for a group of tribes. Therein lies opportunity for counties, said Sonoma County Supervisor Valerie Brown. The county association has drafted a list of provisions it wants the governor to include in the agreements, including strict adherence to local planning standards. Counties, she said, are starting to band together for change. "The bad news," she said, "is you will ask yourself way too many times, 'How did this happen, and how is it I have no power at all?"' Peter Felsenfeld covers Contra Costa County. Reach him at 925-977-8506 orpfelsenfeld@cctimes.com. More counties sit down to play against casinos Marin joining JPA which includes Yolo By JASON MASSAD - MediaNews Group 5-12-04Woodland Daily News The number of counties interested in joining Solano, Sonoma, Napa and Yolo officials in their attempt to ward off Indian casinos could be growing. Marin County could be included, and the Amador County Board of Supervisors "reviewed with interest" a proposal for a coalition, according to a letter received by Solano County officials this past week. A large group of counties participating in the effort could be helpful in plans to form a joint powers agreement or another formal organization that would fund legislative advocacy efforts in regard to Indian gaming. Still in its conceptual phase, each county likely would appoint two supervisors to represent it as part of the coalition. The coalition will meet later to discuss what strategies it will employ and which counties will be involved. "(They will) meet within the next few weeks to determine which counties are to be included in the consortium, identify legislative goals and negotiate the scope of work with a lobbying firm," according to a Solano County report. Indian tribes have broad powers to establish casinos on tribal land. Establishing tribal land in California requires federal approval, with an ambiguous amount of local input. According to the Solano County report, there is "urgency" in moving forward with a multicounty coalition on gaming. Amendments to the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 2003 could be considered by Congress this summer, according to a county report. One of the act's provisions could change rules related to how state compacts mete out casino revenues to local governments, and what conditions have to be met to create a state compact, according to a summary of proposed amendments to the legislation. Amador County's interest in the proposed multicounty coalition could put the region's efforts at the front lines of the Indian gaming controversy. Amador, home to Jackson Rancheria, is now in a battle with the Ione Band of Miwok Indians over a proposal to construct a casino on what is now nontribal land near Plymouth. There has been some support for that casino proposal, but Amador supervisors are opposed. In fact, they have spent some money to fight the effort. "(The county) has engaged both Sacramento and Washington, D.C., lobbying firms to advocate the county's opposition,"according to their letter. "The county is now considering engaging special outside counsel familiar with federal and Indian law to assist in this effort." Oroville Mercury Register- Local Page 1 of 2 y Only ore pkAv..urveso -77 'ce can give you the stmngthofa millionwnmen. • r r jor w 30 urate f+trress&we{yN kss renters ORO' az n .w - ^'ffs::�.�•lfi4�•' -v.raM��*'NwAT:: wr.:--:+ww^A�aa-«,t ' n ONL - . Home I News I Obits I Classifieds I Local Shopping I Auto Search I Archives May 11,2004 0 EMAIL ARTICLE E LINK TO ARTICLE L-- PRINT ARTICLE Oroville,CA Article Last Updated:Monday,April 26,2004-12:30:49 AM PST Enterprise proposes rancheria OTHER ARTICLES IN Marketplace THIS SECTION Auto Shopper subdivision THIS Bridal Connection -OHS's Brollier takes By Mary Weston/Staff Writer WSL tennis Classifieds championship Coupon Book Enterprise Rancheria is proposing to subdivide a 63-acre parcel -Red Suspenders Day Employment TV behind Copley Acres and butting against Ophir School,but some Celebration gearing-up neighbors fear it would devalue the neighborhood, increase traffic 'n Gridley Local Shopping g g and crime,or even be an attempt to bring a casino in the back -Berry Creek arson Oroville Real Estate door. suspects found } incompetent,are set free News "I'm against it,"said Toni Edwards. "We live on Melrose, and we -Body discovered Local have so much traffic here already." floating in Forebay National - 12-year-old driver dies The Butte County Department of Development Services has from accident Business scheduled a pre-development meeting to divide a 63-acre parcel _At the Parks Finance into 32 half-acre lots and three parcels of 15.9 plus acres. Collision avoided Politics between train and Health The conference will run from 9 to 11 a.m.,Thursday,April 29, at vehicle 7 County Center Drive,_in the Development Services conference -D.C.trip on OESD Obituaries room. agenda Weather -In Our Opinion: Archives "Enterprise proposes to purchase land and build 15-30 houses Visitors center would for 60/120 elders and members who are living in dilapidated, benefit Oroville unsanitary conditions or are homeless,"according to the pre- -Native American Sports application report. education a priority Local Other possible land uses include a cultural center,community Column "='' ° ' i_ center, housing office and maintenance department,fire department, storage sheds,gymnasium, basketball courts,tennis Entertainment Jobs courts,community park,and picnic area for all tribal members. Celebrity News Direct Care Sta_ff., Neighbors fear the low-income subdivision planned to house Just For Fun North Valley Services elderly and tribal members who are homeless or live in unsanitary Movie Times ._......................................•.......... conditions would devalue the neighborhood: Truck Driver Confidential "Those tribal members don't belong here," Nina Bruschi said. "It's Local Living • .•.•.•..............."........... low-income housing,and this is an upper end development." http://www.orovillemr.com/Stories/0,1413,157-26686-2108728,00.html 5/11/2004 Oroville Mercury Register- Local Page 2 of 2 Features Bruschi said she and others had been taking petitions around the , @ Recess neighborhood,and everyone they asked had signed. She's also Visitor's Guide concerned about increased crime and traffic. The project is proposed at the west ends of Crane and Tucker avenues,west of Oakdale Special Sections Avenue in the east Oroville area. 2003 Chronology The report states the project would greatly increase traffic on Olive Highway,Oakdale, Hilldale, Melrose, Deerwood and Fairhill avenues hindering the current residents from OrovilleMR.com moving around freely in their secure and safe neighborhood. Contact Us The report also states the project would devalue the homes in the neighborhood and increase crime. Site Search Another neighbor, Rich DeLaby,said they want growth, but they want quality .................... . development that increases property values and follows the same planning and environmental standards that everyone else follows. Enter search term Go» DeLaby and others are skeptical that the rancheria would buy so much property without a money-making incentive. "If all I wanted to build is 30 low-income houses, I wouldn't buy Advanced Search 63 acres of high end property." Enterprise recently tried to buy,property in Yuba County to build a casino and hotel. Some fear that after the land becomes Indian rancheria land, Enterprise could claim sovereignty and build whatever they chose. Enterprise Rancheria wasn't available to comment. Q RETURN TO TOP Go to Section Oroville Mercury Register A to Z Ads by Google Web Design Design by Artists and Programming by Programmers.Cambria,since 1984 www.cambria.com $7.95 Web Hosting 500MB, Unlimited Email,Free Setup PHP,JSP,ASP&PERL!Aff www.LunarPages.com I Media News Group partners: Northern California: The Oakland Tribune-Oakland Alameda Times-Star Alameda OLv_!Ile L4 ercury-_E istfy. Orovi e 6r Vs-Fremont Pacifica Tribune-Pacifica Chico Entgrprise_.f3gG r -Chico Pa�l�yPQst-Paradise Clear Lake Observer-American-Clear Lake Red Bluff Daily News-Red Bluff Southern California: Daily Review-Hayward The Reporter-Vacaville Inland Valley Daily,Bulletin-Ontario Daily Dempgat-Woodland San Mateo County.Times-San Mateo Los Angeles Daily News-Los Angeles Eureka Times-Standard-Eureka SolanoJobs.com-Solano County Lona Beach Press-Tele ram-Long Beach Fort Bra Advocate-News-For;Bragg Times-Herald-Vallejo Pa$1SiQSj r- w -Pasadena Lake County Record'Bee-Lakeport Tri-City Weekly-Eureka Redlands Daily Facts Redlands Marin Independent Journal-Mlarin Tri-Valley Herald-Pleasanton San Bernardino Sun-San Bernardino Mendocino Beacon-telendocino Ukiah Daily Journal-Ukiah San Gabriel Valles Tribune-San Gabriel Milpitas Post..Milpitas The Willits News-Willits Whittier Daily News-VVtuttier ©2004 Oroville Mercury-Register http://www.orovillemr.com/Stories/0,1413,157-26686.2108728,00.html 5/11/2004 BUTTE COUNTY Sample Letter to send to officials... JUN U 12004 May 28, 2004 DESE R®CCNT Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: As residents living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010) that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County--we are strongly opposed to this land r. acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. 1). We've been advised the Rancheria will put this property in a trust—where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2) The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance nor other County services. 3). We as a local community, lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4). We also understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. 5). The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 6). Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thanks for your time. Please free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Your Name Here Address 4G CMZ Phone 5.�4 _ L�e ACc: Supervisor Bob B , pervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson, Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henri Brachais/Butte County Fire Chief, Perry Reniff/Butte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk-TNT Realty May 28, 2004 COU TY JUN 0 1 2n04 DEVELOPMENT Stephen Betts SERVICES Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are residents living near the 63-acre property(APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County. We wish to express our strong opposition to this land acquisition. We believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in this area for the following reasons: 1. We have been advised that this property will be put into a trust by the Rancheria and they will not be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a back door attempt to bring in another casino and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2. The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or other County services. 3. The local community will lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4. We have been told this Rancheria is under investigation by the FBI. 5. The proposed development is too close to an elementary school. 6. Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Sin errel�y,, Glen and Sally Miller 225 Fairhill Drive Oroville, CA 95966 530-534-1282 cc: Butte County Supervisors: Bob Beeler,Jane Dolan,Kim Yamaguchi,Mary Anne Houx, Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register,Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland,Fernando Marin,Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert,Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs,Mike Glaze/South Feather Water&Power, Henry BrachaisButte County Fire Chief,Perry ReniffButte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit,Tom Turk-TNT Realty. • �t I + •�. '...f. - ; ft�i ,.,r' ,� .. ter. ." �,- . t i .P 1. � t t BUTTE May 31, 2004 COUNTY JUN 0 2 2004 Stephen Betts DEVELOPMENT Butte County Planner SERVICES 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts, We have been residents of the Copley Acres Subdivision for 20 years and we are writing to express opposition to the Enterprise Rancheria proposed project on the 63 acres adjacent to Copley Acres. This project proposes to build low cost housing in an area surrounded by some of the most expensive homes in the Oroville area. It seems to us to be very poor planning to use prime land that'could be developed with homes consistent with the area which would add to the tax base, to build low cost housing that will pay no taxes, no school fees, will not support county services while impacting these services. We are asking for your help in stopping this project. If this valuable land is to be developed please see that it is developed with homes consistent with the surrounding area so that it will enhance the neighborhood, not detract and cause property values to fail. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, 4 � BUTTE Linda Perry COUNTY 180 Parson Lane JUN 0 2 2PO4 Oroville, CA 95966 (530) 532-1848 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 31, 2004 Mr. Stephen Betts Senior Planner, Butte County 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 RE: 63 acre property (APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County Dear Mr. Betts: I purchased my home in what I thought was a stable, SAFE neighborhood. I would like to see it stay that way. As a resident living near this property, I am strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it is in direct conflict with the residential development in the area. 1) I have been advised the Rancheria will put this property in a trust where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. 2) The Rancheria will not play any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or for other Butte Count, services. ervices. 3) We, as a local community, would lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. 4) I understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. To me, this is very frightening. 5) The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 6) Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Please do not approve this land acquisition. Thank you for your time and efforts. Sincer BUTTE COUNTY Dr. and Mrs.W.W.Frey JUN 0 2 2004 387 Crane Ave. DEVELOPMENT Oroville,CA. SERVICES 95966-9599 31 May 2004 Mr. Stephan Betts Senior Planner Butte County 7 County Center Drive Oroville,CA 95965 Dear Mr.Betts: My wife,Delores J.Frey,and I are residencts living near the 63 acre property (APN 036-540- 010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County. We strongly oppose the land acquisition because we feel it is not in the best interest of the local community. We have been advised the property will be placed in a trust of the nature which will exempt it from local and state requirements. This scenero has been repeated in other location with developments which do not pay a reasonable support of taxes to the schools,police or sheriffs department,as well as other county services. It is close to an elementary school without consideration of traffic and environmental issues. We ask that you do not approve this land acquisition. Sincerely W.W.and Delore�J.Frey at;For. Yu 0 im may.."7 Am"i myne m jPC eqmww br,"m cpwj!0 rnmrwx m r:. .:P Oy u f ill Onnum P,V"u Umpni ju pal .'t"112 .ago quyunwou;N ITT T, or; q ly w go 1p;[Apt "NMI& r'.it I"U"lvmwmy� P"P qw P; pion �wwy ;W" Hill UVW!"M 'lie.wit 0111PIPY!"'j- All Y June 2,2004 Dear Mr. Betts, I'm writing this letter in response to the property that is in the process of being sold to another Rancheria in Butte County,this one of 63 acres(APN 036-540-010). Stephen, I as well as all the other residence in this area are at the mercy of our County Officials to stop another fiasco in our community. It has nothing to do with low income housing for tribal members but everything to do with another Casino in our neighborhood. I remember the statements by Gold Country Casino when it was going to be just housing for the tribes poor and homeless,and maybe a bingo parlor to support it. We now see the Six-Story Bingo Parlor. If the County sees this as just more income for the county projects,with out thought to the families that suffer from the effects of this vice,where is our hope for a moral society. Where is the concern for the children of your community,the real losers. If all possible, Stephen,by your input,please do not approve this land for the supposed project of low-income homes,we all know by now what the true purpose is for this property. Please be the communities champion for a quality society.Why must Oroville continue to be called the armpit of Butte County. Sincerely, Darrell L. Hindman 44 Crane Ave. Oroville, Ca. 95966 RECEIVED JUN 3 2004 ' BUTTE COU\"IY DEVELOPMENU SERVICES May 29, 2004 Ben& Carol Clark 65 Hart Drive Oroville, CA 95966 Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: We are home owners in Copley Acres and are very concerned about the pending sale of the 63 acre parcel,APN 036-540-010 in Butte County,to the Enterprise Rancheria. We feel this sale would be detrimental and would adversely affect all of the property values in the area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust where they won't be subject to local and state requirements that other developers have to meet. They will not pay taxes, school fees,police, fire, ambulance or for other County services. Once the land is in the trust, we will have no control if they decide to put in another casino which Oroville certainly doesn't need or want, particularly since the property is very near an elementary school. There are other issues of wetlands, access, traffic congestion, etc. that would be adversely affected. By their own application,they are going to build low income housing. Since we have lived in many other areas and have observed how such housing deteriorates after a very short period of time, we feel that this type of development does not belong on this parcel. Thank you for your consideration. Ben S. Clark Carol L. Clark Cc: Bob Beeler,Jane Dolan,Kim Yamaguchi,Mary Anne Houx, Curt Josiassen,Butte Co. Planning Commissioners,Rick Keene,John Doolittle,Dorothy Rice,Bureau of Indian Affairs, Henri Brachais, Cheryl Schmit-Stand Up for California, Tom Turk-TNT Realty RECEIVED JUN 3 2004 BUTTE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SEKVICEs ...,..•..,�).�I.� t'j:,o%, i 't.*;fit(�.ti �� J f 2G � tl All • ,Ill LII •{, M )"'K " Oi ��• it F r. .i,' ,.4 si,1' +1 ,.1✓t ! ,}` 1 ,/ . .,f rl.tr.+:• , .�. . �.Cf :1.41 4, .t ,u '{c'p�'1 1• ,,'`:' 1'1. '{:( . ,� .w '�," t ),:ili `'IJ� '!��l !.` �.1�'r;l ,•, .�r )',jl '1 �f,i :.J; ;.1, �/i, .! /;, ,.� •,r• .! s`1�411+i+ `j� �' .`I •r t� • r , ' ' it - 't. is;) + .„t f� � ? •1. :; .."-.� ! 1 ..'XPi t,'' � j7r, 'r,., �. i' ;l: •r: I .i1f',t; �?: i�i.Ir:.{�l �IIIIt lrri :isi'.r.liG q •j Wjw,,jt , j , !.! I r i 1 1 a.I., F. .r. ,j ,,rF i•1'r,.�. 1J'�k � Cr ,}ir+j'• • '�!° titi�� . ., !u . .} . rr ' .. . . ., i!-'ii• t , it•1.', i ':il�1 ;f r: ;�, :i •r: ;j •r .:1•r .f,,. ,.)' {,, u° .'. �� ,. _ =,� • fl"". .i u`' ,ifd'�tt;r; •.i;t., i7�ii.� �`� . S f �1„ ! 1 :Y` ., t• fti r'• e � ,. ,. �j ' 1. . � .. •ti :, "It.S jr, , tf131�%i k�F, Pit ' May 29, 2004 Stephen Betts Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, Ca 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: As residents living near the 63 acre property(APN 036-540-010)that is in escrow with the Enterprise Rancheria in Butte County—we are strongly opposed to this land acquisition and believe it's in direct conflict with the residential development in this area. We have been advised that the Rancheria will put this property in a trust—where they won't be subjected to local and state requirements that other developers are mandated to meet. This may be a backdoor attempt to bring in another casino—and for that reason alone it should be denied. There are several other reasons that this should not be approved: 1). The Rancheria will not pay any taxes, school fees, police, fire, ambulance or an, other ther County services. 2). We as a local community, lose any jurisdiction over this area once it is deemed a federal Indian land trust. I 3). We also understand this Rancheria is under FBI investigation. 4). The development proposed is too close to an elementary school. 5). Traffic congestion and environmental impact issues have not been addressed. Thank you very much, we appreciate your time and support. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Sincerely, RECEIVED Tom and Veronica Cox 60 Deerwood Drive JUN 3 2004 Oroville, Ca 95966 530-534-3023 sUTrE COUNIT DEVELOPME\r SERV ICES Stephen Betts June 1, 2004 Butte County Senior Planner 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Mr. Betts: My wife and I live on Melrose Drive in the Copley Acres subdivision in Oroville. As homeowners adjacent to the 63-acre property (APN 036-540-010), now in escrow by the Enterprise Rancheria, we are extremely concerned and are in strong opposition to this acquisition. Our neighbors and we are united in our belief that the proposed low-income residential housing project is inappropriate for the residential development in our area and may well create serious increased traffic congestion and crime problems for the adjacent elementary school, as well as the established local residents. We are anxious that once the property is in trust, the development won't be required to meet otherwise mandated state and local development requirements. Once designated as a federal Indian land trust, the extensive development will not pay any taxes and therefore will result in negative impacts upon the community due to the associated increased infrastructure requirements including but not limited to police, fire/ambulance, roads, schools, and other county services to be born financially by the Butte County taxpayers. We will bear the cost, but have no jurisdiction. .Of further concern is the likelihood that the proposed project is in reality an organized attempt to build another casino in Oroville. We already have two casinos and certainly won't benefit from a 'third. It's a fact that the Enterprise Rancheria is already actively pursuing the building of a casino in Yuba County. For our relatively small Oroville community the long-range future impacts of so much local gambling activity, and all the inevitable inherently related problems, may well prove to be devastating. If this acquisition is allowed to proceed, once in trust, the project will be unstoppable and the negative impacts cumulative and irreversible. My wife and I feel that we speak for all the long-term residents of Oroville and Butte County in proclaiming our strong opposition to this project and this acquisition of the 63-acre parcel by the Enterprise Rancheria. We respectfully request that this land acquisition be stopped, before it's too late. We thank you for your time and assistance in this matter. Please don't hesitate to contact us should you have and questions or would like to speak with either of us. Sincerely, RECEIVED Mr. &Mrs. David Masse N . 3 2004 105 Melr'ose'Dnve,'Or`oville (530),533-5012 BUTTE COUNTY y DEVELOPMENT SEK�7CES ._`. � � ... � � w . ..Y �. �. r moi,::.:"• i • .- t t; cc: Supervisor Bob Beeler, Supervisor Jane Dolan, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi, Supervisor Mary Anne Houx, Supervisor Curt Josiassen, Oroville Mercury Register, Butte County Planning Commissioners: Richard Leland, Fernando Marin, Michael Evans, Chuck Nelson,Nina Lambert, Assemblyman Rick Keene, Congressman John Doolittle, Trustee Dorothy Rice, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mike Glaze/South Feather Water & Power, Henro BrachaisButte County Fire Chief, Perry ReniffButte County Sheriff, Stand Up for California/Cheryl Schmit, Tom Turk/TNT Realty. 71PR-29-200408 :31 AM NINA BRUSCHI 5305324813 P. 01 April 29, 2004 Butte County Public Works and Planning Departments Attention: Stephen Bettes and Mike Crump 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 PROPOSED ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA SUBDIVISION (BETWEEN MELROSE AND OAKVALE AVENUES) It is my understanding that the subject subdivision has been proposed and has the potential to significantly impact the surrounding/adjoining properties and existing neighborhoods. Specific areas of concern are: 1. Drainage-this area has historically been plagued with flooding;development in the proposed area will create additional impact. Mitigation proposed? 2. The proposed area is known for its wildlife, beever dams, wetlands, creeks and streams; the environmental impact will be enormous. Mitigation proposed? 3. Traffic-the Copley Acres Subdivision has experienced a demonstrable increase in °thru°traffic as a result of the two casinos. Speed enforcement is currently non- existent and the hazards have increased muni-fold for the neighborhood children and pedestrians. With on-going budget constraints state-wide, it is unlikely funding will be available to curtail the current traffic conditions let alone address increased traffic concerns that are raised with the proposed development. Any ingress from the proposed subdivision on to Melrose Avenue is unacceptable and detrimental to the existing neighborhood. 4. Roads -the impact to the neighborhood roadways is cause for concern. Again, budget constraints as they are will preclude the County from undertaking anything more than minor repairs or patches. The neighborhood is of the mind that we need to preserve the integrity of our existing infrastructure and mitigate any additional impact or traffic increases. t R + • + E E D Y E D APR 2 9 2004 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING 01Yi$ION APR-29-2004 08:32 AM NINA BRUSCHI 5305324813 P. 02 5. The proposed Activity Center is a beast all of its own. A facility such as this is not in keeping with the flavor and integrity of the surrounding areas. Activity from the area's tribal community is going to be very difficult to mitigate. While a Use Permit may be required to address mitigation-activities such as this are impossible to mitigate in a residential area. While today's meeting is preliminary,the affected neighborhoods are very concerned and alarmed. To address the need for accurate information we will be contacting you to set up a meeting time and date to discuss the community's preliminary concerns. y Thank you for taking this information into consideration and we look forward to working with the County. Please feel free to contact me at 534-8003. Christine Lasik. 55 Melrose Drive Oroville, CA 95966 � l APR-29-2004 08:04 AM NINA BRUSCHI 5305324813 P.01 PETITION OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT 13Y THE ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA � n (y The Enterprise Randteds Is requesting permission to move forward with a housing development of which would be located at the west ends of Crone Avenue and Tucker Avenue, in the east Oroville area identifled as APN 036-540-010(see map below). According to the Butte County Department of Development Services"project descriprtion"the goal is to provide safe,sanitary and affordable housing for tribal members who are low to medium income. Enterprise Rancheris proposes to purchase land and build 15-30 for homes for=120 elders and members who are living in dilapidated,unsanitary conditions or are homeless. Possible land uses are a Community Center,Housing Office and Maintenance Department,Fire Station,Storage Sheds,Gymnasium;imsketball Courts,Tennis Courts, Community Paris and Picnic area for all Tribal Members and other outside athletic activities. or BEC. m a 23 T. /9 A R. 4 E. A D. At a A (� i. ® JJJJJAC M 1� \ ; J.."AV R.fAt I \ 8 K I IV 610MIAr fog.", E - � x � t- KL CJI I ally. / ICL{ I• woo Ilpn.A i w MQO 1 80 ACRES ' The following are the objections to the this potential housing development: Traffic will increase greatly in the neighborhood on Olive Highway, Oakvale, Hilldale, Melrose, Deerwood, Fairhill, hence Foothill Boulevard, Oro Bangor Hwy, Lower Wyandotte,etc. At certain times of the day the traffic on Oakvale is already bottle-necked due to Ophir school traffic. The increased traffic through Melrose, Deerwood and Falrhill (Copley acres)will hinder those neighborhood residents' abiliity to move about freely in their secure and safe neighborhood. Thus, the streets In the Copley Acres Subdivision are already sub-stranded. This would be an enormous Impact on the streets. The neighborhoods in the immediate vicinity of this proposes housing development are affluant homeowners thus the home owners will see a sharp decrease in the market values of their homes. The Ophir School that lies within this area is not large enough to accomodate such a surplus of students. The crime rate would most definately Increase In the affluant neighborhoods bordering the proposed housing development E C E U V n E . U V APR 2 9 2004 BUTTE COUNTY 01 ANNING nIVISION a t 1�CO. v 11 TH • iC f!I>i • :1_ �4 _//� PEAK `` / l Ml 91 / , ' .,. .. rte: �/® a c 4 ♦ / �t� as / 1 / � ai .� .' ® � .rte I , I .� • , .�. / t lip wo WA Fj W,malAUR Till M r ■ �yjAr�l, a 77 !��■ �� , .. iii � I t ♦. � � / //. � _ NOW in r Jl ilk Uva ..► /i 1 • / ♦/. _ ill+• �' icLIMi11 ! J,.1 �T Olow"All, r � ►. M _ FA 71M. gg�! f r.• r �L' � . . .•, LH MA / Kim! � • ;. i ' • ' � � '' � 7� % � � � � � Cts OPI �� ��,• �•tom/ISI � � � �' ..1 � s■ C � � 7 .� � All �►1.l,s;iHUMAN '111' ;i��i l�'iu�,�111 � i'i�,�I��,;S' % �►�l r'�/�1fLil1'1}�iiJ!:�;:�r'1 Lu uncle MW ON WW- v" Wl►��'�t�l:l�� VI���i1 `rW %J1�1/�:iil���y l ,�• % �� - ': - �: /J ► i �/ +i R,�ii APR-29-2004 08 :07 AM NINA BRUSCHI 5305-324813 PAGEi U : TFI 4 •N i rj / ,! �• q • ;N • '.. SLI . _ :mil • ' c[ 113 9 dl'IC(Cl&Aloe 5.39 ww • ' lad ■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ E C E I U E APR 2 9 2004 jj,,�� c � f t- � ; � ��` , i � . „�._y l . r I i a Butte County Deparlrnent ofDevelopment Services OT rF YVONNE CHRISTOPHER,DIRECTOR c 0 7 County Center Drive 0 _ Oroville,CA 95965 0 o o (530)538.7601 Telephone, (530)538.7785 Facsimile ADMINISTRATION*BUILDING*GIS*PLANNING July 7, 2004 Enterprise Rancheria Attn: Clifford Angle 1940 Feather River Blvd Suite B Oroville, CA 95965 Re: Pre-Development Review for Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map for the Enterprise Rancheria, APN 036-540-010 i Dear Mr. Angle: I I The following letter is intended to provide a summary of the information provided in the meeting held on April 29, 2004, regarding your proposal to divide a 63.3-acre parcel into thirty-two (32) 0.5-acre parcels and three (3) parcels of 15.9+ acres each. The project site is located at the west ends of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue, west of Oakvale Avenue, east Oroville Area. The following individuals attended the meeting: Clifford Angle—Enterprise Rancheria Harvey Angle—Enterprise Rancheria Tom Turk Steve Betts—Butte County Planning Division Ted Crawford—Captain, Butte County Fire Department/CDF Darren Read- Captain, Butte County Fire Department/CDF Doug Fogel—Butte County Environmental Health Division Eric Schroth—Engineer,Butte County Public Works Department Michael Vieira, Manager,Butte County Building Division Felix Wannenmacher—Butte County Counsel's Office Mike Glaze—South Feather Water&Power District Josh Stuart, City of Oroville Public Works Department Felicia Haslem—City of Oroville Public Works Department The Butte County Fire Department/California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention stated that a pressurized community water system, with fire hydrants, would be required. The pressurized community water system would have to be installed by the Rancheria. Additionally, through vehicular circulation would have to be provided in order to ensure adequate emergency exit from the project site in case of a natural disaster, such as a wildfire. 1 The project site is located within the State Responsibility Area (SRA) and 30—foot building setbacks may be required from all property lines. Please refer to the attached comments from this agency regarding your proposal. The Butte County Environmental Health Division stated that the project site must connect to the Lake Oroville Area Public Utility District's (LOAPUD) public sanitary sewer system. You would be required to submit a will serve letter from LOAPUD at the time of submittal of a tentative subdivision map application with the Butte County Planning Division. Domestic water supply would be required to be obtained from the South Feather Water and Power District. The Butte County Public Works Department would have numerous conditions of project approval. Some of their conditions include: • Prove that there is approved access to a public road or state highway from each proposed parcel. According to Butte County Code Section 20-8, approved access means "right of vehicular travel, within a legal right-of-way that meets county standards, to a public street, with entry thereon, over a roadway that meets county design standards." According to County records, the Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue right-of-ways do not extend all the way to the project site. In order to use these two roadways for access to the project site, the right-of-ways for Crane and Tucker Avenues would need to be 60 feet wide from the project site out to Oakvale Avenue. The Rancheria would be responsible for obtaining the required right-of- ways. • Construct the roads leading to the project site and the interior streets to County Road Standard RS-2B with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. • Prepare a traffic study to determine the project's impacts to vehicular circulation in the project area. • Provide through circulation. Butte County Code Section 20-133 prohibits more than 20 parcels are a cul-de-sac road. As was submitted to the County, it appears that the project would result in much more than 20 parcels on a cul-de-sac road. A minimum of two separate access roads connecting to a public road or state highway will be required. • A plan for a permanent solution for drainage is required. Possible conditions of project approval from the Public Works Department are enclosed. The Butte County Agricultural Commissioner's Office commented that the project may have an impact to a production orchard that lies on the east side of the project site. Some type of buffer may be required from this orchard, such as a building setback(which may be 300 feet) or a physical buffer, such as a substantial tree stand. The Agricultural Commissioner's Office states that they need additional information on the orchard and on a buffer design before they can make specific recommendations. Written comments from the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner's Office are enclosed. The project site is located in the City of Oroville's Sphere of Influence. Representatives from the City of Oroville's Public Works Department attended the meeting, but did not express any significant issues. A request for comments regarding a future tentative subdivision map on the project site will be sent to the City of Oroville for comments, which may respond with conditions of approval. 2 The South Feather Water and Power District provides domestic water to the project area and would be the provider for domestic water to the project site. The water line would have to be extended to the project parcel, the cost of which would be borne by the applicant. The representative from South Feather Water and Power stated that they would need detailed and complete plans for full development of the whole project site, including potential future uses, before they could issue a will serve letter. A will serve letter would be required prior to the recording of the final subdivision map. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) commented on this project and stated that the project may have an impact to State Route 162 and may require improvements to the intersection of State Route 162 and Oakvale Avenue. Caltrans needs more detailed information on your project before they can provide specific comments. Your proposal may require that a traffic study be prepared and that you pay "fair share" costs for improvements at the intersection of State Route 162 and Oakvale Avenue. Written comments from Caltrans are enclosed. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board commented on this project and stated that the following may be needed: • Clean Water Action Section 404 Permit • Construction Activities Storm Water Permit • Dewatering Permit Written comments from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board agency are enclosed. The project site is zoned A-R (Agricultural Residential, 6,500 square foot parcels when connected to public sewer and water) and has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. Your proposal would be consistent with the A-R zoning and appears to be consistent with the General Plan. Your proposal will require submittal of a Tentative Subdivision Map application. The County will be required to prepare an environmental analysis of the project, either through an initial study ("mitigated negative declaration") or through an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). We will not be able to determine what type of environmental review will be required until such time as a formal application for Tentative Subdivision Map is submitted to and reviewed by the Butte County Planning Division. Based upon your proposal as contained in materials submitted with your Pre-Development Conference application the following items may be required for us to prepare an environmental evaluation: • Archaeological Study(survey for historic and pre-historic cultural resources) • Biological/ Botanical Study (survey for rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species) • Wetlands Delineation • Traffic Study • Noise Study 3 Additional studies may be required depending on the project design and comments received from other agencies. The project site is located in blue oak woodland and the project may require retention or replacement of blue oaks. The project site also contains several creeks or swales and the project may require setbacks and no disturbances area around these drainages. Your proposal also included uses such as a cultural center, administration/housing office, maintenance building, fire station, storage sheds, gymnasium,basketball courts, tennis courts, picnic area, and a park. These types of community uses are not allowed in the A-R zone. The PUD (Planned Unit Development) zoning district would allow these types of uses, but you would need to submit an application for and receive approval of a rezone project to change the zoning of the site from A-R to PUD. These uses may be allowed by a Use Permit as quasi-public uses if the Enterprise Rancheria is determined to be a non-profit organization. You would need to provide appropriate documentation to the County to prove that your organization is a non-profit organization in order to allow these uses with a Use Permit. While your proposal appears to be consistent with the zoning district and the General Plan, we can not guarantee that the Planning Commission would approve of the proposed land division. There may be some unknown factors, or issues brought up during the public hearing process, that may prevent the Planning Commission from approving a land division. The information given to you at the pre-development conference is preliminary and is subject to further refinement or changes as the application progresses to and through the formal application process, including public hearings by the Butte County Planning Commission. The enclosed conditions should not be construed as being the final conditions since the County subdivision map process may change the project due to other agency requirements. As you are aware, there has already been considerable opposition to your proposed project from the residents in the area. Attached please find a copy of the correspondence we have received from the residents in the area regarding your proposal. If you have any questions regarding this letter please feel free to give me a call at 538-7153 or via e-mail at sbetts@buttecounty.net. Sincerely, -0;� Stephen Betts Senior Planner Enc. 4 A—enc_ e Nsy"- �+LIU V7 cry( or Caborc��._�GcJ E1�c;t IKl-t1►-q5 2�.0 mcamwferc ✓l&)M GouurY of 134(77rF- - AO S �3d' Sal 53 110D S CL E•rc. Jc�.rot� 3�.'�te �_v_.a��7 �.���« Wks s03 S - 7266 -��rC t►u= G.cA� SQ.�-�.�,t,,-tt_l�Jr��`i1� �'�- - -- _ .. _ li - - � }t - - - - - - - --- I . -- - f� ___.- --- -- - - -- - - - - - -- - _. .. _ �� jt _.... -- - •- - � - --- - - -- - � ---. _�__. ._ - - - ft - -- - i 1� -- ;i - ---- -- ----- � - ---- - �.. i it �� r • � r, 1iI •�� 4 ' � -i � .t `` ---- �' �� - ----- -- �t - -- -- - - . � _ _ _ _ __ . _ .. _ y --- -- i - ---�- - -- ---• --� -- -- - -. -- -------- --- --- f BUTTE COUNTY STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICANT: Enterprise Rancheria DATE: 4/02/04 AGENT: APN: 036-540-010 FILE#: PLANNER: Steve Betts PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Those items checked are conditions of approval. PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS: A. STREETS ® I. Prior to, or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, provide a fully executed road maintenance agreement on the County approved form. ® 2. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the Final Map. Street names shall be approved by the County Address Coordinator prior to the recordation of the Final Map. A minimum of 5 alternate names for each new street shall be submitted. ® 3. Obtain encroachment permit for all new or existing driveway approaches and construct them to County standards,as specified in County Improvement Standards. ® 4. Provide a cul-de-sac, designed and constructed to county standards as specified in the County Improvement Standards. The Final Map shall show the cul-de-sac. ® 5. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that there is approved access conforming to County standards to each parcel from a publicly maintained road. ® 6. All access rights shall be reserved by deed,per County Ordinance, and offered for dedication and depicted on the Final Map. ® 7. The developer shall provide all necessary traffic safety signs including stop signs. A note shall be place on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map stating "The property owners are responsible for the maintenance of all private road safety signs,including stop signs." ® -8. Pay the recording fees then in effect for recording the Final Maps and related documents. ❑ 9. Deed to Butte County, in fee simple,_feet of right-of-way from the centerline of . The right of way shall be sufficient for the installation of standard No. S-5 at all street intersections. ® 10. Construct full street section on Crane Ave. and Tucker Ave. from project boundary to 1}r ve. to RS-2B geometric standard with curb,gutter and sidewalk. Minimum �� �' 11, T t section to be 2 "AC and 8 " AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 % V, mpaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R"value detchbi 'on and other data may be required to support the section design. {{ APR 2 9 2004 i BUTTE COUNTY PIANN N" i ® 11. Construct full street section on interior streets to RS- 2B road standard with curb,gutter,and sidewalk and 2 " AC, and 8 " AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 % relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R" value determination and other data may be required to support the section design. ❑ 12. Relinquish abutters rights to Butte County, along the frontage of parcels ,except at approved access points. ® 13. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map,obtain an encroachment permit and construct a collector public road connection County Standard S-18A ,in accordance with County Improvement Standards. Adequate sight distance at the intersection of access road and Oakvale Ave. shall be provided. ® 14. Show on the additional map sheet or on a document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map a 65 ft. building setback from the centerline of Oakvale Ave., a 50' building setback from the centerline of all interior streets, and a 50' no disturbance setback along both sides of the stream channel ® 1.5. Street lighting shall be provided in accordance with Butte County requirements, accepted design criteria, and recommendations of Pacific Gas & Electric Company. If the developer chooses to install the streetlights and pay energy costs through a County Service Area (CSA), he/she must complete the formation of the CSA prior to recordation of the Final Map. The CSA formation process will require the Developer to fund the service until the beginning of the first fiscal year in which service charges can be collected for the CSA, and agree to an annual maximum service charge to ensure continued operation of the facilities. ® 16. Provide traffic study. ® 17. Provide circulation. ® 18. Contribute pro-rata share for installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Oakvale Ave. and Olive Highway. B. DRAINAGE ® 1. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. ❑ 2. Establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the additional map sheet the elevations (by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark and a temporary benchmark on-site. ❑ 3. Pay the applicable drainage fees in effect at the time of recordation of the Final Map for the drainage area. (The current fee is now$ /acre.) ® 4. A Construction Storm Water Permit will be required by the State Water Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance(including clearing,excavation,filling,and grading)of one or more acres. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. The Permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. i C. FINAL MAP ® 1. New lot lines shall comply with the applicable setback requirements of the Butte County Zoning Ordinance and the County adopted Uniform Building Code. ® 2. Show all easements of record on the Final Map. ® 3. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay in full any and all delinquent, current and estimated taxes and assessments as specified in Article 8, of Chapter 4 of Division 2 of Title 7,of the California Government Code commencing with Section 66492. ❑ 4: 'Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works,that the parcel to be divided is a legal parcel. ❑ 5. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay all applicable assessments established by affected assessment districts,in full. ❑ 6. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map regarding ® 7. Protect oak trees remaining on homesite lots and replace oak trees to be or already removed at a 5 to 1 ratio. ® 8. The project site contains the habitat types known to harbor sensitive plant species. Conduct a botanical survey and implement protection measures if sensitive species are present. ® 9. Minimize mosquito breeding areas through grading and drainage. Fill surrounding dredger pits and provide positive drainage in the main creek channel. A section 404 permit will be required from the Army Corp of Engineers to fill wetlands. I I I i i; APR-28-2004 13:40 CALTRANS D3 PLANNING 530 741 5346 P.02iO3 • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSI+tTATION DISTRICT 3 703 S STREET P.O.BOX 911 MARYS V1LLE,CA 95901-0911 Flys your power! Or energy effigienr! PHONE (530)741-4025 FAX (530)741-5346 TTY (530)741-4509 April 28,2004 04BUT0013 03-BUT-162,P.M.20.490 TSM Pre-Development Review Application Mr.Stephen Betts Butte County Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Orovi Ile,CA 95965-3397 Dear Mr. Betts: Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the pre-development application submitted by the Enterprise Rancheria to divide a 63.3-acre parcel located west of Oakvale Avenue, and south of State Route (SR) 162 and the City of Oroville into thirty-two single-family residential lots and three 15.9-acre parcels. Our comments on the application are as follows: • The development of the single-family residential lots should not cause adverse significant traffic impacts along SR 162 and at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. • Development of the three 15.9-acre lots.in conjunction with the residential lots and additional projects being proposed in the area may cause a cumulative traffic impact to the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. We recommend that if a formal project is submitted, the environmental document prepared for the project address this potential cumulative traffic impact and include mitigation measures. • Lengthening the SR.162 eastbound right turn lane to Oakvale Avenue or by installing a traffic signal at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection will reduce this potential cumulative impact to a Less than Significant level. We suggest that if a formal project is submitted, the County require payment of traffic mitigation fees to help pay for the "fair share' costs of these future SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection improvements. • At this time, it is unknown if the related housing facilities such as the proposed park, cultural center, housing administration office building, maintenance center,fire station, storage units, and recreation facilities will be developed only for use by residents of the subdivision or for public use. The use of the related facilities will alter future traffic volumes in the area; therefore, the use should be clarified in any formal application. "Caltrans improves mobility otroxx California" E ED - E D APR 2 8 2004 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION APR-28-2004 13:40 CALTRANS D3 PLANNING 530 741 5346 P.03iO3 •J Mr.Stephen Betts • April 28,2004 Page 2 a If it is anticipated that the proposed land use on the 15.9-acre parcels may change in the future from Low Density Residential to a more intensive land use,then a traffic impact study may be needed that analyzes the intersection of SR 162 and Oakvale Avenue. Please send us a copy of the formal application for review when available. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Rick Heiman, Local Development/Inter- Governmental Review Coordinator,at(530) 634-7612. Sincerely, BRUCE DE TERRA,CHIEF Office of Regional and Transit Planning "Caltrans lmp►nves mobility arross California" TOTAL P.03 s - California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Terry Tamminen Arnold Schwarzenegger Secretaryfor Redding Office Governor Environmental 415 Knollcrest Drive,Suite 100,Redding,California 96002 Protection Phone(530)224-4845•FAX(530)224-4857 http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwgcb5 BUTTE COUNTY 27 April 2004 APR 2 8 2A04 Stephen Betts DEVELOPMENT Butte County Planning Division SERVICES 7 County Center Drive r Oroville, CA 95965 COMMENTS ON PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE FOR,ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA, APN 4036-540-010, OROVILLE, BUTTE COUNTY This letter is in response to your request for comments prior to a pre-development conference on the proposed Enterprise Rancheria housing project. The conference will be held on 29 April 2004 in Oroville. The proposal is to divide an existing 63.66-acre parcels into thirty-two 0.5-acre parcels and three other parcels of approximately 15.9 acres each. Fifteen to thirty single-family housing units are planned as well as infrastructure (roads, etc.), administrative/maintenance/cultural building, fire station, storage sheds, gymnasium, basketball courts, tennis courts, picnic area, and park. The project is expected to take five years to complete. Public sewer and water will be provided Our comments on the proposal are provided below. -The Butte County Planning Division is uncertain, at this time, whether the property will eventually become tribal land or whether it will remain private. We would have substantially different comments for activities on tribal land. Wetlands and/or stream course alteration—The project proponent may need to apply for a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit (§404 permit) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A §404 permit is required for activities involving a discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States. "Waters of the United States" include wetlands, riparian zones, streambeds, rivers, lakes and oceans. The Army Corps of Engineers Butte County contact for §404 permits is Ms. Laura Whitney, (916) 557-7455. Projects requiring a §404 permit also require a water quality certification(pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act) verifying that the project does not violate State water quality standards. A water quality certification is required for any project that impacts water of the State (such as streams and wetlands). Activities that fall under the water quality certification process include, but are not limited to: stream crossings, the modification of stream banks or stream courses, and the filling or modification of wetlands. A water quality certification must be obtained prior to construction. Failure to obtain a water quality certification, when required, may result in enforcement action. The Regional Board Contact for water,quality certifications is Scott A. Zaitz, who can be reached at the letterhead address or by telephoning (530) 224-4784. Isolated wetlands not covered by the federal Clean Water Act Wetlands not covered by the Clean Water Act are known as "isolated wetlands." Should the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determine that isolated wetlands exist at the project site and should the project impact or have potential to impact the isolated wetlands, a Report of Waste Discharge and filing fee California Environmental Protection Agency �a Recycled Paper Stephen Betts - 2 - 27 April 2004 must be submitted prior to commencing the construction activity. The Regional Board will consider the provided information and either issue or waive Waste Discharge Requirements. Failure to obtain waste discharge requirements or a waiver thereof, when required, may result in enforcement action. Report of Waste Discharge application forms are available by calling our office at(530) 224-4845. Construction storm water - A Construction Activities Storm Water Permit is required for storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading, and excavation result in a land disturbance of one acre or more. Storm water discharges from construction activity that results in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan development of one acre or more, also requires a construction storm water permit. A construction storm water permit, if required, must be obtained prior to construction. Failure to obtain a construction storm water permit, when required, may result in enforcement action. Construction storm water permits can be obtained from Scott A. Zaitz (see above contact information)with the Redding office of the Regional Board. Dewatering Alternative 1: discharge to storm drains or waters of the United States - A dewatering permit, General Order for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters, may be required for construction activities. This general NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)permit covers the discharge to waters of the United States of clean or relatively pollutant-free wastewater that poses little or no threat to water quality. The following categories are covered by the dewatering permit: well development water; construction dewatering; pump/well testing; pipeline/tank pressure testing; pipeline/tank flushing or dewatering; condensate discharges; water supply system discharges; miscellaneous dewatering/low threat discharges. The dewatering permit applies only to direct discharges to waters of the United States. Failure to obtain a dewatering permit, when required, may result in enforcement action. An application form and a copy of the permit are available at this office. Dewatering Alternative 2: discharges to land- Construction dewatering discharges that are contained on land (i.e., will not enter waters of the United States) are allowed under a general waiver adopted under Regional Board Resolution No. R5-2003-0008,provided the following conditions are met: (1)the dewatering discharge is of a quality as good as or better than underlying groundwater; and (2) there is a low risk of nuisance. Examples of dewatering discharges to land include a terminal basin, irrigation (with no return to waters of the United States), and dust control. You may request written confirmation from this office that the waiver is applicable. Wastewater treatment and disposal - Public sewer will be provided by the Lake Oroville Area Public Utilities District (LOAPUD). Therefore,there will be no need for waste discharge requirements addressing on-site disposal of wastewater. If you have any questions, please contact me at (530) 224-3249 or the letterhead address. X Ray Bruun, P.E. Associate Engineer Shasta-Cascade Watershed RB: sae cc: State Clearinghouse, Sacramento Butte County Environmental Health Division, Oroville Page 1 of 2 Betts, Steve From: David Burris [daveandcristi@earthlink.net] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 3:47 PM To: Betts, Steve Cc: clogue20 Subject: RE: Enterprise Rancheria land purchase Mr, Betts, Thank you for the information on the process. Neighbors here are strongly opposed to this issue and would like to be informed every step of the way. Thanks, David Burris ----- Original Message ----- From: Betts.-Steve To: daveandcristi@earthlink_net Sent: 4/30/2004 9:09:33 AM Subject: RE: Enterprise Rancheria land purchase Mr. and Mrs. Burris, The pre-development conference that we held yesterday with the Enterprise Rancheria was to provide them with information regarding a project that they are proposing to do. The County has a procedure, called the Pre-Development Conference, which enables a landowner or developer to get information from County staff and other public agencies on a project that they are considering doing. The only people attending apre-development conference are County staff, staff from other public agencies, and the applicant and their engineers or representatives. No one who can approve a project (i.e. a Planning Commissioner or a Board of Supervisor) attends a pre-development conference. The Enterprise Rancheria paid the applicable application fee ($1,454.00)and submitted the necessary information. County staff and other agencies reviewed their application material and at yesterday's meeting told the Rancheria representatives what they would need to do in order to submit an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map. Numerous issues regarding their proposed project were discussed. I gave copies of all the letters and petitions I received from the neighbors to the Rancheria representatives. A pre-development conference is not open to the public because it is an informational meeting only-no decision is made. The pre-development conference is not considered to be a project and notice to the landowners in the neighborhood is not required. While the pre-development conference is not open to the public, all of the information contained in our file on the Enterprise Rancheria pre-development conference is available for public review. The Enterprise Rancheria now has a decision to make as to if they want to go forward with a Tentative Subdivision Map project. If they decide to do that, they would have to submit a Tentative Subdivision Map application to us and pay the applicable fees. The County would then prepare an environmental assessment of their project, and when that is completed we would mail notices to the landowners in the neighborhood that that document is available for review and comment. We would then schedule the project for a public hearing by the Butte County Planning Commission. We would also mail notices to all the landowners in the neighborhood of the location, date, and time of the Planning Commission meeting. So, if the Enterprise Rancheria decides to go ahead with their project the landowners in the project area will be notified several times and will be allowed to speak at all public hearings that are held on the project. 5/5/2004 Page 2 of 2 4 I hope this answers your questions. If not, please feel free to give me a call or an e-mail. Steve Stephen Betts Senior Planner Butte County Planning Division 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 Desk- (530)538-7153 Fax —(530) 538-7785 -----Original Message----- From: David Burris [mailto:daveandcristi@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 5:46 PM To: Betts, Steve Cc: Beeler, Bob; Christopher, Yvonne Subject: Enterprise Rancheria land purchase Mr Betts, understand today's meeting at 7 County Center Drive was not open to the public. I would like to know when a public forum will be held so the voices of those here in the neighborhood can be heard. As a homeowner and Butte County taxpayer I feel that I have a right to be heard by the county decision makers on this issue. Your prompt response will be greatly appreciated. Thank you, David and Cristi Burris 538-9448 32 Hart Drive Oroville, Ca 95966 I I I I I 5/5/2004 ••... •.w vvv vvaa VV11G 1.Vu1VlY %IVUN0LL l�I. UU1 SUr1DAY '� � �a • $1 Includes aates tett MM.orovillemr.com I Enterprise proposes rancheria subdivision .. BY MARY W1, � StaA Wrier ' �k Enterprise Rancheria is proposing to subdivide. a 63- i acre parcel behind Copley Acres and butting against Ophir School,,but some neighbors fear. ,r �i it would devalue the neighbor- s <• hood increase traffic and crime or even be an attempt to bring a casino m the back door. ' "I'm against it," said Toni Edwards..-'We five on Melrose, and we have so much traffic ' `t�"` ' ;• ' " a here already." �:- ,. r The Butte County "`'`" :•�x J�'' " : v ' Department of Development r• Services'has scheduled a pre.- n development meeting-to divide a 63-acre parcel into 32 half-acre " lots and three parcels of 15.9 plus acres. ' •+; ` :'•' ,-"; ' •• The conference will run from 9.to 11 a.m.;ThurmayeAprit29, •' £+'• RUNYA PAULNEAWWREG151EA at 7.Cduhty Centel I?iive,itl'the t afl,IC�ren reEi�e.a t .�lc ,w'y House.Ift.0rovtite. Development Services confer- x ence'roorn: h home for the elderly has been 'ung-the women up and putting juvenile delinguemcy, 'adult "Enterprise proposes to pur- repainted and-features a full their children in foster care, criminality and lost productivi- chase land and build 15-30 I kitchen,group study areas and asserts I-iig ' ty,to society."' ' houses for 60/120 elders and .y, private bedrooms for each -•.The need for such a facility, Accord' to a brochure,the members who are living in a- mother and her children up to he says,is borne out by the fol- goal of TRACK is to !'engage dilapidated, unsanitary condi- le age five, and a playioom filled lowing statistics produced at a .the entire family in the recovery tions or are homeless," accoiid- lt with toys and games. child welfare services•confer- process, breaking the cycle of ing. to the pre-application Beth Porter, its program ence last year. • addiction for generations to report. n= director,says there are plans to • About 67,0O0 infants are come." Other possible land uses sy build a pia ground outside.and born in -California annually The recovering mother's include a cultural center, com- e a daycare fyaality when funding with alcohol or drug exposure mantra is printed on the•same munity center housing office becomes available. — 80 percent of whom will brochure: and maintenance department; e- The home is licensed for up come to the attention of child "Everything I do allows irie. fire department; storage sheds, al to 10 women and 16 children. protection services before their to be connected to others. I am gymnasium, basketball courts, to Currently,there are seven adult first birthday. a capable, competent woman. tennis courts, community park, nt women and two children,both • About$25 billion is spent My existence counts. MY and picnic area :for all tribal of 5-year-old boys,living there, nationally on direct services, actions today affect my.child's members. iin The children of three of the including hospitalization,men- future.Therefore I am account= Neighbors. fear the low- resident mothers visit on week- tal health treatment and law able to make healthy choices... income subdivision planned to te ends. enforcement for children-who I am more than a survivor,I am house elderly and tubal mem- Being able to bond with their experience abuse and neglect in a champion." bers who are homeless or live in in children helps in the.mothers' the home. Women can stay at the unsanitary conditions would – --��� %,mA to mnre That amount doesn't devalue the neighborhood. ••.. ..t,� ,,.,v cotta CUl'M 1,UWNTY WLIIVJt,L '� -----i Mercu -Register. SUBDIVISIM"_` Continued;tromppge fA "Those tribal members—do would•' 'd g"increase:•traffic follows. beton• . ere ;1Vina,$rusdti on:Olive Highway;'0 Md., :'°DeLaby a3 A others'ai ef�skep said. "It's low-incdaie.hoilsiurg, Itilldile,.Melrose, Deerwood tical that the rancheiia would and this is;orf upper etid,Bevel• anti F1,a_Q`-'avenues hindering buy so much property without idents frpm mov- a mpey-making.incentive. "If Ituschi said ghe.aitd.others ing around-freei�"- tbiiz seciue all•T4i rated to bund is 30 low- ha egn,,takittg petttiom and�safe neighborhood.' indRiie-houses,I Vvotildn'f buY w. achood, and the report also states the 63 aicxes of high end pproperty' e Fygne,,;,tl�e ; .asked. • tad project worild'•.:devilue the. `)'�%teiprise receridy•_tried to •s! ned. She's•; so concerned Homes in the nejhborhood•arid buy'propertyin Yuba County tb d ouiii►e pased;&ime and traf increase;c�ime• r build's casmo and hotel. Sortie Another-;;,-neighbor;'. Rich fear brat after the land becomes ctaSra'psed��tklie'. l?eTQ�,saictthe waist wth, Iridian rancheria' land, .;p of'Oane•and Tri&er' but,theq want i rralitj! 'develop- Enterprise could claim sovet- " es'IV. esti,;iofL1 Oakdale went:flmf,increases roper#y eigntg•and build whatever they .., pp enme,,irr 'the::east C)ziDVMe- values acid. follows.•�the=-same• chose. i t� �1`"i;:% :• M • ,:•,^t;: planrifmfg'.a xd-.envikoi'' ental Enterprise Ranche�tia wasn't rep�zt:states the"prdject standaids'•thaf•'ieveiyorie.-else available•to comment. ii' Contintaedlro' 'a"d• Jk-' ,.•F , $'pend :ka:•tor 1 ,:,getcent:of spofCesmari;fiDr,the;yrovisioiW sitaldng them the second largest AVID C:NEIE.9E�F.WMERGl7EtYftEG1S �r�ei �, one dor s+e�un _COste •authdri s ro nr=age- - armed tori t iit th8 coup-' t3' n'' P gam` ea+ , , �.i:;i:� ment office,:said-firom'8 dad- behind onr the 135,000 U.S. I,-Annuel;Teco aift tt>iii '' rya ;' "'a:' hY Y � .:ms's.. ear ari mania g" sr j° "eout ' a'as nil' '1-"Th sooner we•can' vide troops., 9 ndMoC��ie�d.and`';.,,1•Z TI �,. :'-. .�•g ,•nom . e: ;. Pro. LatheXeee6n�t` ed a azi o ort+ini do Reed,- a member- df the r Detiolf;from:.left;{Niel(C3spers, �'p ? p �??? s; - P Pl PP ty ,SUI 7 c.,r, r �p�aetrcaru,tiipTerice, skid poittheiz famYlies.aQid imp rove Senate ' Armed' Services thi their,local areas the fas there. 'Co "� , t;ti�;;;,>• i t'i`s,j�rl a �{ matittee •said the move. �� .x 'timafes"by!PQfliexelironni- will be a'positive:impact oir'the being spent foi'security means s'`•: ,; .. S,' �'.,?✓;Jvg63 a *�r8tl�tllOTl � C1 5 '�: li secuIY sittiation here,", he; the -reconstruction effort '.is �',o T cant r (Lha dubs t said. , :"�• "compromised and limited: ,t. ' , 1 to d threat'$eve jias East week,giant construction Aztd whrle he said'tom an tis, s ... p ►��iir _;,obTYaioisl a d:a`« g�o�p;eoia-` companies, Siemens AG, must:spend what is needed to >, btitticfion ' �o et'`i'xec,u ; Bechtel.and General• Electric protect .their workers, the +p; that they%oudd'hke'to help tis ) a :,'•' '.° „ te= it is very iuiee•Cf them,"'said`"gowen:•to 'he.;ArssoCrated'• sair3 dney hadsuspetided work expenditure underscores the ,�_press trc a �ivrie 4 terY-i `—•on Sonne projects.because of the huge costAW this' operation 0 Aldridggee ; dadM;`k a iovis;o'` i*instabili ut to extract from e is Sb'4f •Sma11-:TownSatuid pt; tY- �,,8 aY ar>Et &ity is,the US";bed agency; Sowers said,those- compa= United States." a�.Pdi�lits,. or "Stay . t}Lat;:has;beeri`;1°a, stexln ares'decisions to halt work ire Senate A ro nation's te; som$'of your favorite songs;br' dYu g ", pl' P ly,,' •oit'jiisf.,_want to'help•otit;.�e=Z 'strtice,.ttie, dgwnfall of :rsolated instances.. But,, Committee Chairman Ted local' hi school 9' oil' ro .;S�i•dznlssein; tw>s,..:. added "lf 'tie threat level Stevens; R-Alaska• said the �at"�o ficin 'ea oti]cl' riih s-higt Ahey�ay become mo'ney',"for reconstruction is" is grams, this is the concert:foie �., •, • be a•venous�.;ycle, the 's1o,W;• mote- `''hart just isolated there for tltiem to do'*Hat.they+ ry you. "1 'dc' 'in the wor? 'E!a"nsfewer- ,imit ces."'• -have to do" including protect s The corticert is at B p nn.,and. abs..acid,essential setvices or There are about 15,000 civil their emplo ees. e, tieTcets are $20 for' ,gerreran`; e;lracp„peo°pee..-Tiiatr.iit ttiar;; ions.y;►orlcirig for defe e.'coa- Colesaidplaruters•estimated Is adirriission: You"sari'.paircli�se'cold; feed,ther�dissatis f action. tractors M Tra initially-,;that, secu r costs Id tickets at both the OrbvMe Hig1i q` ' �Y"_ 's aril•Las I'h>tmas,High student that has helped spawn hostility_ Many contractors are hiring would eat'up�0 pen`?en if the stores,at Gold Country Casino, toward.'66'Amprican occu- expensive''private security reconstniction contracts. But A. nr iiv chane at 538-4560, prers.'', -'• firms to protect thew employees Bowen said that money was '"nnP!:Df -the thinks'' that. an work sites. Because of the :ex ected to.come from the$32 • - ---' . 1„']l:n» f nno+oe6 ie�nmtii�i»o � Mostly sunny.ices.. Genetic engineered rice y . s y See Page 4A . 80s. North .winds 5 to 10 mph.Tonight: Mostly 0 clear. Lows 50s. North R0k winds 5 to 10 mph. r i !` E,]K DAILY n 500{{ 14 HOME DELIVERY w 390 ..,.. SUNDAY $1 www.orovillemr.com Includes sales tax Copley Acre's c zproperty owners kept Pr7 Q< !I out of conference d xNyA BY RICK LONGLEY a conference to see what steps Staff Writer the tribe must take to develop the property. County Building A concerned contingent of Division official Michael Viera Copley Acres residents and sur- escorted everyone outside the rounding property owners building and gave them the, ' crowded the lobby of the Butte news although some people County Development Services protested they should have Office Thursday morning to been allowed to sit in and see attend a subdivision conference what happened. they soon learned was closed to Meeting participants were to the public. include tribal representatives, The pre-development meet- the county planning staff and Mg was to discuss Enterprise agencies like water and sewer Rancheria's request to subdi- providers and fire or law vide a 63-acre parcel behind the p enforcement entities,Viera said. Copley Acres neighborhood Michael Glaze, general man-' and abutting Ophir Elementary ager of South Feather Water and School into 32 half-acre lots and Power, attended the conference three 15.9 acre parcels. It wants and invited people to stop by. to build what neighbors under- his office later in the day for an stand is low-income housing for update on what he'd observed. . k wry- tribal members. Concerns this He met with real estate bro- also is a backdoor attempt to ker Judy DeLaby and a Copley Photo Submitted/insert Photo by Tonya Paul/Mercury-Register bring in a casino have been Acres resident and explained, Is Parade is shown with lifetime friend Iron Eyes expressed by area residents.as while looking at an aerial map well. of the area, the this far-' �promote charity for Native American causes.The wHowever, worried home- property owners weren't allowed to sit in er back off Olive Highway than he'd thought it would be. Brous African Eyes Cody. To date, Drowty ori the meeting since ButteCounty planners said it was just See COPLEY page 11 A rtists were often claims over 100 such charita- by production ble adventures. 1 Friday, April 30, 2004 1 1 A COPLEY tions or who are homeless. tions, Glaze said. And a gym There also is talk of build- or other facilities might be iother ' ing a gymnasium, basketball added with a permit, but the Continued from page 1A courts and other rec facilities residential proposal is within for tribal members and a cul- current zoning guidelines. As a result, - Crane and tural center. There also was a suggestion Tucker avenues would be the For his part, Glaze said his by county officials of making roads primarily serving the water agency needs to meet it a planned unit development th potential distribu- property,and two tribal repre- with the tribe's engineer and or HUD that could not be it it would establish sentatives indicated the tribe review a master build-out changed once -it's recorded tail presence by the would be willing to improveplan for the subdivision without additional hearings, .-ter, in time for the these roads to county stan- before South Feather Water Glaze said, but that has not dards including sidewalks and Power would issue a been finalized. .iday sales season. and gutters if necessary,Glaze "Will Serve" letter to the The rancheria representa- eethe store closures said. county on this project. tives agreed this property was nue by about $300 The -men, who seemed to That is because the.water not a good site for a casino, quarter and trim have authority for the tribe, agency needs to know if it will Glaze said, and they r$60 million. told the planners the have the capacity to service expressed concern about com- tom line is that this rancheria will conform to the subdivision in the future. n nity opposition to the pro- _iveaY rk in progress, said county standards,but it might If it remains strictly residen- Zt as they are only looking to -s Jr., ea analyst at want' to keep the interior tial, Glaze said he believes be treated fairly. av est Research, a saidecu- streets private with gates South Feather'can handle it. Tom Turk of TNT Real les tax iCleveland.He said across their entrances,he said. He added he never.mentioned Estate in Oroville said he had ww�ww is whether He Glaze added -the Indian anything about a casino, but. no comment on the project retail partners who gentlemen mentioned the he must know ahead of time if even though the land's report- casino rumors and said' the a larger water using facility edly in escrow and he is han- of its products. rancheria has no plans to put will come in down the road. dling the sale, according to said it will incur this parcel into trust at this Butte County Fire officials opponents of the project. charges between time, and Enterprise is still are asking for a pressurized Opponents are circulating -n and $450 million looking at putting a casino in water system at the develop- petitions against this project it store closures and Yuba County since Oroville ment; he said , and South because they say low-income t ucturing measures. does not need anymore casi- Feather Water wants the housingwill devalue proper- my ended the first nos. Oroville already has two rancheria to pay for system ties in p Copley Acres andthe th $1 million in from$1Indian casinos and a third in capacity changes and individ- surrounding area which .09 billion at the works near Highways 99 ual water meters for the resi- includes mostly upscale last year, reflecting and 149. dences up front. homes. in expenses and the However, 10 ears down The low-income housing Traffic roblems and con- ing eMachines. y g steps shares fell 14 cents the road, it is possible plans will have limited square- gestion a so make the area velop might change,Glaze said, and footage and may include mod- unsuitable for such develop- $cha e, the New the tribal reps couldn't say ular homes that fit federal ment, neighbors say, since the Viera: Exchange,before the what would happen then. Housing and Urban roads are not adequate to a the released.They shed According to count Development HUD pro- serve a subdivision. gents in the extended g y p (HUD) p t the, Mon. papers,the tribe wants to pur- gram standards,Glaze said. County planning officials --ople: chase the land and build 15 to Zoning for the property is did not respond to a Mercury- have; let: 30 houses for 60 to 120 tribal agricultural-residential which Register request for additional i see teway.com elders and members who have means horses and livestock information on this project by been living in dilapidated could be allowed on the half- press time. ire to housing, unsanitary condi- acre lots per county regula- fives,. and ;ewer law said. man-' r and rence ip by. or an F1 IF. IF. 1) 1 .1; 14 ved. . bro- All I AIW-Amk ILA ITA LrTO T ma far- away 99 mo. for over 60 Channels I inga Local C a 0 1be. Page 1 of vIY^i 1t:r� Betts, Steve From: Betts, Steve < Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 7:53 AM '? a.: To: Schroth, Eric; Crawford, Ted; Vieira, Mike; Hill, Rob; Wannenmacher, Felix; Fogel, Doug Subject: Enterprise Rancheria Pre-Development Conference - Reminder Just a reminder that the pre-development conference for the Enterprise Rancheria will be held this Thursday (April 29)at 9:00 a.m. in the Department of Development Services' conference room. If you or a representative from your department cannot attend please forward your comments and possible conditions of project approval to me prior to the meeting. Thanks. Steve Stephen Betts Senior Planner a� Butte County Planning Division 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 Desk- (530) 538-7153 Fax — (530)538-7785 .r if I r 4^ `44/26%2004 is _; ,- z:,: �•, :>_; • Page 1 of 1 • Betts, Steve From: Edell, Stuart Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 10:45 AM To: Betts, Steve; Schroth, Eric Subject: FW: Casino cut-through traffic on Fairhill Dr. FYI From: Lundbom, Paul Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 4:59 PM To: Graves, Bryan; Martinez, Rob Cc: Edell, Stuart; Crump, Mike Subject: Casino cut-through traffic on Fairhill Dr. Bryan, Apparantly Casino patrons are beating a path between the Casinos via Ophir- Lower Wyandotte - Bangor Highway- Fairhill Dr.- Deerwood -Melrose Ln. - Hildale Ave. -Oakvale - Olive Highway. Cash Colby of Fairhill Dr. has requested the County's traffic count information on Fairhill Dr. He wants both the most recent counts (done last year?)and any counts done before the casinos created the current traffic influx. He says that he knows we have the information because he observed hoses stretched across the road and our Butte County truck sitting at the intersection at Foothill Road doing manual counts for almost a month solid last year. He needs the information before a meeting he is attending this Thursday morning. He was citing recent increases in crime and vandalism, in addition to traffic, and a new development that is going in east of Fairhill Dr. as reasons why the County needs to step forward with a solution to abate the traffic influx. .Paul A. Lundbom Senior Civil Engineer Butte County Public Works 7 County Center Drive Oroville,CA 95965 Phone:(530)538-7681 ext.2019 FAX:(530)538-7171 4/27/2004 Rpr,, 27 04 12: 16p Steve Jasco 530-345-6678 p. 1 530-521-5859 phone 15303456678 fax Butte County Department of Development ftx To: STEPHEN BETTS From STEVE JASCO Fax: 530 538-7765 Pages: TWO(including this page) Phone: 530 538-7601 Date: 4127/2004 Re: PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA Urgent and For Immediate Review PLEASE GIVE TO STEPHEN BETTS IMMEMATMY. THANK YOU Stephen, i Any questions please call me at 530 521-5859. Steve Jasco DU V APR 2 7 2004 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION f 1 � , �. �� tib{i � �, r.,•,� .- � ; .. �� � + � , t._._.,._......._._....__,,.,_,__.1 , CALTRANS D3 PLANNING b ""'',��,.,.� 530 741 5346 P.01iO3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA•DEPARTMENT OF ATION FACSIMILE ILE COVER • MR-1009(REY 07/82) adbwv i Attention From Steve Betts NORTH REGION—DISTRICT 3 Division of Planning, Office of Regional &Transit Planning 703"B" Street P.O. Box 911 Marysville, CA'95901 UnAlCompany Senders Name Butte County Planning Rick Heiman Date Total Pages(Including cover) Aril 28, 2004 3 Subject FAX#(area code) CALNt7 FAX# (530)741-5346 8-457-5346 Comment Letter.for the.Enterprise Ranchdria,TSM Pre-Application Phone#(area code) email: (530)634-7612 rheiman@dot.ca.gov Phone#(area code) FAX#(area code) Number of Pages Sent 530-538-7153 530-538-7785 T2 . D E C E 0 U C APR 2-8 2004 i BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION 04/23/2004 15:20 COMER PAGE TO : FROM : BURRIS FAX: 538-538-9448 TEL : 5305389448 COMMENT : FC EOWE APR 2 6 2004 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION C .. r. � i� ... i � � .i� ` I. + A.f.w,�--..��� ---. .w...,� 7 � {- 47�� � 4 bsJi I�i f, r � q t � �� ,.. � � � v--28-04 02: 10P Golden Valley Home Health 530 532 8369 P.01 II I FAX X i TRANSMISSION A P-r ; DATE. �F o _0 c� fou h r a 5`yt Ai— FAX r 5 3 $ 77F, S.S E i FROM: Lynnaer Cantu MESSAGE: ctY7f a � f Yt.c of O r� "f Z OsE�c /ow j . i TRANSU PMN 2�PAGES (INCLUO(NC COVER PAGE) I FAX r 11 APR 28 2004 ! BUTTE COUNTY PLANN,itil;DM',WN _ _._ - P. 01 A r-28-04 02:07P Golden Valley Home Health 530 532 8369 ill . Jtl . I FAX 4 TRANSMISSION GATE: �� o 7 T O: S fe ve ria- es e l Gt?fe l 5y rfaV1Y11�YICT De fit A► Fra: -6-39- 7 7 SS , FROM: Cynaeee Canuc !-PONE: -;Z-8101 i MESSAGE: Le el- be, YeSC't�1 i� La n Y-7 J, yic- a o /O W / Yl c-&7-pi e- i r TRANSMi =NG 2 PAGES (INCLUDING COVER PAGE) _ FAX l�"`�l M'Z,369 " .J� � moi♦.�. \\} 1 JE G M 2004 r w.eMw.r,ApY 2%2U4 Amok+aawe:2m nft4 Pop:I eunE couse,Y .._... i o�vTrFO 0 0 0 0 o Lteroffice Memorandum TO: File PRED 04-20 (Enterprise Rancheria) FROM: Steve Betts 11 SUBJECT: Meeting with Enterprise Rancheria Representatives Planning Division Phone: 538-7153 DATE: March 15, 2005 FAX: 538-7785 Myself and Eric Schroth of the Public Works Department met with representatives from the Enterprise Rancheria to discuss the possible tentative subdivision map on APN 036- 540-010, which was the subject of a pre-development conference held on April 29, 2004. The representatives from the Enterprise Rancheria were Cliff Angle, Cathy Frazier, Frank Watson, and Gary Montana, their attorney. They said that they were planning on purchasing the parcel soon. They did not present us with any specific plans for the property, and most of our discussion was centered on vehicular access to the project site. They stated that they have acquired a 60-foot wide easement from Melrose Drive (west of the site), and will be acquiring a 60-foot wide easement from Mt. Ida Road. Both easements would be across private lands. The access from Melrose Drive would be the normal everyday access, with the access from Mt. Ida Road only being used in the event of an emergency. Mr. Schroth and I said that the emergency access road may not be sufficient to meet the requirements of BCC 20-133, but that it might be approved if the Planning Commission granted an exception per BCC 20-4 (Mr. Montana was provide with copies of Sections 20-4 and 20- 133 and was told the rest of the BCC was available on-line). Mr. Angle and Mr. Montana stated that they may limit the initial subdivision to 20 or fewer parcels. Mr. Montana stated that County regulations would not apply to the Rancheria once the Rancheria acquired fee title ("Indian Fee", per Mr. Montana) to the parcel. I stated that I believed that State/County regulations applied until such time as the property was put into Federal trust status, not just the purchase of a property. Mr. Montana stated that there have been recent cases where an Indian tribe acquired fee title to a property and at that point they were no longer subject to the requirements of the local jurisdiction. I told him our County Counsel Office would be interested in knowing the facts of those cases and would need to look into this issue. We discussed the existing opposition by the neighbors to the project. Mr. Montana was concerned that the County would not treat the Enterprise Rancheria fairly, given their ethnicity. I stated that their ethnicity would not be a factor and would not influence us in Page 1 of 2 any way. I stated that neighborhood opposition would not be a factor during staff's environmental review of the project,but that the Planning Commission may take that into consideration during the public hearing process. I told them about the problem of the proposed community center on the site (a Use Permit would most likely be required for that use), and that the environmental assessment that they are required to do (pursuant to HUD requirements) should be complete and accurate given the likely neighborhood opposition. I stated that we would do our own environmental analysis, but most likely would utilize their environmental assessment, and that an EIR might be needed, depending on the results of our initial study. I mentioned that they should review my letter of July 27, 2004, to them that put forth all the possible conditions of project approval and potential impacts. We discussed the requirement for LOAPUD and SFWPA to give us letters stating that they have the capacity to serve the project site and will do so. I mentioned that SFWPA needs to know all the future uses on the site before they will issue such letter. Page 2 of 2 A �► Butte County Department ofDevelopment Services QT rF YVONNE CHRISTOPHER,DIRECTOR ° ° 0 0 7 County Center Drive o -- o Oroville,CA 95965 0 -`�-4i:J y o (530)538.7601 Telephone c�U N'�y (530)538.7785 Facsimile ADMINISTRATION*BUILDING*GIS*PLANNING April 1, 2004 Re: Pre-Development Conference for the Enterprise Rancheria — Thursday, April 29, 2004, at 9:00 a.m. To Whom It May Concern: The Butte County Development Services Department has received a request for a pre- development conference regarding a proposed Tentative Subdivision Map for the Enterprise Rancheria to divide a 63.3-acre parcel into thirty-two (32) 0.5-acre parcels and three (3)parcels of 15.9+ acres each. The project site is located at the west ends of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue, west of Oakvale Avenue, east Oroville Area, and is identified as APN 036-540-010. Sewage disposal for future dwellings on the site would be handled through the Lake Oroville Public Utilities District and domestic water obtained from the South Feather Water and Power Agency. The site is zoned A-R (Agricultural Residential, 6,500 square foot minimum parcel size) and is designated by the Butte County General Plan as Low Density Residential. The project site is within the Oroville Urban Area and is within the City of Oroville's Sphere of Influence. The purpose of the meeting is to inform the applicant of local or state requirements that may apply to their project. -This allows the applicant to incorporate those requirements into the design of the project when the actual Tentative Subdivision Map application is submitted. The pre-development conference will be held in the Department of Development Services conference room located at 7 County Center Drive on Thursday, April 29, 2004, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. If your department or agency has concerns or comments regarding the proposal, please have someone attend the meeting or submit written comments to this department prior to the meeting. Comments may be faxed to (530) 538-7785, attention Stephen Betts. If you have any questions, please contact me at (530) 538-7153, or via e-mail at sbetts@buttecounty.net. Sincerely, Stephen Betts Senior Planner Enclosures cc: Butte County Environmental Health Division Butte County Public Works De arment, Land Development.Division Butte County Agricultural Commissioner Butte,County Fire Department/CDF Butte County Counsel Butte County Assessor's Office City of Oroville,Planning Department Lake Oroville Public Utilities District South Feather'Water and Power Agency California Department of Fish and Game California Regional Water Quality Control Board Caltrans Tom Turk Clifford Angle,Enterprise Rancheria . T LEAD IN SHEET FILE NO: PRED 04N-20 APN: 036-540-010 APPLICANT: Enterprise Rancheria 1940 Feather River Blvd., Suite B Oroville, CA 95965 OWNER: Rice Revocable Income Life Trust REPRESENTATIVE: Tom Turk/TNT Real Estate REQUEST: Pre-Development Conference for a Tentative Subdivision Map to divide a 63.6 f acre parcel into thirty-two 0.5-acre parcels and three parcels of 15.9 + acres LOCATION: at the west ends of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue, west of Oakvale Avenue, east Oroville area SIZE: 63.66 acres SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT# 1 EXISTING ZONING: A-R, (Agricultural-Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR(Low Density Residential) ZONING HISTORY: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: SITE HISTORY: APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: ASSIGNED PLANNER: Stephen Betts Date Application Received: 3/26/2004 Date Project Assigned:. 3/29/2004 Preset Hearing Date: 4/29/2004 at 9:00 a.m. T tj "DRAFT"LEAD IN SHEET FILE NO: �� � "a AP# 03(o `9`4( -010 APPLICANT: en+er p r I S e. �ano-h er c OWNER: (ZI C(E It JLoYvlc 0 fG- Tt2U 5'T- REPRESENTATIVE: -WA Tu►I- PROPOSED REQUEST: (to be filled out by person taking in application) FINAL REQUEST: (to be filled out by project planner) Mac +A d:.►ZAL a co 3. to f ac.rec- 0arcc\ telco 32 0. S-acm f,Q -ce\s CwNel +V%rce parcels e-C 1 S. q + acms. SIZE: lQ 3. CQ (Q Qcc-e S LOCATION: fie. e C n e. uw e Q fNck '�'y ckor Ay c�s e_ . �.�1� �.c A off- ! Ava 1„ i4.,o nv c . SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT# �- EXISTING ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: i..a.a 17 erg 51° � tc��rti� a ASSIGNED PLANNER: PLANNER'S INITIALS S Q Date Application Received a�, mw e o!f Date Proiect Assigned -j9 Inag i2!V BUTTE IDR Date n/,(a COUNTY 30 Day'Com lete N AN MAR 2 6 2004 Preset Date �17 ,VLN (.'QO DEVELOPMENT • SERVICES /�Jeetih9 KAP1anning\Forms\Lead In Sheet.doc COMMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST County Offices and Cities: • / Chief Administrative Officeryo Develop.Services Direct a X Public Works Director \0 X Environmental Health X Asseso � — uilding Manager TSheri b BCAG `AEU�C x LAFCo _Air Quality Mgmt. _Butte Co.Farm Bureau eggs _Gridley _Chico �1740rovillev/ _Paradise Chico Airport Commission Information Syster9s Dept. _Animal Control �Agricultural Commissions/ a X County Counsel/ Irrigation -District: _Butte Water —Biggs/W.Gridley Water _Durham Irrigation _OWID _Paradise Irrigation _Richvale Irrigation Table Mountain Irrigation -Thermalito Irrigation —Other Domestic Water _Butte Water District J _California Water Service Co. _Del Oro Water Co. (ILiWfD •7 L Ov 1� J A_tA _Thermalito Irrigation District _Other Sewer 'f _Butte Water District _Themalito Irrig6tion _Sterling City Sewer Main Skansen Subdivision(CSA 21) L.O.A.PUD Fire Protection 9 X California Department of Forestryv _EI Medio Fire Protection District Recreation Districts _Chico Area Recreation Durham Area Recreation _Feather River Rec.&Park Paradise Recreation&Park Richvale Recreation &Parks Utilities PG&E North-Chico _Chambers Cable TV lira'irfc Bell- 4ASQ ft�South-Oroville Viacom Cable TV State Agencies �CalTrans(Traffic) _Dept.of Water Resources Dept.of Fish and Game Forestry(Attn:Craig Carter) / _Dept of Parks and Rec. _Highway Patrol $ ,Central Reg.Water Quality Coni+. _Caltrans,Aeronautics Program _Off.of Governmental&Env.Relations _Department of Conservation _Off.of Mining Reclamation Dept.Social Services,Comm.Care Licensing Federal Agencies _US Forest Service _US Bureau of Land Management _US Fish&Wildlife Service _Army Corps of Engineers _National Marine Fisheries Sservice Other Districts,Agencies,Committees,etc. Lime Saddle Dist _Community Association School Districts Drainage _ButteCouncil � Reclamation _Cal Nativelive Plant Society �R-{,a Butte Co.Mining Committee _Forest Ranch Community Assoc. 1` Q 1� _Paradise Pines Com. Assoc. _Butte Ck.Watershed Conservancy 1 _Mosq.Abatement.Oroville/Butte Co K:\Planning\Forms\D ISTR.wpd Project Description Crane Ave./'Fucker Ave. Or®vine, Ca® • Goals —The goal of the Enterprise Rancheria is to provide Safe, Sanitary, and Affordable Housing for our Tribal Members, who are low to medium income. Objectives -Purchase land and build fifteen(15)to thirty (30)homes for our Elders and Members that are homeless or living in dilapidated unsanitary conditions. We need to better our lives and provide respectable housing for our people. • Land Use—Residential , and other possible uses are Community Center, Housing Office and Maintenance Dept, Fire Station, Storage Sheds, Gymnasium, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts, Community Park and Picnic Area for all Tribal Members, and other outside athletic activities. • Population density—we propose 60/120 Tribal Members to reside on this housing site. • Services —All utilities such as Water and Sewer are on the premises, and PG&E and Telephone are in the vicinity of the property. • Traffic Conditions—We will check with the County of Butte for a primary access at Crane Ave. and a secondary access at Tucker Ave. 0 Drainage—If the County agrees to the use of the property and agrees to let the Tribe purchase this parcel of land, we will hire an Engineer and Architect to accurately design and deal with drainage that would satisfy the County. • Wildlife & Wetlands—We will deal with the Wildlife& Wetlands as required by the County's Policies and Procedures. • Zoning—The parcel of land is zoned AR, so we don't believe we will have to request the County to rezone the parcel of land to enable our Tribal Members a '/z acre lot. ParcelQuest by CD-DATA Property Detail Butte, CA Kenneth Reimers, Assessor Parcel#(APN): 036-5407010-000 Use Description: Parcel Status: ACTIVE Owner Name: RICE REVOCABLE INCOME LIFE TRUST Mailing Address: 8172 BAYFORD WAY, SACRAMENTO CA 95829%RICE DOROTHY 0 TRUST Situs Address: Legal Description: PTN SEC 23 T19N R4E ASSESSMENT Total Value: $556, 255 Use Code: RV Zoning: AR Land Value: $556,255 Tax Rate Area: 091004 Impr Value: YearAssd: 2001 Improve Type: Other Value: Property Tax $5, 678.80 Price/SgFt: % Improved: Delinquent Yr. Exempt Amt: Exempt Codes: SALES HISTORY Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Transfer Recording Date: 12/13/1993 05/26/1993 05/30/1991 12/13/1993 Recorded Doc#. 1993R54743 1993822594 1991R21059 1993854743 Recorded Doc Type: Transfer Amount: $472, 000 Sale 1 Seller(Grantor): RICE JACK & GUITHRUN TRU 1st Trst Dd Amt: Code1: 2nd Trst Dd Amt: Code2: PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Lot Acres: 63.660A Year Built: Fireplace: Lot SqFt: 2,773, 030 Effective Yr. A/C: Bldg/Liv Area: Heating: Units: Total Rooms: Pool: Buildings: Bedrooms: Flooring: Stories: Baths(Full): Park Type: Style: Baths(Half): Spaces: Construct: Bsmt SgFt: Site Inflnce: Quality: Garage SgFt: Building Class: Timber Preserve: Condition: Ag Preserve: Other. Other Rooms: "*The information provided here is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed. Page: 1 of 1 5 � . s I N !!� I V' ..........._.._...,..__.____... W._ NIL— _.._.._...___. ._., ._..,.-,_-....._..-W.-----._... ` s.a-y7b _� ' ,, F. 1 , l :• 'b �W�'4t•.- _lir •L.yd �. 4 -� � -.�, ,, .. .. _ 17P j• Y 1 t •°'Fl� �� � _ � ` „ .' ' - -...•.•1 yf�����• s � - w� 1'"�:+++"F ..y�t!• '°�'3�,""•�s- _ ��'it r1 Jr. �fif ,-. � � �'ii"y. '•`g ,Y�� � "`' �,.� �" tip, � f r�' i � -�% � 's 't A.�.'! ��=;•4+i it ,S• .- � ?` � .�: t i 01, lIt 1. qq _ fi...•�' t �y Flo; ,, .1.�'• 1F.Sr.` i t�• �' ��f�' i.. t' !'t .4 47A `� 1, n.,a � `•t. kV �,. �� ,t'•• .`tiro. � ti- 1i �,i' - .� - - r + icy_, t'- t `�� '+�• -` 'hl {� �f{mat. }' +r� * .. - ;. i :f y 1 )! , e� t IL IS IkV 1 3 } e �C' off y, .4 _ +�.�A i i.• ' I I t� S •'\ 111, r�''� � t , •_ '?sem; �� 'I 3C t 1 0 •. � �SSj a + T4 5'.�.'� 'x= ,q.5'Xis tf *��' x '� .-� .t �� , �+� u,��- �r� Y�{Jt r �1 d•t 4;s-�•-" �. ����T�,'+t�. ti-, .;. .1• i"�K' i " � � y '.. '�"r[/yx•�wr ' `�`�:y � "T�K' -�. .tf. .'�• T-''"" y -R �'�-•�a����f j.,...r!�, f��R- .tom "Z L�2'+�? ::-�F,', „�,y,ti ('� ' �a,{.� rti..•<+• �K �t''f i� .s .+Via.. �l� �:' 'u'$�b t fir,#��s•`>?t(it tt'^y� r ,: �S'rti� �r1"�.. . t .s y j" ✓•z� i y' r�{CVs i_ Si. -' r •".. F �'r'. '�( `fit. 1 r7 1-1 > ', Oroville area, California, United States 162 ©CIIGTCj� yy $ in) 1 Vey 162 ,g s r iS a got Ir— ------- IIt 1 s -a ale=C� — i' `' � arse a � � � _._._--• -,,���, G i 7' WR—Mel a / y - --- Bangor_IM Fee- -0 - -- - - - - _ I OMI 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Copyright O 1988.2001 Microsoft Corp.and/or Its suppliers.All rights reserved. http:/Awww.microsofLoom/streets O Copyright 2000 by Geographic Data Technology,Inc.All rights reserved.O 2000 Navigation Technologies.All rights reserved.This data Includes information taken with permission from Canadian authorities m Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada.0 Copyright 2000 by Compusearch Micromarketing Data and Systems Ltd. Oroville area, California, United States 1 A, f jact r a o Ga Crane— ve----m Crane—Ave ,; ----- -------------------------- --- r' (Oa le—Ct UAWr 1 , GO W t Q 4 " , 0 yds 200 400 600 Copyright O 1988-2001 Microsoft Corp.and/or Its suppliers.All rights reserved. http:/twww.microsotLrom/streeta O Copyright 2000 by Geographic Data Technology,Inc.All rights reserved.O 2000 Navigation Technologies.All rights reserved.This data includes Information taken with permission from Canadian authorities O Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.0 Copyright 2000 by Compusearch MlcromaAceting Data and Systems Ltd. PT. SEC. 22 a 23 T. /9 N, R. 4 E. M. D. B. Q M. ss 4 v Q R e /3 /2 i uaeAC Y3 10 6LOORAC 4DD.Aa \ `` )D.??AC 8.NAC I � g At I \\ P/M Da-TO I`, yr 46-38 1 r `. �. /3 4JOAC. asp `Lo.9r.� •. —SCtYE.73�4'T8�2-. _ — e WE rM N A42,46018 B /33.4-34.4 COPLErrrACRES i — — Root. N IN PUMN,! COPLZ AC M IaDDI N N E < ' xt. a wrr►e w1r oC` � aiiAa i Pcc.{ . PMA86 DI I �. 17 a.00AR -L Lf.6 pPA r- fA pNILL I 19 MOM p w 76- F6-6-1 6/ 62 a PC'- .187 oiII .er w\a OOTH/LL ACRES • f>i L °" 10 �\Y 47 SUBDIVISION O.IOAe a Pr73-49' r a suUNIT Sam 42 - a • NK �NI Assessors Map No. 3s-54 County of Bunte,Calif. REVISED: 8-89 Id. D. a. i . P T SEC. 22 a 23 . T. 19 N. E , tQ LW 2616.94 462.23 PERCY _ - 1010.92 _ _WAY-- O 210.00 69 (2) o� 1 - 400'00 cm l AC N 24 25 26 Ip 63.662 AC 498.45 N 39. 77AC 8.42AC 4.03 1 1 O AC I rn d �O WK768-�� PIM 93-70 Q� I PIM 46-38 �' 0 H Ze 4.39AC. 1 S` \ 1 �'%/j• r�` 34.5 2.594.6 ti 4 °�< `��= ° �• • S.B.E.135-4-78A-2 A-1 N 0/°00'E 1635.93 ` \ - 350.00 231.60 N L95AC. - - - N 19.42 A 5 SBE /35-4-54- 4 7 1 4r' CORN. — c, 47 10 Y' 9 O COPLEY ACRES 1 2alo2.o71862.4/ h ~---' 251.79 N UNIT 3 a '' 188.31 /X+2 +} PHASE I23 N 7TcOPLE1,`—ACRES MELROSE DR MORRF PCL. 4 O � "5 a UNIT 2 1 WIT 2 QFL �%� 5.//AC. / PCL.2 AQ ^• } �7 PHASE 21 PH SE l �� _ pR 172. 5.00 AC t _ _ _ �o S II.L \ b� e' �•r z _ 101-- -1 '315 . - ' - - 1 �5 _ 00 FAIRN 191.39 PM 59/29 L F. .-L N Cr 6 1 P P HUNTER DR e� 62 PCL. 3 /6 ' L 412.87 S.00AC. r0' 80 vZ 41 0�r o R?Z5-9 BFC6834 1' z' ��STA D 65.30 FO07-HILL ACRES' (139N s c� \ N o LOMA ~102.5 �V S�URDs'V/.SIOi 5.l8 A c PM 73-49525 COPLEY ACRES SUE. UNIT NO.l \ �C U AVE 0 W VI pRiVE GREENBANK - 2C''0 ap0E P Rov'�'L Assessor's Map No. 36 - 54 County of Butte, Calif. California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region o.M Terry Tamminen Arnold Schwarzenegger Secretaryfor Redding Office Governor Environmental 415 Knollcrest Drive,Suite 100,Redding,California 96002 Protection Phone(530)2244845•FAX(530)2244857 http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwgcb5 BUTTE COUNTY 27 April 2004 APR 2 8 20-04 Stephen Betts DEITLoP?d ENT Butte County Planning Division SERVICES 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 COMMENTS ON PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE FOR ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA, APN #036-540-010, OROVILLE,BUTTE COUNTY This letter is in response to your request for comments prior to a pre-development conference on the proposed Enterprise Rancheria housing project. The conference will be held on 29 April 2004 in Oroville. The proposal is to divide an existing 63.66-acre parcels into thirty-two 0.5-acre parcels and three other parcels of approximately 15.9 acres each. Fifteen to thirty single-family housing units are planned as well as infrastructure (roads, etc.), administrative/maintenance/cultural building, fire station, storage sheds, gymnasium, basketball courts,tennis courts, picnic area, and park. The project is expected to take five years to complete. Public sewer and water will be provided Our comments on the proposal are provided below. The Butte County Planning Division is uncertain, at this time, whether the property will eventually become tribal land or whether it will remain private. We would have substantially different comments for activities on tribal land. Wetlands and/or stream course alteration—The project proponent may need to apply for a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit (§404 permit) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A §404 permit is required for activities involving a discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States. "Waters of the United States" include wetlands, riparian zones, streambeds, rivers, lakes and oceans. The Army Corps of Engineers Butte County contact for §404 permits is Ms. Laura Whitney, (916) 557-7455. Projects requiring a §404 permit also require a water quality certification(pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act) verifying that the project does not violate State water quality standards. A water quality certification is required for any project that impacts water of the State (such as streams and wetlands). Activities that fall under the water quality certification process include, but are not limited to: stream crossings, the modification of stream banks or stream courses, and the filling or modification of wetlands. A water quality certification must be obtained prior to construction. Failure to obtain a water quality certification, when required, may result in enforcement action. The Regional Board Contact for water quality certifications is Scott A. Zaitz, who can be reached at the letterhead address or by telephoning (530) 224-4784. Isolated wetlands not covered by the federal Clean Water Act Wetlands not covered by the Clean Water Act are known as "isolated wetlands." Should the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determine that isolated wetlands exist at the project site and should the project impact or have potential to impact the isolated wetlands, a Report of Waste Discharge and filing fee California Environmental Protection Agency r,} Recycled Paper Stephen Betts - 2 - 27 April 2004 must be submitted prior to commencing the construction activity. The Regional Board will consider the provided information and either issue or waive Waste Discharge Requirements. Failure to obtain waste discharge requirements or a waiver thereof, when required, may result in enforcement action. Report of Waste Discharge application forms are available by calling our office at(530) 224-4845. Construction storm water- A Construction Activities Storm Water Permit is required for storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading, and excavation result in a land disturbance of one acre or more. Storm water discharges from construction activity that results in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan development of one acre or more, also requires a construction storm water permit. A construction storm water permit, if required, must be obtained prior to construction. Failure to obtain a construction storm water permit, when required, may result in enforcement action. Construction storm water permits can be obtained from Scott A. Zaitz(see above contact information)with the Redding office of the Regional Board. Dewatering Alternative 1: discharge to storm drains or waters of the United States - A dewatering permit, General Order for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters, may be required for construction activities. This general NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)permit covers the discharge to waters of the United States of clean or relatively pollutant-free wastewater that poses little or no threat to water quality. The following categories are covered by the dewatering permit: well development water; construction dewatering; pump/well testing; pipeline/tank pressure testing; pipeline/tank flushing or dewatering; condensate discharges; water supply system discharges; miscellaneous dewatering/low threat discharges. The dewatering permit applies only to direct discharges to waters of the United States. Failure to obtain a dewatering permit, when required, may result in enforcement action. An application form and a copy of the permit are available at this office. Dewatering Alternative 2: discharges to land - Construction dewatering discharges that are contained on land (i.e., will not enter waters of the United States) are allowed under a general waiver adopted under Regional Board Resolution No. R5-2003-0008, provided the following conditions are met: (1) the dewatering discharge is of a quality as good as or better than underlying groundwater; and (2) there is a low risk of nuisance. Examples of dewatering discharges to land include a terminal basin, irrigation (with no return to waters of the United States), and dust control. You may request written confirmation from this office that the waiver is applicable. Wastewater treatment and disposal - Public sewer will be provided by the Lake Oroville Area Public Utilities District(LOAPUD). Therefore,there will be no need for waste discharge requirements addressing on-site disposal of wastewater. If you have any questions, please contact me at(530) 224-3249 or the letterhead address. :4/�M' Ray Bruun, P.E. Associate Engineer Shasta-Cascade Watershed RB: sae cc: State Clearinghouse, Sacramento Butte County Environmental Health Division, Oroville Inter-Departmental Memorandum To: Stephen Betts, Senior Planner From: Ted Crawford, Fire Department Subject: Pre-development conference for Enterprise Rancheria Subdivision in South Oroville area, AP#036-540-010 Date: April 27, 2004 Based on the information furnished for the pre-development meeting on the new proposed 63 acre subdivision for the Enterprise Rancheria located at the west end of Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue in the south Oroville area, the following would be the minimum requirements: 1. Construction, installation or development of structures or facilities on the parcels/lots shall comply with the latest California Fire Safe Regulations, (PRC 4290), and all other applicable State and County codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of application for improvement permits. 2. Building identification and/or addresses shall be installed in conformance with Public Resources Code 4290 and shall be posted at the beginning of building construction and maintained continuously thereafter. 3. A pressurized community water system for fire protection is required. The specific locations and fire flow requirements shall be in accordance with the Fire Department specifications and to the satisfaction of the County Fire Chief. Average required hydrant spacing for the residential areas is 500 feet, hydrant size 6 inches, and residual fire flow 1000 gpm. All other buildings may require a higher fire flow based on their size. Automatic fire sprinklers may be required in multi-use facilities as specified by the California Building Code. Submit plans to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to construction of facilities. 4. Fire hydrant identification, reflector or post reflectors shall be installed acceptable to the County Fire Chief. 5. Circulation will have to be addressed as both Crane Avenue and Tucker Avenue are dead end roads. 6. This area'is within 3 miles of a Butte County Fire Station and a new station would not be necessary. In lieu of a fire station, an appropriate donation could be made to the Fire Department These requirements may change as a result of any additional information regarding this project. I will be available for the meeting on April 29, 2004 at 9:00 o'clock. If there are any questions please contact me at 538-7994. CC: D. Dyer G. Morris File a 11 man! rux sqqVsm.! L';-*:j"s�--.-;-'>rj'.."%' ju 11r: 31 s PLO pupow 241 us ir -Qp 'AW ;Q ps QmGQRq so Popi COTS QW500 awl jjTM IV) u'! lam.:: lu 111013 is jQz; tu yp% prom, umq its Avg. ypyc jymulss QUG `r,;i;..:1 W"', z"C; 51 !QCVFI %fM PIN "i [A jps pufsomm "Suspsup 1CIRYSI ul lys 'Wen VIA. V"s, 11 1001 4,t suiteCount r _�—'>�' '-• LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY OFFICES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 316 NELSON AVENUE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3318 AGRICULTURAL DEPT.: OFFICE:(530)538-7381 FAX:(530)538-7594 RICHARD B.PRICE LOUIE B.MENDOZA,JR. Agricultural Commissioner Assistant Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights and Measures Weights and Measures To: Department of Development Services,Planning Division From: Agricultural Commissioners Office Subject: Response to Request for Project Review and Comments Date: April 29,2004 Applicant: Enterprise Rancheria Project Designation: Pre-development Conf. APN: 036-154-010. ExistingConditions: 1. G.P.designation LDR,AR east side adjacent. 2 Zoned AR. 3 Production orchard on the east boundary. Pertinent Excerpts from thePertinent Excerpts from the Agricultural Element: Goal 2 Conserve and stabilize agricultural land uses at city and community boundaries in order to protect agricultural lands from encroachment and conversion to urban uses. Goal 2:Policies 2.1 Agriculture shall not be made enviable by the economic impacts of urban development. 2.2 Encourage urban infill development within city limits and within existing unincorporated communities where development can more easily and readily be served by public infrastructure facilities. 2.3 Require development to provide land use transitions,setbacks and buffers between urban development and agricultural interface to reduce interference and conflict. Program:2.2 ...a buffer shall be established on property proposed for residential development in order to protect existing agricultural uses from incompatible use conflicts.The desired standard shall be 300 feet...but may be adjusted to address unusual circumstances.Guidelines,as part of the General Plan's implementation,shall be developed illustrating buffer requirements for various situations. Goal 2:Programs 2.3 Where development approval,other than residential,is proposed on lot(s)adjacent to an agricultural operation or Orchard and Field Crops land use category,the Zoning Ordinance shall require a natural or man-made buffer between the development and the agricultural land use.The buffer shall be totally on the lot(s)where development is proposed.A buffer could be a topographic feature,a substantial tree stand,... or similarly defined feature.Agricultural uses may be permitted in the buffer area. Findings and Review Statement:Review Statement: Need more data on east orchard and proposed buffer design. Robert C.Hill,Deputy Agricultural Commissioner i of)`J•�rw�f� /; --'S•: v7,). f �.1�7 ?• •/i�•�.- j c. ,.b v�' -` �s t .. � :fir-.: •j ",•/ `�/ � �•�♦E„ �5"• _� - r`' •r j14 �'• ~�---�'� a +wt.:� 'q.:.av�. yt. '�•�� ° r� t. ,, _S� 00�y 1 I' �'s,.e, .,F�,.�`` r�� � �� • t' ..�; } •.rl.�ld.,.►r 'j '�+ �'?j���Y',.�r�q�Lt• 1���:�� � • �'•[.� i ♦. r V•7 h,,-,gyp�•. t �� {�4.�I+,r4 �• p r /'r ,�yT 't Lk «�. �' �,.� Z r � �� .,•ff r" ice-• � � � �. '� bv •1 ! jjt � � .�' "S,r o •r,.ti���y���`7 *'7 All � �i fY 4�'. � lyt....l�t G� �~�� � •,✓� f �-, Q}hV r C• 'r I.. ,,,:"��-tt...f' JJ.is �L_ ; V.f. `.�'?'.. C�-r;• P;'�'" Ii., .r•S�d,`r.��i•"14_.P� �C,r. .'r� t. f•J f k , J t n _r s �{1',�.t'"/ � p�t p`N �+�_'..'. ,�, `� Jt. f •�-r p ,j`f7r' `sS r� iEu ; �? � •� 7`r ,r J+���(*l'i..t �� �' v` ~ �z ,p. � ,� •�" � ' r ,�~ 'C..' .i 1�"�A �� �. 4 -..ri a.F7. - ',� �i _ •'�^ 'E 111 hj� � �..1 ��""'� ��J� C,_ `r^}-i_ a :I ,� • V'7'I h'•�G J �, 7 l `yI ♦ - ,� �• • ��I �, I r- - �� del • Z... lk 35 `� y, h- .Ari �` .. It 'r C►✓. t4� ..� i, �� ]'♦ .v�'im� `^ �1'k,�i •__!••`� �'.� �� .'u. + r i� ♦ ��` _I�� d� .,"�,�� •r, l.r ^�•d �� ''s.�' �`. .cif+�:2��,f c+S� C � v �C �:ry,}�„ ��� ►`�,���,. �'p� ,' '•••p^�.,'�f v t 4 _--�-^� ^? 'rid•. ; • a `t a k- •' �� GGGG �tV .5 q Q ♦• •. :rr.4( T `�`„�. ;1�1 •. - �.^-•t `� ,.7 lk. '' �. � . . � •_, r+ _. •;1.� � , 1_ S!; •j�'�r�f�!1 .-+-'r p.�~•�,+'�I � V ". . 'Y J"',f' ,�` •7M' ; ~, `�.a .r �` .n ,,,, ^.'L r} s!` •'=`'fit-R "1•' - �,�� r�-^�'' A''` � •}7V? r�•ti �� t � �.,4�� y•'G• �_i�=e '•,_f � �h O rC� . ,�: A �� � qui}V. � •'a�y♦.�� •1t �'�•.�' �- L �j ', �s,te `=�' ` r'i "T` '1 "` _ 7Y'� Q• • ���.,,��,•,. �•.-r •q ce 1v 7 � a �` - �`�V.r-�� q(�a^ ..;� ,. L: ,,�r " ti y � Mx • � t_ � c, ` ,, rz All ,♦]`+,'-.0 ��.. _ f O � . •NCS � �f i! ,�, � C,-l�'� `-�� . ;. :t y .o. �• r, �� �� ,, - � V7 a d - Y..,'r -�- ....ate .:' �, � • S' , `o �'_` � : 1 j', J.i �� • cryc '� �' r.Jl ,d •h r; •ra•�S {�''• � • ' i' �777�� s '�� i�'3 ff �r • �r �r�ti�:. �_•��'��, _1 ,��:���'S - L � 'tr / 'o ,v, S.-�,, - S-�y�; i G+S�., i at:b ;�� , � .. A' ` � . �. � w � � i b? s�a�s R7 ' � ,. � � 1 - i { . n ". ` i • s � f 1 ' w. Y ' �` ' u + APR 2 9 2004 ! BUTTE COUNTY STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR BUTTE COUNTY TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP PLANK) :!))VISION APPLICANT: Enterprise Rancheria DATE: 4/02/04 AGENT: APN: 036-540-010 FILE#: PLANNER: Steve Betts PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Those items checked are conditions of approval. PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS: A. STREETS ® 1. Prior to, or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, provide a fully executed road maintenance agreement on the County approved form. ® 2. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the Final Map. Street names shall be approved by the County Address Coordinator prior to the recordation of the Final Map. A minimum of 5 alternate names for each new street shall be submitted. ® 3. Obtain encroachment permit for all new or existing driveway approaches and construct them to County standards,as specified in County Improvement Standards. ® 4. Provide a cul-de-sac, designed and constructed to county standards as specified in the County Improvement Standards. The Final Map shall show the cul-de-sac. ® 5. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that there is approved access conforming to County standards to each parcel from a publicly maintained road. ® 6. All access rights shall be reserved by deed,per County Ordinance, and offered for dedication and depicted on the Final Map. ® 7. The developer shall provide all necessary traffic safety signs including stop signs. A note shall be place on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map stating "The property owners are responsible for the maintenance of all private road safety signs,including stop signs." ® 8. Pay the recording fees then in effect for recording the Final Maps and related documents. ❑ 9. Deed to Butte County, in fee simple,_feet of right-of-way from the centerline of The right of way shall be sufficient for the installation of standard No. S-5 at all street intersections. ® 10. Construct full street section on Crane Ave. and Tucker Ave. from project boundary to Oakvale Ave. to RS-2B geometric standard with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Minimum structural section to be 2 "AC and 8 "AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 % relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R"value determination and other data may be required to support the section design. ® 11. Construct full street section on interior streets to RS- 2B road standard with_curb, gutter,and sidewalk and 2 " AC, and 8 " AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 i % relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R" value determination and other data may be required to support the section design. ❑ 12. Relinquish abutters rights to Butte County, along the frontage of parcels ,except at approved access points. ® 13. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map,obtain an encroachment permit and construct a collector public road connection County Standard S-18A ,in accordance with County Improvement Standards. Adequate sight distance at the intersection of access road and Oakvale Ave. shall be provided. ® 14. Show on the additional map sheet or on a document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map a 65 ft. building setback from the centerline of Oakvale Ave., a 50' building setback from the centerline of all interior streets, and a 50' no disturbance setback along both sides of the stream channel ® 1.5. Street lighting shall be provided in accordance with Butte County requirements, accepted design criteria, and recommendations of Pacific Gas & Electric Company. If the developer chooses to install the streetlights and pay energy costs through a County Service Area (CSA), he/she must complete the formation of the CSA prior to recordation of the Final Map. The CSA formation process will require the Developer to fund the service until the beginning of the first fiscal year in which service charges can be collected for the CSA, and agree to an annual maximum service charge to ensure continued operation of the facilities. ® 16. Provide traffic study. ® 17. Provide circulation. ® 18. Contribute pro-rata share for installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Oakvale Ave. and Olive Highway. B. DRAINAGE ® I. Prior to the recordation of.the Final Map a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. ❑ 2. Establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the additional map sheet the elevations (by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark and a temporary benchmark on-site. ❑ 3. Pay the applicable drainage fees in effect at the time of recordation of the Final Map for the drainage area. (The current fee is now$ /acre.) ® 4. A Construction Storm Water Permit will be required by the State Water Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance(including clearing,excavation,filling,and grading)of one or Tore acres. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. The Permit must be obtained from the-State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. C. FINAL MAP ® 1. New lot lines shall comply with the applicable setback requirements of the Butte County Zoning Ordinance and the County adopted Uniform Building Code. ® 2. Show all easements of record on the Final Map. ® 3. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay in full any and all delinquent, current and estimated taxes and assessments as specified in Article 8, of Chapter 4 of Division 2 of Title 7,of the California Government Code commencing with Section 66492. I ❑ 4. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works,that the parcel to be divided is a legal parcel. ❑ 5. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay all applicable assessments I established by affected assessment districts,in full. ❑ 6. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map regarding ® 7. Protect oak trees remaining on homesite lots and replace oak trees to be or already removed at a 5 to 1 ratio. ® 8. The project site contains the habitat types known to harbor sensitive plant species. Conduct a botanical survey and implement protection measures if sensitive species are present. ® 9. Minimize mosquito breeding areas through grading and drainage. Fill surrounding dredger pits and provide positive drainage in the main creek channel. A section 404 permit will be required from the Army Corp of Engineers to fill wetlands. I I I I STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS TRANSPORTAXION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP TATION BUTTE DISTRICT 3 COUNTY p+ 703 B STREET APR 3 0 2004 P.O.BOX 911 MARYSVILLE,CA 95901-0911 DEVELOPMENT Flex your power! PHONE (530)741-4025 SERVICES Be energy efficient! FAX (530)741-5346 TTY (530)741-4509 April 28, 2004 04BUT0013 03-BUT-162, P.M. 20.490 TSM Pre-Development Review Application Mr. Stephen Betts Butte County Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965-3397 Dear Mr. Betts: Thank -you for the opportunity to review, and provide comments on the'pre-development application submitted by the Enterprise Rancheria to divide a 63.3-acre parcel located west of Oakvale Avenue, and south of. State Route.(SR) 162 and the.City of Oroville into thirty-two single-family residential lots and three 15.9-acre parcels. Our comments on the application are as follows: • The development of the single-family residential lots should not cause adverse significant traffic impacts along SR 162 and at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. • Development of the three 15.9-acre lots in conjunction with the residential lots and additional projects being proposed in the area may cause a cumulative traffic impact to the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection. We recommend that if a formal project is submitted, the environmental document prepared for the project address this potential cumulative traffic impact and include mitigation measures. • Lengthening the SR 162 eastbound right turn lane to Oakvale Avenue or by installing a traffic signal at the SR 162/Oakvale Avenue intersection will reduce this potential cumulative impact to a Less than Significant level. We suggest that if a formal project is submitted, the County require payment of traffic mitigation fees,to help.pay for the "fair share" costs of these future SR.162/Oakvale Avenue'intersection improvements: • At this-time, it is unknown•if.the related housing facilities:Such as.the,proposed.park', cultural center, housing administration office building, maintenance center, fire station, storage units, and recreation facilities will be developed only for use by residents of the subdivision or for public use. The use of the related facilities will alter future traffic volumes in the area; therefore, the use should be clarified in any formal application. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 1 A.% Mr.Stephen Betts April 28,2004 Page 2 • If it is anticipated that the proposed land use on the 15.9-acre parcels may change in the future from Low Density Residential to a more intensive land use, then a traffic impact study may be needed that analyzes the intersection of SR 162 and Oakvale Avenue. Please send us a copy of the formal application for review when available. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Rick Helman, Local Development/Inter- Governmental Review Coordinator, at(530) 634-7612. Sincerely, 62-t � BRUCE DE TERRA, CHIEF Office of Regional and Transit Planning " "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 7 �7k s •'� li L BUTTE COUNTYL SPR 2 9 2004 STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ------ ----- APPLICANT: Enterprise Rancheria DATE: 4/02 04 -�� ..•...._ --------j AGENT: APN: 036-540-010 FILE#: PLANNER: Steve Betts PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Those items checked are conditions of approval. PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS: A. STREETS ® 1. Prior to, or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, provide a fully executed road maintenance agreement on the County approved form. ® 2. Provide street name signs per requirements of the Department of Public Works prior to recordation of the Final Map. Street names shall be approved by the County Address Coordinator prior to the recordation of the Final Map. A minimum of 5 alternate names for each new street shall be submitted. ® 3. Obtain encroachment permit for all new or existing driveway approaches and construct them to County standards,as specified in County Improvement Standards. ® 4. Provide a cul-de-sac, designed and constructed to county standards as specified in the County Improvement Standards. The Final Map shall show the cul-de-sac. ® 5. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that there is approved access conforming to County standards to each parcel from a publicly maintained road. ® 6. All access rights shall be reserved by deed, per County Ordinance, and offered for dedication and depicted on the Final Map. ® 7. The developer shall provide all necessary traffic safety signs including stop signs. A note shall be place on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map stating "The property owners are responsible for the maintenance of all private road safety signs,including stop signs." ® 8. Pay the recording fees then in effect for recording the Final Maps and related documents. ❑ 9. Deed to Butte County, in fee simple,_feet of right-of-way from the centerline of The right of way shall be sufficient for the installation of standard No. S-5 at all street intersections. ® 10. Construct full street section on Crane Ave. and Tucker Ave.from project boundary to Oakvale Ave. to RS-213 geometric standard with curb, gutter and sidewalk Minimum structural section to be 2 "AC and 8 "AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 % relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "It"value determination and other data may be required to support the section design. ® 11. Construct full street section on interior streets to RS- 2B road standard with_curb, gutter,and sidewalk and 2 " AC,and 8 " AB, SC 250 prime,fog seal and 95 % relative compaction. Submit design to Land Development Division for approval. "R" value determination and other data may be required to support the section design. ❑ 12. Relinquish abutters rights to Butte County, along the frontage of parcels ,except at approved access points. ® 13. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map,obtain an encroachment permit and construct a collector public road connection County Standard S-18A ,in accordance with County Improvement Standards. Adequate sight distance at the intersection of access road and Oakvale Ave. shall be provided. ® 14. Show on the additional map sheet or on a document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map a 65 ft. building setback.from the centerline of Oakvale Ave., a 50' building setback from the centerline of all interior streets, and a 50' no disturbance setback along both sides of the stream channel ® 1.5. Street lighting shall be provided in accordance with Butte County requirements, accepted design criteria, and recommendations of Pacific Gas & Electric Company. If the developer chooses to install the streetlights and pay energy costs through a County Service Area (CSA), he/she must complete the formation of the CSA prior to recordation of the Final Map. The CSA formation process will require the Developer to fund the service until the beginning of the first fiscal year in which service charges can be collected for the CSA, and agree to an annual maximum service charge to ensure continued operation of the facilities. ® 16. Provide traffic study. ® 17. Provide circulation. ® 18. Contribute pro-rata share for installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Oakvale Ave. and Olive Highway. B. DRAINAGE ® 1. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. The drainage plans shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site and or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. ❑ 2. Establish 100 year floodplain elevations and the lowest floor elevations for any structures. Show on the additional map sheet the elevations (by contours) and the location of an accepted NVGD benchmark and a temporary benchmark on-site. ❑ 3. Pay the applicable drainage fees in effect at the time of recordation of the Final Map for the drainage area. (The current fee is now$ /acre.) ® 4. A Construction Storm Water Permit will be required by the State Water Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance(including clearing,excavation,filling,and grading)of one or more acres. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. The Permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. C. FINAL MAP I. New lot lines shall comply with the applicable setback requirements of the Butte County Zoning Ordinance and the County adopted Uniform Building Code. ® 2. Show all easements of record on the Final Map. ® 3. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay in full any and all delinquent, current and estimated taxes and assessments as specified in Article 8, of Chapter 4 of Division 2 of Title 7,of the California Government Code commencing with Section 66492. ❑ 4. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, prove, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works,that the parcel to be divided is a legal parcel. ❑ 5. Prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, pay all applicable assessments established by affected assessment districts,in full. ❑ 6. Place a note on a separate document which is to be recorded concurrently with the map or on an additional map sheet of the Final Map regarding ® 7. Protect oak trees remaining on homesite lots and replace oak trees to be or already removed at a 5 to 1 ratio. ® 8. The project site contains the habitat types known to harbor sensitive plant species. Conduct a botanical survey and implement protection measures if sensitive species are present. ® 9. Minimize mosquito breeding areas through grading and drainage. Fill surrounding dredger pits and provide positive drainage in the main creek channel. A section 404 permit will be required from the Army Corp of Engineers to fill wetlands. 04/23/2004 15:20 530-538-9448 BLJRRIS PAGE 01 32 Had DIMe ormft CA 959M Phone:53&DW Fwt Ta Slee w Belt P� DmW Bums ltr 538-TM Data Apd 23,2004 Pth�518 Paw= 1 Rerf APN 03VA&010 M X U C3 Roy Rswlwrr► O Pls■ss COMINS M O PNsss ftq* D/Name Rwide .Csaaswrbr NO ON THE EfMrjnM RANCHEFdA PURCHM OF APH 036640.010. 1 moved 10 Orarite with mN tw*almost two yam apo• Since nW wife mm a nai9re of Omit 1 sent har m A on to look for a suitable Place to purchm a home. She f umd on the East F000 is ares of Orowft since,in her ognion that was the most desirable area to lire. There were swod hen Ma an the marlget and we derided an purdmft a home an Had Driv%mer"is located In Copley/lass. Copley Maes is a greet One to We with a dean wetdcapt neighborhood and bSwAkl homes. r Is e perferd area 10 ndw chow because it is qurle amend vftWly alma free. HOMM0,4 low to wddwn incorne houdry 11; 'to$200=0-M,000 ddw 101 18 Nor sGOW M96*n*OPP M 00 Gab of"10 Enllw ub*Rslm*mla for avviol reasons: 1. Thai pobebtlly d alma in the neighborhood volt''usages dmnvdcaty. 2. The pmbd ter of the neighborhood ta" an a lees than well4wo look YA also drarvutc* hraeMse. 3. Neighborhood hams values wit drop. This Is a big arra a*can sneak up on ft omaq boom" cfthe drop M tact rera m. Remernber the aid saying:'Don't bile to hand that bad W. 4, Dupe County old the Egret Foch h of Owle is a beauWW place to We. This type of houakfg dwdopmerd va detract from that appeal and people vA move a wAft re. I do not appwe Erderprhm Mu cheria builft a housing dmmk pment for ttrelr lees forMV s..bibs ffmt a Just let Ommr buld ft out by ma airport where there Is undeveloped Wrd that would wodc for thrs prrpoee. ra E0VE R 2 6 2004 UTTE COUNTY NNING DIVISION