Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZCA 04-02_PLANNING Vd �IIV IV � V lulu � IV � ^ IV� � VI SEPARATOR' SHEET APN ( AIO /V Pao,ERNUMeEa 76714 011- 62 f A4 i PROJECT SUMMARY SHEET FILE NO.: ZCA 04-02 li PROJECT TYPE: Zoning Code Amendment i APN: County wide APPLICANT: Department of Development Services ADDRESS: 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 PHONE: (530) 538-7601 - OWNER: ADDRESS: REPRESENTATIVE: ADDRESS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zoning Code Amendment amending Butte County zoning regulations set forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be obtained prior to the construction and operation of large retail projects and through the addition of design standards for such projects LOCATED: County wide PROPERTY ZONED: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: TOWN/AREA: County wide 1. Application accepted: 11/21/2003 Amount: $ 0 Receipt#: 2. Assigned To:- Robert Mackenzie 3. Comments sent to: Development Services Director, Public Works Director, Environmental Health, Assessor, LAFCo,Agricultural Commissioner, California Department of Forestry,Building Manager 4. Sent to Inter-Departmental Review Committee(IDR): 5. Date scheduled for IDR: 6. Comments received from: 7. Rezone Petition Signatures Checked: 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# 15061. (bx3) Other 10. Staff Report: Project Video: 11. Clearinghouse circulation required: Yes No Date Sent to SCH: 12. Publication Notice Written: Display Ad Prepared: 13. Notices Mailed: Number of Notices: 14. Newspaper Publication Date: Q ® G, B 15. Planning Commission Hearing(s): Action taken: Special Conditions: Commission Resolution No.: 16. Board of Supervisors' Hearing(s):_ a? —/D o ?� Action taken: c} Board Resolution No.: Ordinance No: 7 Adopted: :lam —::Z O— d 17. Type Zoning Code Amendment/Send for signature: 18. N.O.E. /N.O.D./APPENDIX G: Fish&Game Fees Paid: Yes No 19. - Send validated Zoning Code Amendment: 20. Assessor's Memo: 21. Copy of Zoning Code Amendment to Planning Technician: A. ZCA 04-02 - Proposed amendment to Chapter 24 ordinances requiring Use Permit for large retail projects and establishing mandatory design standards for such proj ects. Rob McKenzie, Deputy County Counsel, said he is asking for an insertion of a sentence under parking spaces in the Large Retail Ordinance to say"Runoff from the site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff." He said this should be added as a precaution against applicants getting confused and not understanding the condition. He suggested inserting this sentence into the middle of the paragraph as the third sentence and add to the second sentence under 24-264 (C) (2) (g) (2) after"All parking areas" add"and other site improvements." It was moved by Commissioner Marin, seconded by Commissioner Lambert, and carried to modify the ordinance by adding to 24-264(C)(2)(g)(2)after"All parking area""and other site improvements."; and add a third sentence to read "Runoff from the site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff.", by the following vote: i AYES: Commissioners Marin, Lambert, and Chairman Leland NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioner Evans ABSTAINED: Commissioner Nelson ■BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION■MINUTES ■ JANUARY 22,2004 ■ PAGE 15 ■ z Department of Development. Services — Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulation set forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be obtained prior to the construction and operation of large retail projects and through the addition of design standards for such projects. (RM) (County-wide) Rob MacKenzie gave a brief summary of the changes in the proposed Ordinance since the last hearing as listed in the memo dated December 24, 2003. Chairman Leland asked if someone is building in-fill, supposing there are 4 or 5 buildings that are 10,000 square feet each and someone is going to build a 10,000 square foot building in the middle, different owners, different time of development, would this ordinance come to bear. He said the definition of Large Retail needs to be clarified. He did not think this ordinance should apply to in- fill. Ms. Christopher did not agree becausecumulative impacts that could be caused by adding another 10,000 square foot building. Mr. Wannenmacher said currently the County would require a Use Permit for a shopping center when it is a certain size, and if they say in additional to requiring a Use Permit for the shopping center, additional work in the shopping center would require additional Use Permits, it should be made clear. Chairman Leland asked with a whole block of retail,do we want to have.a Use Permit for every new retail store in downtown Chico. Mr.MacKenzie said he was not sure if either the owner of the existing shopping center or the owner of the new addition would be'violating the prohibition-of the Ordinance. Because one would be operating a 40,000 square foot business and the other a 10,000 square foot facility. Ms. Christopher said if that is what they want the ordinance to say, the Director has the authority to decide if a Use Permit is required. She said the purpose of the Ordinance is to deal with potential impacts. Commissioner Evans was.absent at this time. .Mr. Wannenmacher said that the only zone that allows general commercial uses is the C-2 zone, every other zone allows retail stores and shops of a light commercial character. He would not expect anything over 50,000 square feet to meet that definition: He said in the C-1 and C-2 zones there is a Use Permit requirement for shopping malls or shopping centers of 5 acres or greater.. He said if it's a stand alone building that would fit within the definition of light commercial,they could argue that they have a use of right, but it would have to fit in that definition. Chairman Leland asked where the C-2 zoned areas in the County were located. _ L, a ....•, ..•,.. ,..,,.., .,•1,....,.. ... .,. ....., ...,._.,,. ,,.,..F .:. .:,. "a:t:� ..+,5c:»B\. `:;yr•p.a,''� •rf:�F• .,!� .'� -.�rwi.' �; . ?•..,. ,.,;1�,%'zit.. -fi ..tt:,r� .}� ^.iv> .a:,.. ,.... .. .F a.•. :e �1.:.._•. ...... .:. ,..r, �.S..N.:`�,....., ., }.>{.:......r. >,........... .*:rv,::-s-a..,,w �,RYC+;:'.d. ..A:+;.,.,�1.�r.. -t.,,w.....visu:,;. tiJ'.,5:,`b `,+':w S.. F�.. .,.,.. .,........n„c„�,.:, `�C»..u�a....;rxd«:...,;t?.c,..o,_.,.'!wt,v.,,.....�(._..,,,,r:«,;.,..�..a.,L ,»ra::. .§,f:. :5,..� .,.�,: �,�_a�n n .t, ?['+:i��•,lP �`t��n.e,•;. y� ���• �..�F 7�` .z h'�-u;.;�_r■�BUTTE-..COUNTYRLAN�NING.•�COMNIISSION:�1vIIIVUTE�S:-■'7AAiIJARY8 x:2004 .PAGE 3.3�■,.-�'><,..,�g� ;:�:��a�R'�r�.Y:• .✓:: h' S:y-•• tC', ,.b: ..f. ..ty t, :l. „_^ ).- :M,:. .�.;,7�.a At��j •l�;f�..hr. r ..,Y')v.�rr,:.�.,,;u„ ;. .. .,... a"Fn.:...,; „✓:.• 4�?o.,"`y.,y.�r>•. +�.r. .l'.'l?!f' ...Y'�`.,,.:'���v.•.i-�,i^;:::,.. ..-f 't., k:, .�,�:"F'! h�af`y,•:.saar'i!rl< ^t;k' ki k,!' v'k� �, Q �<a,�.,,.;: w�„ , w k .rJ•..tii:. ::+,:h:t ,l >r5: �3,e,• a- ';:L,...,• :ht't'v0^ .P.,e�'U r\•+,, n.v. n.,}n@;e•kY„ ., ki:.?,K;. 5 ,..,x... .,_,kX/,r•t, '..y5 ,.. ^r.:'.'�,.:•..r, �•.,:�+�� i yy.. y .:, .'ry._ �.. ...,: ]l+ s., P.... . ......,«.�, h( n'9. ., ��', ,.�.�:.Au r.._t.. w ,,,• .,. ,a., 1..wt.,..NJ.f.,ti ......:.:Yy,........,1•..,�4,.t-„•w+,... .,.:.........rb,..P•.i.mA.t�`.rl,,.,.,.u:�";:•.t1:A.,->,eJ.z1�k,� .+CA.,Yx�d.''�,S„ ti.tf`!k"tn c:T„•, d� ,...,...} ...:. ........,...,.,.4 .... .. ,...._.. _..1, ,. :df, ,.t�. .....a.,,,..-.. ,,n .Y.. , ..wry. r.'•.i.t.,..:, e,.5,�,' r.yJ:'.� .;Sw: .iRl: ick^ .E. 1+ r. ,,., ... ,. . f,,, .,... 5 ,,..:,y.,. .., :..�..:•.:.:....:. .:....:�::.,,:....,u.;.:....:..,,• .L ,.t,,..t... 3y.,.. :�;”' •.�t•.'r,�h''_.;'., ht' ... ...:.... ..5,rr;,.-..���,....... ,'� ,r� .:a.:,. x, 5«:r:d..cn.,. ,.. .,p..,..._.,.5,,,.. .._:,x. .,_c.. •,..:..: t.r.,s«,c'=s,,,�y>:..,..;.�.�..,rA?a.,r,;_:✓<-as::r.,, ,. ...E ..'t�.. . a. ..G...�., .. e.:. ..,r. ,. ... ..;.. ..... } ,.,r.n.r,,. .S. x. �:u.•r+::. 'sas`1:n5�, s'V�.. ��yy F yyyy u r. ', ll r F ,.t.. t. ':s„ ,e. ,'(1','.f,(�i�r r. rr.X.�!��se>,,^-s^-`:.`1r., i::•�;I`s�;h'^`i,- �r�TM;.!6^.4,i�t� ,Y,.Mn.,L, 6!51...1'.,;s ..,t:;:.T.i ala v\.3. ,'.'� Pe tl,:,,••.�f{-. "y ::Q ,�. '{''i' i�' Y ,}�{ ,3. Yt. ..lo: t:;,h. de 4.:.�„ ,�q, s3��•.nF,. ti't°'; ,.t'."� �� ,'¢�• Y •, �'b�r.. .1 ,}�:.a ,•s S .r., ,,`e=^.,P{j 7r'..: ,..9y:3'�S �, x ,L.w..^.,r i:: .,t nr_•vy .x r.. iL^'Ti;�h3:. :3fr'• ..�,•,,:µti+'.�P .,F... -•..,t.: :, ,•.,., v?��.lS,.. ll.tl�. 't, c d ✓ .3:. .+f. et. �E••S{.:': ,.nh,...v,._4'*r±;;t"�i .,i^e�� r. a• t'' :f1� +R m( :.�,.•:. ,.r,,.yr+ .`a.,- .,ti:nt�t ...{; ,r.. ,..r i�'t ! '.v .�kE., .:a.. .d-:, "},� -.r,� �!",'” L' i�2-:: •�,a J 9t t ,..h.*wh,• �;...;�.t::^-r tii?7";;:t,::r;'`w'^': .,"...•d .. ,,.,t,.c�:; :.., v� .,vbY. L«- ' i =,�, n:r' �fk 3�. .uv�" >.«6 .,.�”-- •f`i.. � a+, ,i.i�,,r.,-i..tae�,`,',[. :r:� :•.�:.: .,4:o- w.,oe:d.,,.. n,f5. ..t,,.?'r•..r's`:�:..., � . 3'�. ''>E!:+�1 '�i ., � 'S t�.'c..,.,._...1•+-�;, ,.K"S, ..,b�,� t:. ,.._,.;;�.,,:., ....:,w.: ,:.. }..r ..•»,. t.. .....-:�,i,.''ta?:`<>1... 5.'a. ,4._ .r .c. ..,,«:i`,u:.� �;. ”:'h...Ad "�`a :ttf �. v, ,. .k',,. ,..:Gibb:,, .s .t,.,.t., t.,,,,_ ,.lj,� K,v.r � �,h Y,. ,..r,�. :3..•...•r `]::z:�:YF.z,.,fir., _;>„•. n,�...;y.�„' :.t.�.M ..�l.r �•»�it�£k%;�.y.. :�r,•,:�;1 :.�...<.-i.. s., w.,�Y,,: e,. £$ ......,r%u...�1,A,x,.•7.¢�:J.K..,....G..1'-t...�h• �'k a.x.i�, ^�d�r:<..,. .,. fig,w.ls. .3.,.t..•,ht uo%�A+.. -:.A�i.�S4w5'..-. �.. . .� , ,.,._ ,.. �. -f w....iv. 'v. Iv.n.:.. :•x.v.t.. G..,;^rv:. r?,ij�...,r.+�'�;';$•.�w.c•s,?"r•r..t ,-'�;,a�.2;'>~:>'kl� rt:;•S: k nh.., >,E,.;�e:�. .4. ',�. .t:..S,.:, .•.v,. n�f,. ... x. . ,. ui:^..'::,{t;;. .. :. ,"5:' ,:..r .Ir,Y,tS. 4k'. n.l':i i�w�•,.,3.o�•'!W v::H-l' ..�.:,�','r,'w„5;,. • • Mr. MacKenzie said the area at the intersection of Highway 99 and Esplanade is one example. He said regarding people wanting to add to an existing structure with an additional 10,000 square foot building, they could put into the ordinance an exception for the Director of Development Services that upon finding that the impacts that would be imposed by the new addition would be incremental and very small and, therefore, the Director could accept a ministerial permit instead of a full Use Permit. Commissioner Lambert said it would be helpful to have an idea of what size the different stores are in square feet, i.e., is Raleys 50,000. There was a brief discussion on different types of stores. Chairman Leland said that when zoning is established it takes into account the amount of traffic for the types of commercial activity allowed. He asked if they really need a separate Use Permit for design standards. Ms. Christopher asked if the Commission would like it better if it did not incorporate an existing building and addition area. She said if it was a new building of 50,000 square feet, it would be the trigger point no matter what the building is next to. Chairman Leland said that is what they should be focused on,big increments of retail and not small additions to what is already a big area of retail. Brief discussion. Commissioner Lambert said that when they look at zoning they should be looking at the worse case scenario. Ms. Christopher discussed the laundry list of uses allowed,Section 24-140. They discussed impacts of large retail shops going into an area. She said they can amend the definition to say"new." Chairman Leland said he would be more comfortable with"new" 50,000 square foot building and not adding a small shop to a large building. He asked if a movie theater is considered a retail kind of business. Ms. Christopher said theaters are usually considered more of an assembly hall type of business such as a concert hall, etc. Chairman Leland asked what about aesthetic concerns,if the concerns apply to retail buildings why not other large buildings that come along. He felt design standards should be across the board. Mr. MacKenzie went through the changes to the ordinance starting on Page 2 of County Counsel's memo dated 12/24/03. He read the changes 1-14 and to Section 5. Chairman Leland said regarding roofs the idea is if you are on an adjacent land use you will not see equipment on the roofs. He suggested on Page 8 under e. after "fagade view" add "from public rights-of-way or." He had a question on Page 7 c.Entryways;it states that every fagade has to have a customer entrance. He said most retail centers have an entrance in the front and a back that has a ■BUTTE.GOUNTY PLANNING_CON-M,SSION MEMTES 7ANiIARY 8,.2009 ■PAGE 34 ■ - ' . a ... L . .... .,.... . ... . .1:. ... ., .. r .. .n.... ....... .. .... .. _ ..t... ..r . ... r. .., ,. delivery dock and no customer entrance. He did not think this should be imposed on the back of a store. Mr. MacKenzie said a fagade is defined as any side of a building facing a public right-of-way. He made a change to"whose"and changed the word to"which"under B. 1. on Page 3 of the ordinance. Chairman Leland said a lot of retail stores back up to a residential area and there is a fence between the store and residences and a dressed up facade is not required. Ms. Christopher was not sure she agreed with 2. c. Entryways, where it says "All facades shall include at least one customer entrance." Mr.MacKenzie said one way to handle the problem is to eliminate the words from B. 1.which state "or facing an adjacent residential land use." He said if you eliminate the entryway requirement in 2. c.it would take care of the first problem mentioned,but if you also delete the part of the definition of facade,then you are removing the requirement that unadorned lengths exceeding 20 linear feet are prohibited on a wall that faces a residential land use. Ms. Christopher suggested leaving the definition of fagade alone, then on Page 7 a. Facades, you have to do something to make it attractive every 20 feet,but then drop 1. c. at the bottom of Page 7. Mr. MacKenzie suggested deleting only the first sentence from 1. c. and leave the rest. Ms. Christopher said there was a comment made reguarding the size of the building; if they went from 100 feet to 20 feet linear length because 50,000 square feet is not a huge building and for this size building you would not want 100 foot long plain wall sections. Chairman Leland said he did not want to impose architectural restrictions on the side of the building facing the residential areas. Ms. Christopher discussed writing in an exception to fagades regarding service areas and exempt out service areas. Chairman Leland discussed dressing up the building where it faces the street and has a fence put up where the building faces a residential area. He suggested changing a. Facades to number the first paragraph 1. and change the paragraph numbered 1. to 2. Mr.MacKenzie continued going over the proposed changes to the ordinance in the County Counsel memo. Chairman Leland said they are talking about elevating the aesthetic standards of the big buildings and he did not want to put in something that is so onerous to stop retail building. Ms. Christopher said the requirements are fairly relaxed. She discussed the design standards in the City of Chico. ■BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING CONvIMISSION■MINUTES■JANUARY 8,2004 PAGE 35 ■ .i... .... ..' ...".A., :... ..f. .... .i.f...^' '... :.... E..... 1. ... i.. ... u,.. . .l„ .. ..w.. ..,. ........ ,. Chairman Leland said he would suggest finding this consistent with the General Plan;exempt from CEQA; and recommend approval to the Board, with the changes in the County Counsel 12/24/03 memo, change B. 1. "whose" to "which" and deleting the last sentence which says "or facing an adjacent residential land use; re-number 2. a. to 2. a. 1. and 2. a. 1 to 2. a. 2; from c. Entryways, delete the first sentence.; using the original definition of the 50,000 square feet; and drop the H-C zone. Mr.Wannenmacher said that the C-C zone was added,but under the reading of the H-C zone nothing over 50,000 square feet would be allowed right now and this ordinance would allow it by Use Permit. The hearing was opened to the public. Mr. MacKenzie said there was an e-mail received from a member of the public and a video tape on Wal-Mart was submitted. He said the ordinance proposed is a legislative matter, and the Commission has a wide discretion concerning what material they wish to consider. He said staff has not viewed the tape and the proponent is not here for the Commission to ask questions. Chairman Leland said the tape has to do with one retailer and does not pertain to this ordinance. He said he was inclined to not view the video. Mr. Wannenmacher said normally the rule on public comment is that you set limits which historically the Planning Commission has not done. He said the limits could be time limits, etc. Chairman Leland said the video is not relevant and decided the Commission was not going to listen to the video. Ms. Christopher noted that there is no application in front of the Commission at this time. The hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Leland,seconded by Commissioner Lambert,and carried to recommend approval of the Zoning Code Amendment ZCA 04-02, 1. Find that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. 2. Find that adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308. 3. Recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors subject to the recommended changes on County Counsel Memo dated 12/24/03,change B. 1."whose"to`which" and deleting the last sentence which says"or facing an adjacent residential land use;re-number 2.a. to 2. a. 1. and 2. a. 1 to 2. a. 2; from c. Entryways, delete the first sentence.; using the original definition of the 50,000 square feet; and drop the H-C zone. AYES: Commissioners Marin and Lambert, and Chairman Leland NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioners Nelson and Evans BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING.CONM§SION ,MINUTES 8,2604 PAGE.36 Y l ABSTAINED: No one t t ■BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COIVINIISSION Iv1INLJTES:■JANUARY 8;2004 ■PAGE 37■ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMEN 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: FP Tm FNT' DF t klrl-are /rifW7- S IPRI CCS - ADDRESS: STREET,CITY,STATE,&ZIP CODE FILE NUMBER: (FOR OFFICE USE) &• dP9'/U r- e bei e vicc e 7ZeA ssy 6 s' Z. e-l4 0 Al—D NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT(If any) TELEPHONE: LOCATION OF PROJECT(Major cross streets and Address,if any) C'0UW22 -w/ D e t }. �g�'• fi r t-K ,,�`:i c: `rtk t r�, ' • r; ; i:ir.GENERAL INFORMAT�ION�REiJIRED ,, � •, .Z} i , Q t' .•lkC+ .. ,r ,. Seo•. ,gip, s: c=s r e.• a:- .q s: rw. .i,s 9 les ? -e +'.,:..:i:'YP 9•w , a+::•e 9F1+� •,:...z3Y,:.. . - a..;,r5•,t In. kY' •Cl 'Pt-t i."Yw&`. rG r*'Tt" ,>3+Ir.5; OWNER'S NAME: TELEPHONE: ADDR SS: CITY,STATE,&ZIP CODE: N ZON GENERAL PLAN EXISTING LAND USE SITE SIZE(in Square Feet or Acres) EXISTING STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) PROPOSED STRUCTURES(in Square Feet) (Check One) (Check One) ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE SEWERED ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON PUBLIC WATER ❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON SEPTIC �¢ t W❑ PROPERTY IS OR PROPOSED TO BE ON WELL WATER 'y>+� t'Iir..i � ,,f;#Y,�v, `Gi e"''E�' }7✓p`3'�� '�7a�7L�kY'NJ'a.'x=; Via. �" .'Ydc�1N` `•?ni�,rl�r�g''•#.'[*•e': ^f.J" �,Xcr . "h9.• £ &r yP..y.r .�.. '7t 4i. irt� 'n � J.. moi. a t }a •iM�M !. 's3i r t ]E$Y Si.• � " �E �r �`. a 54�*hJ � P+LIGATION RE TEST ,. QRu 't`�rz :n. ,'�E� ED 4 . E.t�.]`�c3.,+-s`,.•c'Ysdatbt�?8i'_'�2,C:+,f,�.rr - .iY7Ead, xEY°Yivr+ t1s�31' `isE>bsa'YM�w :;ta, .` !'tii` ❑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 ❑DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ®OTHER: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT .:..t'•?''.', � , F .�,..u4.hjC. {};1t'k�•,`T� x�Yr} �"7`.-_:t�z^ Y pE�`y:7 <-'�'Ri`a$r.,•:'�5,,,�'E,'�,h=,X�,,:wri..j•t.}'tse•�.r�'�^^ yfi i :+u7.•:.,r r �: . -..y.y}- �„� M q+y °PfROJE@T DESCRIPTION:�^� N`� t��� I +,k�+ �� 4 1'� � Oft Y tat,Fc2• F?.r � # a�?tsT4mW'I {bitt� K ? SEg9JabAK ca.t.< .4.a RUM eart�law 2Y5�cr�. FULL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT(Attach necessary sheets. If this application is for a land division,describe the number and size of parcels.) Com. GE.. GL-Q1L. r w�r +. ra. •� i �'f��`+s(Ek�It � r _. ���1r:...y..x..Ma...,.fr�:-,;..,n'..rrt.�,::..,:.�.e:.cru:,!`�:tk :I.iii•in.,:J.e.�c4Wi.!'a:.`.i_.a..a..:. 4" ::.f?,.3I��xTxsls.l,`�,7.�.}43'•9 =4 4ao u�O , � RAM, 01, uCR KA �a I CERTIFY THAT I AM PRESENTLY THE LEGAL OWNER OR THE AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE ER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. FURTHER,I ACKNOWLEDGE THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION TIFY THAT ALLO T E ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. (If an agent is to be authorized,execute an avit of a_ rization an inc de a affidavit with this application.) DATE: //18�3 SIG ATURE: K:IFORMSIUNIFORM APPLICATION Page 1 of 2 AGENT AUTHORIZATION T0: Butte County, Department of Development Services: Phone Number - Print Name Mailing Address is hereby authorized to process the application for on my property, identified as Butte County Assessor Parcel Number: APN# - - This authorization allows representation for all applications, hearings, appeals, etc. and to sign all documents necessary for said processing, but not including document(s) relating to record title interest. Owner(s) of Record: (sign and print name) Print Name Print Name Signature Signature Architect and/or Engineer: Phone Number(� Print Name of Architect/Engineer Mailing Address FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Verify: Date Received: Total Amount Received: ❑ AP Number(s) ❑ Legal Description ❑ Owners Authorization ❑ Zoning Requirements ❑ Project Description ❑ Copies of plot plan Taken by: Receipt No. PW/LD Plan E.H. CDF NOD/NOE Fees Payment of the currently required Application Fee and/or Deposit(Any unused portion of a deposit)will be returned upon final action. Current fee for this application is. as of Make check payable to "Butte County Treasurer". K:\FORMWNIFORM APPLICATION Page 2 of 2 DECLARATION OF FEES DUE (California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4) f l =G?t FOR CLERK USE ONLY NAME AND ADDRESS OF LEAD AGENCY/APPLICANT: COUNTY OF BUTTE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 25 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE,CA 95965 (530)538-7621 Project: Adoption of"An Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forih in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by Requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects." Project Description: Adoption of an ordinance intended to protect the health,safety,and welfare of the citizens of the county by regulating the construction and operation of large retail projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from large retail projects are mitigated by the owners of the large retail projects,in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to county taxpayers. The ordinance amends Butte County Code Chapter 24, Article III, entitled. "Zone Districts"and Article IV,entitled"General Development Regulations." FILING NO. CLASSIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: 1. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION/STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION [X] A. Statutorily or Categorically Exempt $25.00(Twenty-Five Dollars)Butte County Clerk's Filing Fee [ ] B. De Minimus Impact—Certificate of Fee Exemption Required .$25.00(Twenty-Five Dollars)Butte County Clerk's Filing Fee NOTICE OF DETERMINATION.—FEE REQUIRED 2. [ ] A. Negative Declaration [ ] $1,250.00(Twelve Hundred Fifty Dollars)State Filing Fee. [ ] $25.00 (Twenty-Five Dollars)Butte County Clerk's Filing Fee [ ] B. Environmental Impact Repoli $850.00(Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars)State Filing Fee $25.00(Twenty-Five Dollars)Butte County Clerk's Filing Fee 3. [ ] OTHER(Specify)General Rule Exemption $25.00(Twenty-Five Dollars)Butte County Clerk's Filing Fee gAordinance\NOE DFG fee decl.doc CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) NOTICE OF EXEMPTION To: County Clerk, County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 From: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Project Title: Adoption of ordinance entitled:"AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BUTTE COUNTY ZONING REGULATIONS SET FORTH IN BUTTE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 24 BY REQUIRING THAT A USE PERMIT BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF LARGE RETAIL PROJECTS AND THROUGH THE ADDITION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SUCH PROJECTS" Location -- Specific: The unincorporated areas of Butte County. Location— County: Butte County Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: The ordinance is intended to protect the health safety and welfare of the citizens of the County by regulating the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owners of the Large Retail Projects; in order to ensure'that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers.The ordinance amends Butte County Code Chapter 24, Article III, entitled "Zone Districts" and Article IV, entitled "General Development Regulations." Name of Public Agency Approving or Carrying Out Activity: Board of Supervisors of The County of Butte Exempt Status: • Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: CEQA Guidelines,Sections: 15061(b)(2)915308, 15360. Reasons why activity is exempt: i The Board of Supervisors of The County of Butte has found that the above-described activity, is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines,.Section 153061(b)(2)and that the application of that exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines,,Section 15300.2. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308 provides that where a local agency's regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment, certain actions such as the adoption of ordinances or regulations to assure the maintenance, restoration,enhancement,or protection of the environment have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15360 defines "environment" as the physical conditions which exist within the area which will be affected by a proposed project including land, air, water,minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. "Environment" includes both natural and man- made conditions. The ordinance is intended to protect the health safety and welfare of the citizens of the County by regulating the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owners of the Large Retail Projects,in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. Thus, the Board's adoption of the ordinance is intended to protect the "environment." Therefore,the adoption of the ordinance is categorically exempt from the CEQA process pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15061(b)(2), 15308, and 15360. Lead Agency Contact Person: Robert W. MacKenzie, Chief Deputy County Counsel Butte County Counsel's Office 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Telephone:(530) 538-7621 Signature: //� vDate: FEB Paul McIntosh, . Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte Date received for filing and posting by County Clerk: document\Big Box Ordinance NOE • r 1 2 Ordinance No. 3 8 7 0 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BUTTE COUNTY ZONING REGULATIONS SET FORTH IN BUTTE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 24 BY REQUIRING THAT A USE PERMIT BE 4 OBTAINED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF LARGE RETAIL PROJECTS AND THROUGH THE ADDITION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SUCH PROJECTS 5 6 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte ordains as follows : 7 Section 1 . 8 The Board of Supervisors finds the following: 9 1 . A current, prominent trend in the State involves the 10 construction and operation of large retail centers of 50, 000 or more 11 square feet. 12 2 . The construction and operation of each such large retail 13 center presents a correspondingly large potential for adverse impacts 14 to health, safety and aesthetics to the citizens of the area in which 15 it is constructed and operated, including but not limited to visual, 16 traffic, pedestrian safety and air quality impacts. 17 3 . Due both to the large potential for adverse environmental 18 impacts in the immediate or adjacent area presented by the 19 construction and .operation of each such large retail center, and the 20 enormous potential in the County .for cumulative health and safety and 21 environmental impacts, including but not limited to those set forth 22 above, presented by the construction and operation of multiple large 23 retail centers, in order to protect the health safety and welfare of 24 the citizens of the County, it is necessary to: 25 a. Limit the construction and operation of large retail 26 centers to specified zoning districts within the County;' 27 and 28 1 I b. Require that the construction and operation of each such 2 large retail center occur only after at least one public 3 hearing has been conducted pursuant to the discretionary 4 Use Permit process set forth in Butte County Code Section 5 24-45, et seq. ; and 6 c. Establish clear and concise community design standards 7 specifically applicable to the construction of large retail 8 centers. 9 4 . Changes to the Zoning Regulations are required to implement 10 the three objectives set forth above,. to ensure compatibility of large 11 retail projects with the unique character of Butte County and also 12 ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of the environmental 13 impacts imposed by such projects are not shifted to County taxpayers. 14 15 Section 2 . Section 24-264 is added to Article V, entitled 16 "Specific Use Requirements" of the. Butte County Code to read as 17 follows: 18 "24-264 Large Retail Projects. 19 A. Allowed only in specified zones subject to Use Permit 20 Requirement. 21 1 . Notwithstanding any. provision in this Code or any 22 regulation to the contrary, the construction and operation 23 of Large Retail Projects, as defined herein, is prohibited 24 unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued after 25 at least one public hearing has been held pursuant the 26 process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et 27 seq. Further, said use shall only be allowed in the C-1 28 2 I (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) , and C-C 2 (Community Commercial) zoning districts. Large Retail 3 Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district 4 shall be limited to 100, 000 square feet or less . 5 B. Definitions. 6 1 . Facade: the front of a building and/or any of its 7 sides facing a public right-of-way, which side is 8 predominantly visiblefrom a public right-of-way or public 9 park. 10 2 . Large Retail Project: Any new commercial retail 11 project, the total- gross building area of which equals or 12 exceeds 50, 000 square feet, including but not limited to 13 mercantile uses, and or .shopping center uses . For the 14 purpose of determining building area, multiple buildings 15 located closer than 20 feet together shall be considered 16 one building., 17 3 . -Light. Source: a complete lighting unit consisting 18 of a lamp and all necessary mechanical, electrical and 19 decorative parts, such as reflectors (mirrored enclosures 20 surrounding the lamp) , refractors (glass or plastic 21 enclosures surrounding the lamp) and lenses, designed to 22 direct light rays . 23 4 . Outdoor Light Fixtures: all outdoor illuminating 24 devices, reflective surfaces, lamps and other devices, 25 either permanently installed or portable, which are used 26 for illumination or advertisement . Such devices shall 27 include, but are not limited to, search, spot and 28 3 I floodlights for: 2 a. buildings and structures; 3 b. recreational areas; 4 C. parking lot lighting; 5 d. landscape lighting; 6 e. billboards. and other signs; 7 f . street lighting; 8 g. product display lighting; 9 h. building overhangs. and open canopies. 10 C. Design Standards for Large Retail Projects 11 1 . . Purpose. These standards are intended to provide 12 developers of large retail building development with 13 guidelines for creating safe, efficient, pedestrian- 14 friendly projects with human scale orientation, while 15 discouraging large, nondescript buildings and "unfriendly" 16 pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded 17 parking lots . Further, enhanced Large Retail. Project 18 design will accomplish. the following objectives: 19 a. Encourage large, single building construction with 20 definition and good architectural design rather than 21 enormous, warehouse appearance with unbroken, blank walls. 22 Good design encourages clearly defined entryways, 23 articulated roof lines to prevent monotony, pedestrian 24 amenity areas, and concealment of unsightly mechanical . 25 structures from public view; 26 b. Encourage pedestrian-oriented design which 27 effectively resolves the incompatibility between 28 4 I pedestrians and motorists , while providing 2 interconnectivity between buildings, parking areas, and 3 other internal/external components; 4 C. Encourage parking lot design which meets vehicular 5 needs, while providing a safe, efficient comfortable 6 pedestrian flow; 7 d. Encourage adequate landscaping that allows large 8 buildings and their components to blend with their 9 surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the 10 public benefit and mitigating air pollution and excessive 11 heat gain which emanate from large impervious parking 12 areas; 13 e. Encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to 14 enhance public safety while avoiding forms of. nuisance and 15 intrusiveness into adjacent areas . 16 2 . Design Standards. The following standards shall be 17 required for all Large Retail Projects: 18 a. Facades. 19 1 . No uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of 20 any portion of the facade shall exceed 20 feet in length, 21 and shall include one or more of the following: 22 Architectural features such as pilasters, columns, 23 canopies/porticos,, arcades, colonnades, and/or parapets. 24 At least one architectural feature shall be required on 25 each wall plane. . 26 2 . Multiple Stores' within a single building. . 27 Where .a -Large Retail Project contains individual stores 28 5 1 that are less than 50, 000 square feet of gross floor area 2 each, with separate, exterior customer entrances, the 3 street ` level facade of each store shall provide 4 fenestration along the horizontal length of the building 5 facade of each store. 6 b. Materials. Predominant exterior building material 7 should include architectural or split face block, brick, 8 glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete 9 with architectural finish. 10 C. Entryways . Customer entrances shall be clearly 11 defined and should include at least two of the following 12 features : canopies /porticos , overhangs , 13 recesses/projections, arcades, raised above-the-doorway 14 cornice parapets, peaked roof forms, arches, outdoor 15 patios, display windows, integrated architectural details 16 such as tile work, moldings, planters.or wing walls, and/or 17 landscaped sitting areas. 18 d. Service Areas. Service areas which include .areas 19 designated for loading and unloading of goods and refuse 20 collection shall be buffered from right-of-ways and 21 residentially . zoned areas. Buffering shall consist of 22 construction of a wall between the service area and 23 abutting land use. All other applicable site development 24 standards and regulations must be met in addition to this 25 requirement. 26 e. Roofs. Flat roof lengths longer .than 100 feet in 27 length, rooftop equipment and heating, ventilating, and air 28 6 1 conditioning (HVAC) units shall be concealed from any 2 facade view by adjacent land uses of lesser intensity, and 3 public rights-of-way. 4 f. Pedestrian Circulation. Large Retail Projects 5 shall encourage pedestrian-oriented ingress and egress 6 through design features that enhance pedestrian safety, 7 efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition 8 between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways. 9 g. Parking areas. Parking lots and access aisle- 10 ways shall be designed utilizing the following standards: 11 1 . Parking lot design. Vast unbroken parking 12 lots are prohibited. The design of parking lot separators 13 shall consider pedestrian movements, conflict points with 14 vehicles, site distance and angles, security site lighting 15 and safety within the parking lot area. A pedestrian 16 access way shall be provided to. main customer entrances . 17 The parking lot shall be designed with traffic calming 18 features along the fire lanes fronting the building, 19 facades, as determined by the Planning Commission which 20 shall consider the* recommendations of the County Fire Chief 21 and the Director of Public works. Parking lots shall be 22 designed to reduce vehicle movement along the fire lane. 23 Alternative designs that incorporate existing natural 24 resources are encouraged, subject to approval by the 25 Planning Commission. 26 2 . Parking Spaces. The total number of parking 27 spaces shall be determined in accordance with Section 24- 28 7 1 240, except that the Planning Commission may grant a 2 variance from the formula set forth in Section 24-240 if it 3 also approves specific measures for the mitigation of 4 impacts to traffic safety and available parking due to 5 outdoor displays and sales. All parking areas and other 6 site improvements must be designed and maintained and shall 7 be located and configured in such a manner as to provide 8 the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff 9 management and aquifer recharge for the site. Runoff from 10 the site shall not contribute to or cause an increase from 11 pre-development conditions in peak runoff . Runoff from the 12 site shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that term is 13 defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance 14 to: any nearby property. 15 h. Landscaping. The following landscaping standards 16 shall be incorporated into the design of all Large Retail 17 Projects . 18 1 . Foundation. Foundation landscaping may be 19 required. 20 2 . Parking areas. Every ten (10) spaces shall 21 be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping 22 to be placed in medians or islands. Grouping of landscaped 23 islands is encouraged to promote the healthy growth of 24 larger trees. Alternative designs are subject to approval 25 by the Planning Commission. 26 3 . 50% Area Shading Required. Trees shall be 27 planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so 28 8 I that at tree maturity, 15 years, at least 50 percent of the 2 total paved parking. area, not including the entrance 3 drives, shall be shaded at solar noon on June 21 . The 4 Planning Commission may require that the applicant plant 5 and maintain trees of a specified size. On sites with poor 6 soils and/or drainage, additional installation measures may 7 be required to ensure that the shading. standard can be 8 reached within a reasonable time after project approval . 9 4 . Perimeter Buffer. A perimeter buffer may be 10 required along the full length of all streets serving a ' 11 Large Retail Project . 12 is Signage. Subject to the restrictions set forth 13 in Business and Professions Code Section 5200, et seq. , 14 signage shall be designed as part of an integrated project 15 design. The location(s) and design shall be reviewed and 16 approved as part of the overall site plan. The predominant 17 sign material shall be compatible with the principal 18 building design. Notwithstanding the restrictions set 19 forth in Business and Professions Code Section 5200, et -20 seq. , signage shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that 21 term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private 22 nuisance to any. nearby property. This subsection (i) does 23 not apply to site directional signage or traffic control 24 signage. 25 j . Outdoor displays and sales. 26 1 . Any permanent display areas :not within the 27 building which face a public right-of-way shall be shielded 28. 9 I from view. by a wall and incorporated into the overall 2 design of the building. As an alternative, landscaping of 3 the display area in lieu of a solid wall with a minimum 4 height 'of four (4) feet may be utilized. 5 2 . Outdoor displays and sales shall occur only in 6 approved area(s) . The location(s) and design of outdoor 7 displays and sales areas .shall be reviewed and approved as 8 part of the overall site .plan. Outdoor displays and sales 9 areas shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that term is 10 defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance 11 to any nearby property. 12 k. Lighting. Lighting shall not cause off-site 13 glare. In the event that off-site glare results from 14 lighting on the premisses of a Large Retail Project, 15 measures shall be taken to eliminate such glare. 16 D. Compliance. In order to ensure that the development 17 standards required herein are adhered to, in addition to 18 the application requirements of Section 24-45, at a minimum 19 each application for a Large Retail Project shall include 20 a complete . site plan drawn to scale, with overlays or 21 separate drawings depicting all of the following: 22 1 . The exact location of each building; 23 2 . The design of all traffic and parking areas, 24 showing all adjacent public and private streets 25 and roads, traffic signals, traffic lanes, entry 26 ways, fire lanes and all parking areas, including 27 but not limited to a depiction of each required 28 10 I fire lane and parking space; 2 3 . A complete landscaping plan depicting vegetation, 3 location, species and size; 4 4. All designated service areas; 5 5 . All pedestrian walkways and sidewalks; 6 6 . A complete lighting plan, showing location and 7 type of all lighting, including but not limited 8 to building, signage and parking illumination, .9 including specifications on height, intensity or 10 brightness, radiation pattern and required light 11 shielding; 12 7 . All signage, including location, height, lighting 13 and content; 14 8 . A colored facade rendering for each building, . 15 except that this requirement may be waived by the 16 Director of Development Services; 17 9 . Designated Outdoor display and sales area(s) . . 18 E. Conflicts with California Building Code. In case of 19 any conflict between these requirements and the .California 20 Building Code, the California Building Code shall prevail. 21 F. Violations. Notwithstanding any provision of this 22 Code. to the contrary, including but not limited to the 23 definitions of Public Nuisance set forth in Section 24 32A-2, any violation of any provision of this Section 25 24-264 is a public nuisance per se, and the Director 26 of Development Services may utilize the nuisance 27 abatement procedure and provisions .of Chapter 32A, as 28 11 I well as all other remedies now or hereafter available, 2 to abate or otherwise regulate 6r. prevent violations 3 of this Section 24-264 . 4 5 Section 3 . Section 24-142 is added to Article III, entitled "Zone 6 Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 7 "24-142 Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial) 8 Zone. 9 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 10 24-140, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 11 264, are not allowed in the C-1 (Light Commercial) Zone 12 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 1.3 requirements of Section 24-264 . 14 15 Section 4 . Section 24-147 is added to Article III, entitled "Zone 16 Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows: 17 "24-147 Large Retail Projects in the C-2 (General 18 Commercial) Zone. . 19 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 20 24-145, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24 21 264, are not allowed in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone 22 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 23 requirements of Section 24-264 . .24 25 Section 5 . Section 24-152 is added to Article III, entitled "Zone 26 :Districts" of- the Butte County Code to read as follows : 27 "Large Retail Projects in the 24-150 C-C (Community 28 12 I Commercial) Zone. 2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 3 24-155, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 4 264, are not allowed in the C-C (Community Commercial) Zone 5 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 6 requirements of Section 24-264 . Large Retail Projects in 7 the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district shall be 8 limited to 100, 000 square feet or less . 9 10 Section 6 . Severability. 11 If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to 12 any person or circumstances is for any reason held to be invalid by 13 a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed 14 severable, and the invalidity thereof shall not affect the remaining 15 provisions or other applications of the Ordinance which can be given 16 effect without the invalid provision or application thereof . 17 Section 7 . Effective Date and Publication. 18 This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date 19 of its passage. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is authorized 20 and directed to publish this ordinance before the expiration of 21 fifteen (15) days after its passage. This Ordinance shall be 22 published once, with the names of the members of the Board of 23 Supervisors voting for and against it, in the Enterprise-Record 24 a newspaper of general circulation published in the County 25 of Butte, State of California. 26 PASSED AND .ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of 27 Butte, State of California, on the 10th day of February , 28 13 1 2004, by the. following vote: 2 AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Houx, Josiassen 3 NOES: Supervisor Yamaguchi and Chair Beeler I 4 ABSENT: None I 5 NOT VOTING: None 6 R. eeler, hair of the 7 Butte County Board of Supervisors 8 ATTEST: 9 10 PAUL MCINTOSH, Chief Administrative Officer 11 and Clerk of the oard 12 By e y 13 g:\or inance\Big Box Or .7.wpd 14 u 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 14 �13T oTFo 0 0 0 0 o c=��'=:"�o INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM UN OFFICE OF BUTTE COUNTY COUNSEL TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Robert W. MacKenzie, Chief Deputy County Counsel�. SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Chapter 24 Ordinance Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects and Establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Projects DATE: 1/15/04 The above proposed ordinance was submitted to your Commission for your consideration at your meetings on December 11, 2003 and January 8, 2004. Subsequent to your January 8,2004 meeting, County Counsel's Office staff discussed the provision in the proposed ordinance which addresses storm water runoff/drainage with Public Works, Land Development Division staff. That provision in Section 2 of the ordinance (24-264(C)(2)(g)(2)) currently provides,in pertinent part: All parking areas must be designed and maintained and shall be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer. recharge for the site . Runoff from the site shall not create a Public Nuisance, . as that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. Public Works , Land Development Division staff commented that the language of the provision, particularly the words"maximum feasible degree,"differed from the County's standard storm water runoff/drainage requirement applicable to subdivisions, commercial and industrial development, multi-family dwellings having three or more units on a single parcel, and parcel maps creating lots of three acres or less in gross area. The standard requirement is that no such project shall contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff. I recommend a revision of the above proposed draft ordinance, which would add the following language to Section 2 of the ordinance (24-264(C)(2)(g)(2)): "Runoff from the .site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff." I recommend that such language be inserted into the middle of the existing paragraph, between the two existing sentences. Inserting the County's standard storm water runoff/drainage requirement into the proposed ordinance should prevent any confusion regarding whether or not the words"maximum feasible degree"excuse applicants from compliance with the County's standard condition,by providing a clear statement that they do not. 1 Action Recommended. The following action is recommended regarding the above proposed amendment: Recommend adoption of the proposed amendment to the Board of Supervisors. cc: Paul McIntosh Yvonne Christopher Marion Reeves GAROB\planning commission5mpd 2 A. ZCA 04-02 - Proposed amendment to Chapter 24 ordinances requiring Use Permit for large retail projects and establishing mandatory design standards for such projects. Rob McKenzie, Deputy County Counsel, said he is asking for an insertion of a sentence under parking spaces in the Large Retail Ordinance to say"Runoff from the site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff." He said this should be added as a precaution against applicants getting confused and not understanding the condition. He suggested inserting this sentence into the middle of the j paragraph as the third sentence and add to the second sentence under 24-264 (C) (2) (g)(2) after"All parking areas" add"and other site improvements." It was moved by Commissioner Marin, seconded by Commissioner Lambert,and carried to modify the ordinance by adding to 24-264(C)(2)(g)(2.)after"All parking area""and other site improvements."; and add a third sentence to read "Runoff from the site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff.", by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Marin,Lambert, and Chairman Leland NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioner Evans ABSTAINED: Commissioner Nelson I ■BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION■MINUTES■JANUARY 22,2004 ■ PAGE 15 ■ BUTTE COUNTY CLEM OF THE BOARD USE ONLY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING DATE: AGENDA TRANSMITTAL AGENDA ITEM: Department Development Services —Zoning Code Amendment 04-02, Retail AGENDA TITLE: Stores DDS, DATE: 1/9/04 MEETING DATE January DEPARTMENT: Planning REQUESTED: 27, 2004 Rob PHONE: 7621 REGULAR CONSENT X CONTACT: MacKenzie DEPARTMENT SUMMARY AND REQUESTED BOARD ACTION: Planning Commission Action Report to the Board of Supervisors for Department of Development Services Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA 04-02) regarding an amendment to Chapter 24 requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects, establishing mandatory design standards for such project. Pursuant to Butte County Code Sections 24-25.30 and 24-25.40(a) & (b), the Board shall set this Rezone for a public hearing within ninety days of receiving the Action Report from the Planning Commission and shall give notice of the hearing date at least ten days prior to the hearing. If no action is taken by the Board within the ninety days, the proposed Code Amendment shall be deemed denied. AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTALS REQUIRE THE ORIGINAL (1) IN A FORMAT THAT CAN BE REPRODUCED BY STANDARD OFFICE EQUIPMENT ATTACH EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM AND OTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION AS NECESSARY 'Budgetary Impact: Yes No X CAO OFFICE USE ONLY If yes, complete Budgetary Impact Worksheet on back Budget Transfer Requested: Yes No x Administrative Office Review If yes, complete Budget Transfer Request Worksheet on back. Administrative Office Staff Contact (Deadline is one business day prior to normal agenda deadline.) 4/5/s Vote Required: Yes: _ No: Will Proposal Require an Agreement: Yes No x Auditor-Controller's Number(if Date Received by Clerk of the Board: required): County Counsel's Approval: Yes No x Will Proposal Require Additional Personnel: Yes _ No x Number of Permanent: Temp Extra Help Previous Board Action Date: Additional Information Attached: Yes x No Describe: memo Rev. 06/02 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION REPORT APPLICANT: Department of Development Services FILE #: ZCA 04-02 REQUEST: Proposed Chapter 24 Amendment Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects, establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Projects. LOCATION: In the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), and C-C (Community Commercial) zones. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AND SUPPORTING FINDINGS: A. Find that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. B. Find that adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308. C. Recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors. Delete the words under Fagade "or facing on adjacent residential land use"; re-number a. Facades to show#1. for the first paragraph and make a. 1 now a. 2; delete"All facades shall include at least one customer entrance"under c. Entryways.;return to the original definition of 50,000 square feet; and delete the H-C zone. VOTE: 3-0-2-0 AYES: Commissioners Marin and Lambert and Chairman Leland NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioners Nelson and Evans ABSTAINED: No one DATE OF LAST HEARING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION: i PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION REPORT APPLICANT: Department of Development Services FILE #: ZCA 04-02 REQUEST: Proposed Chapter 24 Amendment Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects, establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Projects. LOCATION: In the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), and C-C (Community Commercial) zones. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AND SUPPORTING FINDINGS: A. Find that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. .B. Find that adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308. C. Recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors. Delete the H-C (Highway Commercial) zone from Section 2 (24-264(A)(1))of the ordinance; Delete the language "or facing on adjacent residential land.use" from the definition of "Fagade" in Section 2 (24-264(B)(1))of the ordinance; Return to the definition of "Large Retail Projects" which appeared in Section 2 (24-264(B)(2)) of the first draft of the ordinance considered by the Commission, with the exception of raising the square footage requirement from 25,000 square feet to 50,000 square feet; Re-number the two subparagraphs in Section 2 of the ordinance under 24-264(C)(2)(a) "Facades" to show the first paragraph as #1 and the second paragraph as #2; Delete the language "All facades shall include at least one customer entrance" from Section 2 (24-264(C)(2)(c) "Entryways." VOTE: 3-0-2-0 AYES:Commissioners Marin and Lambert and Chairman Leland NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioners Nelson and Evans ABSTAINED: No one DATE OF LAST HEARING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION: January.8, 2004 ,owT 0 0 O C � - o C INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM �U t4 OFFICE OF BUTTE COUNTY COUNSEL TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Robert W. MacKenzie, Chief Deputy County Counsel SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Chapter 24 Ordinance Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects and Establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Projects DATE: 1/15/04 The above proposed ordinance was submitted to your Commission for your consideration at your meetings on December 1.1, 2003 and January 8, 2004. Subsequent to your January 8,2004 meeting, County Counsel's Office staff discussed the provision in the proposed ordinance which addresses storm water runoff/drainage with Public Works, Land Development Division staff. That provision in Section 2 of the ordinance (24-264(C)(2)(g)(2)) currently provides, in pertinent part: All parking areas must be designed and maintained and shall be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site . Runoff from the site shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. Public Works , Land Development Division staff commented that the language of the provision, particularly the words"maximum feasible degree,"differed from the County's standard storm water runoff/drainage requirement applicable to subdivisions, commercial and industrial development, multi-family dwellings having three or more units on a single parcel, and parcel maps creating lots of three acres or less in gross area. The standard requirement is that no such project shall contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff. I recommend a revision of the above proposed draft ordinance, which would add the following language to Section 2 of the ordinance (24-264(C)(2)(g)(2)): "Runoff from the site shall not contribute or cause an increase from pre-development conditions in peak runoff." I recommend that such language be inserted into the middle of the existing paragraph, between the two existing sentences. Inserting the County's standard storm water runoff/drainage requirement into the proposed ordinance should prevent any confusion regarding whether or not the words"maximum feasible degree"excuse applicants from compliance with the County's standard condition,by providing a clear statement that they do not. 1 Action Recommended. The following action is recommended regarding the above proposed amendment: Recommend adoption of the proposed amendment to the Board of Supervisors. cc: Paul McIntosh Yvonne Christopher Marion Reeves GAROMplanning commission5mpd A 2 CITY OF OAKLAND ')FFICEC=Y _-, Y CLERK AGENDA REPORT _ . 2003 SEP I I PM 2: 10 TO: Office of the City Manager ATTN: Deborah Edgerly FROM: Community and Economic Development Agency DATE: September 23,2003 RE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OAKLAND PLANNING CODE TO DEFINE "LARGE-SCALE COMBINED RETAIL AND GROCERY SALES COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES" AND PLACE ZONING CONTROLS ON THIS ACTIVITY TYPE IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL, MANUFACTURING AND SPECIAL ZONES SUMMARY The proposed zoning text amendment would establish a new land use category called "Large- Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales Commercial Activities," which describes retail stores over 100,000 square feet that devote more than 10% of their sales floor area to non-taxable _merchandise, but excludes wholesale clubs or other establishments selling primarily bulk merchandise and charging membership dues. The proposed regulations would prohibit "Large- Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales Commercial Activities" in the C-5, C-10, C-25, C-27, C-28, C-31, C-52, C-60,M-10, S-1, S-3,and S-15 zones and require a conditional use permit for such activities in the C-20, C-30, C-35, C-36, C-40, C-45, C-51, C-55, M-20, M-30; M-40, S-2, S-16, and S-19 zones. The proposed amendment responds to concerns about the potential for such stores to generate high negative impacts on transportation mode split,traffic congestion and associated air pollution, and on the viability of neighborhood commercial districts. Staff recommends that the Oakland City Council approve the attached ordinance and text amendment. The proposed text amendment will be brought before the City Planning Commission on September 17,2003, and any recommendations received from the Planning Commission will be .forwarded to the City Council as a supplement to this agenda report. FISCAL IMPACTS Direct Fiscal Impacts The proposed zoning text, amendment has no direct fiscal impacts. It does not involve expenditure of city funds or require additional staff to implement. The proposed text amendment will become part of the zoning regulations and will be administered concomitantly with other zoning regulations. �. OWCOUN IL OCT 21 2W3 Item: C& ttee Se tuber 2003 Deborah Edgerly September 23,2003 Page No. 2 Indirect Fiscal Impacts While there are no direct fiscal impacts of the proposed regulations, there are potential indirect impacts to sales tax revenues. The proposed regulations will require a conditional use permit for large-scale combined retail and grocery stores in a number of commercial zones where such stores are currently permitted outright. In these areas, the conditional use permit requirement could add to the time that it takes to establish a store, and until established, the proposed store would not be generating sales tax revenue. This is a short-term potential impact. The processing time for a conditional use permit is likely to be two to three months. In the event that the Planning and Zoning Division denies an application for a proposed large-scale combined retail and grocery store because the proposed project does not conform to the conditional use permit criteria,the failure to establish such a store could create longer-term impacts on sales tax revenues. However, a portion of any potential new tax revenues generated by a new large-scale store would simply reflect a shift of sales from existing businesses in the community. In addition,the proposed ordinance applies only to large-scale combined retail and grocery stores; it does not place new limitations on or require special review for other types of retail or grocery stores, either small or large, which have the potential to generate sales tax revenue. In the industrial .,zoning districts, a conditional use permit is already required for any retail establishment over 3,000 square feet, so the proposed regulations do not impose any additional review processes or restrictions. In the neighborhood-oriented zoning districts where big box grocers are proposed to be prohibited, the establishment of a big box grocer is considered unlikely anyway,due to the lack of large parcels of land. Overall, the potential fiscal impacts of the proposed regulations are minimal. The proposed regulation is unlikely to have a negative impact on sales tax revenues. BACKGROUND On April 8, 2003, the Oakland City Council unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 12482,which established a 45-day moratorium on large retail stores with more than 100,000 of total sales floor area and more than 10%of this sales floor area devoted to non-taxable merchandise (Attachment B). On May 20, 2003, an ordinance to extend the moratorium for an additional ten and a half months and to further study the implementation of more permanent controls was favored by six of the seven councilpersons present, though it failed to meet the 4/5ths of total Council vote required for passage of an urgency ordinance. While similar in size to other large-scale retailers and to wholesale membership clubs, large- scale combined retail and grocery stores, also referred to as "big box grocers,"or "superstores," can generate an intensity of impact that, at the minimum, warrants special review and consideration, and in some areas of the city, warrants prohibition. Because of the particular combination of uses they include, these stores generate high traffic volumes and present a mayor threat to the vitality of Oakland's neighborhood-serving commercial districts. These impacts are discussed further in the "Key Issues and Impacts" section of this report. Ite C&ED �0'3 e Septe er 2 , Deborah Edgerly September 23,2003 Page No. 3 Establishments that combine discount retail sales and full service groceries in giant"superstores" are the fastest growing sector of the grocery market. While a national trend, the growth of these superstores is also becoming a national concern. Dozens of local jurisdictions have enacted ordinances that either completely prohibit new stores over a certain size or require special permits or impact studies (see Attachment D). Most of these laws were designed to help sustain the vitality of small-scale,pedestrian-oriented shopping districts. California jurisdictions that have recently enacted prohibitions include the Cities of San Luis Obispo, Arroyo Grande, and Martinez,as well as Contra Costa County. The proposed text amendment will be brought before the City Planning Commission on September 17, 2003, and any recommendations from the Planning Commission will be forwardedto the City Council as a supplementto this report. KEY ISSUES AND IMPACTS Neighborhood Commercial Areas Oakland contains a number of neighborhood commercial districts, such as the Laurel, Dimond, Fruitvale,Rockridge, Piedmont Avenue, Telegraph Avenue, Montclair,and Grand Lake districts. The business and surrounding residential communities have often rallied for zoning regulations that protect the small-scale retail character of the districts. These local commercial areas remain viable in part because they provide for a range of consumer needs, and include businesses such as supermarkets that allow residents to buy. essential goods. For example, the Laurel District along MacArthur Boulevard includes a supermarket,bank, and hardware store, as well as small- scale retail establishments,restaurants,and other businesses. The City of Oakland has policies and programs to promote .the vitality of neighborhood commercial districts. The Land Use and Transportation Element of the Oakland General Plan includes policies for maintaining the vitality of neighborhood commercial districts serving a range of consumer needs. The City's Neighborhood and Commercial Revitalization program includes business attraction and retention efforts, as well as a grant program for commercial facade improvements,while the Blight Abatement program includes clean-up and enforcement activities for blighted and undermaintained properties. The establishment of large-scale combined retail and grocery stores in Oakland could negatively impact the economic viability of the city's local commercial districts by drawing sales away from traditional supermarkets located in the districts. While other types of large stores can also draw away sales, big box grocers present a unique threat.because of the inclusion of discount retail and full-service grocery under one roof. Industry and academic studies indicate that the greatest loss from traditional grocery stores comes from the big box grocers. A study on the impact of big box grocers in Southern California concluded: "Free-standing food stores would likely yield market share [to Big Box Grocers] and in some cases become vacant, while taxable sales from grocery operations would shift to locations that are much more prone to the impacts of Item. C&EDk23, Septe e • ' •r Deborah Edgerly September 23,2003 Page No. 4 regional business cycles."' Another study performed by AC Nielsen U.S. on 2001 Wal-Mart supercenter sales growth found that"the majority of sales growth at Wal-Mart supercenters— 72 percent— came from a `direct shift of dollars that had previously gone to other channels.' Of that majority `channel shift' revenue growth, almost one third came from supermarkets. ,2 Where a grocery store serves as an anchor to a local commercial district, the presence of a big box grocer in the city can threaten the viability of the entire commercial district. The proposed text amendment, by prohibiting large-scale combined retail and grocery stores in some commercial zones and requiring a conditional use permit in others, can serve as a means for protecting Oakland's local shopping districts. Industrial land preservation Retail uses are currently prohibited in the M-10 zone and require a conditional use permit if they have more than 3,000 square feet of floor area in the M-20, M-30, and M-40 zones. The existing limitations on retail uses are intended to preserve the integrity of Oakland's industrial areas by protecting them from shopping traffic incursion and from conversion to other uses through land bidding competition, as non-industrial uses can typically pay more per.square foot for land. The proposed regulations do not alter these existing restrictions on retail uses in manufacturing zones. The proposal to add a category called "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales" and require a conditional use permit for this use in manufacturing zones is consistent with existing regulations, and continues to protect industrial lands from inappropriate land conversion and traffic incursion. . Traffic and transportation Large-scale combined retail and grocery stores can negatively impact traffic congestion and transportation mode split (the proportion of trips by different modes of transportation, such as automobiles,transit, hiking;and walking). Big box grocers have particularly high transportation impacts because of the frequency of grocery trips combined with the scale of the establishments. The typical household makes more frequent trips to the grocery store than to a general retail store. The typical household also makes more frequent trips to a grocery store than to a warehouse membership club, which primarily sells bulk food items that are purchased on a more occasional basis. The proposed text amendment, by requiring a conditional use permit for large- scale combined retail and grocery sales, will allow the City to consider potential transportation impacts in determining whether an individual store location is appropriate. The April 8, 2003 report to the Oakland City Council (Attachment A) on the interim moratorium employs figures The Impact of Eag Boz Grocers on Southern California:Jobs, Wages and Municipal Finance, Prepared for the Orange County Business Council By Marlon Boarnet,Ph.D.,Associate Professor UC Irvine and Randall Crane, Ph.D.,Associate Professor UCLA(September 1999) Z Economic Analysis of the Proposed Fremont Wal-Mart:Short and Long Term Impacts on Retail and Economic Development,Prepared for The United Food and Commercial Workers Union,Local 870 by Strategic Economics (March 2003) ` 3Item: C&ED ittee Septe er 2 003 Deborah Edgerly Seatember 23,2003 Page No. 5 from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation manual, a compilation of traffic generation studies, to show that big box grocers are likely to generate more traffic on a daily or weekly basis than other types of large stores. The projections in this table factor the average number of trips generated per 1000 square feet by the average store size. Retail attraction and economic development goals The City of Oakland is actively engaged in attracting businesses, including large retail businesses, to Oakland. Oakland has fewer large retail stores than nearby cities like San Leandro and Emeryville, and in effect, loses potential sales activity to these nearby cities. In addition, there is a need for more and better grocery stores in certain parts of the city that are currently underserved. The proposed ordinance is not intended to discourage the establishment of either retail stores or grocery stores,but instead targets a particular form of store which because of its potential for creating high negative impacts to the community,merits special evaluation. The proposed regulation applies only to large-scale combined retail and grocery sales. It would not apply to any other type of large retail establishment without a full-service grocery component, a regular grocery supermarket, a membership store, or a multi-vendor market. The Oakland General Plan calls.for strengthening Oakland's economic and j ob base. While not directly a land use issue, it is important to note that the presence of big box grocers tends to depress wages. A study of the impacts of big box grocers in Southern California found that wages and benefits at traditional supermarkets are generally fairly good, while at discount retail' establishments, wages are lower and benefits more limited. When business is diverted from traditional grocery supermarkets to combined discount retail/grocery dstablishments, higher- wage jobs are converted to low-wage jobs, as the big box grocers tend to pay their grocery personnel the lower retail wages. The study concludes: "because of differences in pay and benefits in the discount retail and grocery sectors, a shift from traditional grocery stores to supercenters creates the very real risk that high wage jobs will be replaced with low wage jobs."3 General Plan Conformity The 1998 Land Use & Transportation Element (LUTE) of the Oakland General Plan, and its subcomponent, the Estuary Policy Plan, contain objectives and policies that promote the maintenance and enhancement of Oakland's neighborhood-serving commercial areas: Objective NI: Providefor healthy, vital, and accessible commercial areas that help meet local consumer needs in the neighborhoods. Policy 110.4: The vitality of existing neighborhood mixed use and community commercial areas should be strengthened andpresewed. 3 The Impact of Big Box Grocers on Southern California:Jobs, Wages and Municipal Finance (September 1999). Item: C&ED ittee Septe er 2 , 003 Deborah Edgerly September 23. 2003 Pase No. 6 Policy T2.3: Promote neighborhood-serving commercial development within one- quarter to one-half mile of established transit routes and nodes. The establishment of large-scale combined retail and grocery establishments can threaten the vitality and viability of Oakland's neighborhood shopping districts, particularly if they draw ,grocery sales away from traditional supermarkets located in the districts. Many of the local commercial districts are "anchored by a grocery store that allow local residents to buy day-to- day essentials, and while in the neighborhood,patronize other local businesses. Studies indicate that the "big box grocers" draw significant sales away from traditional supermarkets. The proposed text amendment,by prohibiting large-scale combined retail and grocery stores in some commercial zones and only conditionally permitting them in others, can serve as a means for protecting Oakland's local shopping districts. The General Plan also contains objectives to increase the use of alternative modes of transportation and minimize automobile use and associated air pollution: Objective T4: Increase use of alternative modes of transportation. Objective T7: Reduce airpollutants caused by vehicles. Allowing the establishment of large-scale combined retail/grocery stores in Oakland could contravene the above transportation policies. Because of their massive scale, big box grocers typically occupy large sites and have large parking lots, and are not typically located in areas with close and convenient pedestrian connections,which discourages pedestrian and transit trips to the site. While the foregoing can be said of any large-scale store— including general retail, home furnishing,and home improvement stores—the big box grocers tend to generate even more traffic than other large stores because the full-service grocery component encourages more frequent trips. Precedence A number of other jurisdictions, including several cities in California,have adopted ordinances prohibiting the establishment of large-scale retail stores or combined retail/grocery'stores or requiring special impact studies or review (see Attachment D). Ordinances in Contra Costa County and the Cities of Martinez and Arroyo Grande all specify a maximum size threshold and a maximum percentage of sales floor area that may be devoted to the sale of.non-taxable merchandise. Like the proposed ordinance, Contra Costa County's ordinance excludes membership warehouse clubs from these restrictions. A legal analysis from the Nevada Attorney General's Office in response to 1999 Clark County legislation prohibiting new retail stores over 110,000 square feet and more than 2% of sales floor area devoted to grocery sales found that the County had the authority to regulate such stores under its police powers and zoning powers, Item: C&ED ee Septembe 2003 Deborah Edgerly September 23.2003 Paee No. 7 Alternatives An alternative to the recommended approach would be to completely prohibit "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales Commercial Activities" in Oakland. Complete prohibition would make it easier to prevent the establishment of a big box grocery store. However, the conditional use permit procedure allows evaluation of projects on a case-by-case basis, and also establishes a discretionary permit process that will ensure that most such establishments will go through environmental review under CEQA for a full analysis of potential impacts. While the establishment of a big box grocer in Oakland is generally not desirable due to the amount of traffic generation and the impacts on local retail districts, the retail and grocery industry is in a process of change and could take an unforeseen form. The conditional use permit procedure allows for some flexibility in implementation, the ability to consider the impacts and appropriateness of a particular project, and for future changes in the industry. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is an amendment to the Oakland Planning Code (zoning ordinance)to add a new land use classification called "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales Commercial Activities" and specify where this use is permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited. The proposed classification describes stores with over 100,000 square feet of sales floor area and more than 10%of this sales floor area devoted to the sale of non-taxable goods, such as groceries. These stores, also referred to as "big box grocers," typically combine discount general merchandise and full-service grocery sales under one roof. The proposed new classification would not affect large retail establishments that do not include a sizable grocery component. The proposed definition also does not include membership clubs that typically sell in bulk to both businesses and individual households. "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales" activities are distinguished from these other commercial uses because they have the potential to create particularly high impacts on traffic and transportation, and on the vitality of neighborhood commercial districts. The proposed text amendment would require a conditional use permit for "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales"in the C-20, C-30, C-35, C-36, C-40, C-45, C-51,C-55,M- 20, M-30, M-40, S-2, S-16,and S-19 zones. These are the higher=intensity or more regionally- serving commercial zones, the light to heavy manufacturing zones, and certain "special" zones that govern land uses. Some of these zones already require a conditional use permit for all retail uses or for those over a certain size; in these areas, the proposed amendment does not represent a change to existing policy. For example, a conditional use permit is already required for retail sales in the S-2 zone,which is intended for areas devoted to government offices and other major public facilities. In the M-20, M-30 and M-40 zones, the existing code requires a conditional use permit for any retail sales establishment over 3,000 square feet. The S-19 zone requires a conditional use permit for retail sales over 10,000 square feet. In the C-51 and C-55 zones, any new project with over 100,000 square feet requires a use permit. (See Attachment C for a detailed comparison of existing and proposed regulations.) 14k ORAICOUNCIL Item: OCT 21 2003 C&E ttee Sep ber 2 , 03 Deborah Edgerly September 23,2003 Page No. 8 "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales" activities would be prohibited in the following commercial zones that are intended to create and enhance locally-oriented commercial districts: C-5, C-10, C-27, C-28, and C-31. The proposed regulation would also prohibit such uses in the C-25 zone, which is intended for office uses, and the C-52, which is a downtown historic area emphasizing pedestrian shopping. The proposed regulation would also prohibit big box grocers in the S-15 zone, which is intended to create a pedestrian-friendly environment and encourage.transit ridership near major transit stations. "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales"would also be prohibited in the S-1, S-3, C-60 and M-10 zones. In these zones, General Retail Sales are already prohibited, so the proposed project does not represent a change to existing policy. The proposed regulations would apply to new establishment or expansion of or conversion of an existing use to "Large Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales." SUSTAINABLE OPPORTUNITIES The following sustainable opportunities are associated with the proposed interim ordinance: Economic: The proposed ordinance supports the retention and strengthening of local retail-and neighborhood-serving commercial areas. A potential indirect impact of the proposed ordinance could be the preservation of higher wage jobs for Oakland workers. Large-scale combined retail/grocery stores tend to displace sales at traditional supermarkets, and when this happens, higher-wage jobs can be replaced by lower-wage jobs or those with more limited benefits. The proposed project provides a process for reviewing the potential impacts of any large-scale combined retail and grocery store. Environmental: As described in the April 8, 2003 report to Council (Attachment A), large combined retaillgrocery establishments generate significant automobile traffic and can contribute to traffic congestion and overall vehicles miles traveled. Both traffic congestion and overall vehicle miles contribute to air pollution. The proposed regulation, by prohibiting big box grocers in certain zones and requiring a conditional use permit in others, will ensure that the transportation and environmental impacts of any proposed superstore can be thoroughly analyzed and considered. The conditional use permit process gives the City the discretion to deny an application that does not meet the established use permit criteria. Social Equity: A potential indirect. effect of the proposed ordinance could be preservation of higher wage and benefit jobs for Oakland workers. The aforementioned study of big box grocers in Southern California finds that discount retail chains that operate supercenters typically offer much less comprehensive health care coverage than major California grocery chains. Ite kX1 C& ommittee Sepr2berN<3 Deborah Edgerly. September 23,2003 Page No. 9 DISABILITY AND SENIOR CITIZEN ACCESS The proposed text amendment will not impact disability and senior citizen access RECOMMENDATION AND RATIONALE Due to the degree of negative impacts that large-scale combined retail and grocery stores may have on transportation mode split, traffic congestion and associated air pollution, and on the vitality of Oakland's neighborhood commercial districts, staff recommends adopting the proposed text amendment prohibiting "Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales Commercial Activities" in the C-5, C-10, C-25, C-27, C-28, C-31, C-52, C-60, M-10, S-1, S-3, and S-15 zones and requiring a conditional use permit for such activities in the C-20, C-30, C-35,C-36, C- 40, C-45, C-51,C-55,M-20, M-30,M-40, S-2, 5-16, and S-19 zones. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY COUNCIL Staffrecommends that the City Council: 1. Affirm staffs environmental determination. 2. Adopt the attached proposed ordinance. Respectfully submitted, Claudia Cappio, Director of Development Prepared by: Heather Coleman, Planner III Community and Economic Developmenf'Agency Planning and Zoning Division 3 Item. C&ED ittee Septemb 23, 3 Deborah Edgerly September 23,2003 Page No. 10 APPROVED AND FORWARDED TO THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVEL PMENT COMMITTEE: OFFICE OF THE CITYAR OFFICE OF THE CITY M A G R Attachments: A. City Council Agenda Report,April 8,2003 B. Ordinance No. 12482,April 8,2003 C. Existing and Proposed Regulations for Large-Scale Combined Retail and Grocery Sales D. Cities and Counties Limiting Large-Scale Stores ORAIL OCT 2 2003 It C& ttee Septe r2003 -sacbee.com -- Business -- Wall set to super-size in California • Page 1 of 6 Newsletters I Site Map I Subscribe to the Print Edition I Traffic I Weather I Wireless Delivery I Yellow Pages ,_n�lj Search Archives or Site Search 4 Lie Cl1_TFiLPed dfdl;IS. STOCK QUOTES ARE DELAYED UP * S&P 3.54 1 r DOW 43.55 1 T �I News I Sports I Business I Politics I Opinion I Entertainment I Lifestyle I Travel I Women I Classifieds I Homes I Cars I Jobs I Sacbee• / Business Powered by: accessBee--Internet f< Sections: 24-HOUR NEWS • Business Wire • Agriculture • Business •Technology_ • Stock Market News • Autos • State Business News • Wall Street Journal • Personal Finance • Real Estate • Commercial COLUMNS/STOCKS 30-DAY ARCHIVES • Small Business • Columnists • Careers •Taxes • • Technology Business _ sadlee�� - - , - - - - - - - •" `��"F 4;e. ' SECURITY/ M< ti i ka book store - .0-11..........A, Social Work Ir Wal-Mart set to super-size in California Fo.Sition By Bob Walter -- Bee Staff Writer APARTMENT_L Published 2;15 a.m. PST Sunday, November 30, 2003 AGENT/ OFF, _T Get weekday updates of Sacramento Bee headlines and breaking news. Sian up CONSTRUCTI( here. Contract_Adr The first Wal-Mart Supercenters won't open in California until spring, but their Accountina_St impending arrival is already changing the state's retail landscape. Accountant_; €l7 ••• , The looming presence of these super-sized grocery stores, which are about half TRUCK.DRIV California the size of Arco Arena and offer 100,000 products at cut-rate prices, is roundly Distribution L" blamed for the supermarket strike/lockout that has idled 70,000 workers in Southern California since October. PROPERTY Ca, Partners, Inc._ That strike/lockout has been underscored by RESTAURANT efforts among unionized supermarkets to cut costs while competing against nonunion powers such as ENGINEER Wal-Mart. (STRUCTURAL leading_ Union and supermarket CARPENTER- officials say a similar strike EXPg_CARPENTER- is all but inevitable next remodels.ienced_,f� rdels. ... summer when labor contracts expire in Northern California. Medical Biller Phys,s.pecia.lty http://www.sacbee.com/content/business/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- WaljAart set to super-size in California Page 2 of 6 In preparation for Wal- Mart's arrival, the Raley's supermarket Finance B tA and Bel Air su p �� � Settlement Ar chain has cut administrative costs with Financial Corp an early retirement offer o w Mgr This ... and some layoffs. At the y same time, the West ��Of� -*«' lam Sacramento-based Service Tech , company is planningmr; �4� ` ►Itr' unprecedented growth, � �> '� �' - ` ��;+ r � -,►;, DENTAL RDA_: with 25 new stores �� Sacramento & scheduled to open in the R i.p next four years, said „ - .uhrcT B� —�€ �c - � LEGAL SECRE' William J. Coyne, resident : `": T Y•`` t Y P Exp'd-_Leg al Si of Raley's. , . ti�. INSURANCE C Like most of the exp.'d.._in._auto. . supermarket officials and representatives interviewed, Coyne was reluctant to talk about specific competitors. But he acknowledged that Raley's is trying to optical Asst - become leaner, gearing up for a more competitive environment that includes Cameron Park everything from Supercenters to specialty grocers such as Trader Joe's and Whole Foods. SALES_ OPPOR John Morrell "We try to work every day with a sense of urgency," Coyne said, "to become more efficient in every area, from logistics and distribution to buying and INSTALLERS_F service." Installe.rs_Gre; Starting in the Coachella Valley desert, Supercenters are coming to Southern CUSTOMER Sl California in the spring and to the rest of the state as fast as Wal-Mart can get The Pepsi Boti permits. RESTAURANT ColoradoB_ell_e Confirmed targets in Northern California include Lodi, Woodland, Stockton, Tracy, Yuba City, Turlock and Redding. HVAC SERV_IC Exp w/ own U The Supercenters will employ thousands. Most of them will have $1 million in sales every 10 days or so, analysts say, a third higher than the typical Raley's COACHES Soc and about double the average Safeway in the capital region. counselors/c Their low prices will reduce the cost of food, especially in the Sacramento area, CONSTRUCTI( which has some of the highest grocery prices in the nation, retail analysts say. G_C.._is search Some analysts say each of the Supercenters, which morph together a Wal-Mart MECHANIC Ex discount department store and a large supermarket, will result in the closure of Mechanics ne( two traditional grocery stores. Others say entire supermarket divisions may flee the region. View All_Top And still others, mostly union officials and their supporters, say the Supercenters will spur economic policies that lower the standard of living for tens of thousands of supermarket employees. For those reasons, municipal and grass-roots forces have been marshaling from Calexico to Chico to keep the Supercenters from being built. Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart says it plans to open 40 Supercenters in California in the next four years -- none of them closer to Sacramento than Lodi http://www.sacbee.com/contentibusiness/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- Wal set to super-size in California Page 3 of 6 or Woodland. Analysts and Wal-Mart watchers say the number will be much higher and undoubtedly will include the capital. David S. Rogers of suburban Chicago, a grocery analyst and academic who has done research on Wal-Mart for more than 10 years, said the company wants to open "100 to 200 stores" in California. "With Wal-Mart," he said, "you have to look at what they do rather than what they say." And what Wal-Mart has done -- using a combination of low prices and saturation -- in market after market is dominate or at least become a major player. In Dallas, for example, Wal-Mart has 51 Supercenters, discount stores, neighborhood markets and Sam's Clubs, and has moved from being the sixth- ranked grocer to the top spot in less than five years, according to consulting firm Retail Forward. In the Oklahoma City metropolitan area, where Wal-Mart operates 11 Supercenters, it went from capturing about 6 percent of that region's grocery business in 1997 to more than 30 percent in 2002, the latest year for which such data are available. Such dominance helped push Wal-Mart's annual sales in 2002 to $247 billion, which is greater than the combined sales of the 10 largest supermarket chains in the United States. When Wal-Mart topped the Fortune 500 for the second time this year -- by $60 billion over runner-up General Motors -- the magazine pondered whether anybody ever would displace the Bentonville behemoth. The conclusion: not in this lifetime, barring something as unlikely as a merger of GM and Ford or Exxon Mobil and ChevronTexaco. With about 1.45 million employees, Wal-Mart has more people in uniform than the U.S. Army (480,000 on active duty). The company expects to hire more than 600,000 people next year, based on growth (160,000 new jobs) and turnover, said Christi Gallagher, Wal-Mart's human resources specialist in Bentonville. Gallagher says Wal-Mart's turnover rate is about 45 percent. The industry average is 65 percent, according to the National Retail Federation. Wal-Mart says it offers competitive wages in all of its markets and that 90 percent of its employees have health benefits, half of them through Wal-Mart. Most analysts estimate that Wal-Mart employees are paid a quarter to a third less than unionized workers in supermarkets and other retailers. And in part because of lower labor costs, the company's relatively new Supercenters have turned Wal-Mart into the country's biggest grocer in less than a decade. http://www.sacbee.com/contentibusiness/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- Watart set to super-size in California • Page 4 of 6 In 1992, Wal-Mart had 34 Supercenters that generated about $1 billion in sales, according to Retail Forward. By the end of 2002, the company's 1,258 Supercenters topped $100 billion. As Wal-Mart has grown, so has its clout with suppliers. According to Retail Forward, the company accounts for 28 percent of Dial Corp.'s total sales. For Del Monte Foods, the proportion is 24 percent. Other totals, according to Retail Forward, include Clorox and Revlon at 23 percent, and Procter & Gamble at 17 percent. And all those percentages are rising. "If you are Procter & Gamble," said Jim Watt, a vice president at Modesto-based Save Mart Supermarkets, "and in five years, 30 percent of your business is Wal- Mart, then who owns whom?" Wal-Mart says its relationship with its suppliers, plus its legendary distribution system, allows its Supercenters to sell groceries that cost 10 percent to more than 30 percent less than groceries at most warehouse and conventional supermarkets. For much of the competition, the results of Wal-Mart's success are often brutal. In Oklahoma City, more than two dozen supermarkets have closed or been converted to other uses in recent years. And the former market leader, Homeland Foods, though it still has more than 20 stores, has been in and out and back into bankruptcy protection. In Sacramento, Raley's says it is waiting and ready. "Tom Raley would have relished this competition," Coyne said. Raley, who died in 1991, started the $3.2 billion company that bears his name and has grown to 134 stores in California, Nevada and New Mexico. In the greater Sacramento region, Raley's controls nearly 35 percent of the grocery market share, according to Trade Dimensions, a Connecticut-based retail analyst. Coyne said Raley's will compete not only with its "core competencies" such as service, quality products and community involvement, but also with aggressive growth. Along with the 25 new stores in the pipeline, he did not rule out even faster growth through acquisitions of the kind that put Sacramento's Be[ Air Markets and Bay Area-based Nob Hill Foods under the Raley's flag. Raley's ultimate advantage, he said, comes from being "local," whether the store is in Land Park, Reno, Elk Grove or the Bay Area. "We just have the ability to know our customers better than competitors that are based in Cincinnati or Boise or elsewhere," he said. "At the end of the day, I can assure you that Raley's will be standing tall." Analysts agree with the Raley's president, though they say the company undoubtedly will lose some market share to Wal-Mart. http://www.sacbee.com/contentibusiness/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- Wa*art set to super-size in California Page 5 of 6 But not even the Supercenters will knock Raley's from the top of the charts in the Sacramento area, said Burt P. Flickinger III, a noted New York-based retail analyst. Wal-Mart will move from nowhere into the second spot, he said, mostly at the expense of Ralphs, Albertsons and Safeway. "The national chains will be caught in the middle," unable to compete with Wal- Mart's low prices or the loyalty of Raley's customers, he said. Safeway spokesman Alexander Winslow wouldn't talk about competing with Supercenters but said Sacramento is a major market for Safeway, which has grown to two dozen stores in the capital region. Trade Dimensions said Safeway has increased its market share in the last two years from about 13 percent to 17 percent. Ralphs spokesman Terry O'Neil said his Kroger-owned firm has not grown as fast as planned in the Sacramento area and, in fact, closed five stores last year. Ralphs' market share dropped from almost 9 percent in 2001 to about 5 percent this year, Trade Dimensions said. But O'Neil said Sacramento still holds an important place in Ralphs' long-term plans. Kroger has plenty of experience against Wal-Mart in other states, he said, "and we'll compete with what we do best: higher quality, better variety and better service." Albertsons declined to comment. David S. Rogers, the Chicago-area academic, and Paul Adams, an Olathe, Kan.- based analyst, agreed that the national chains were the most vulnerable. "I think you will see significant division closures," Rogers said. "There is no God- given reason that anybody will survive, big chain or not." Graphic: Wal-Mart overview About the Writer --------------------------- The Bee's Bob Walter can be reached at(916) 321-1215 or bwalter(@sacbee.com. TheSacra mcg wBee - Get the whole story every day - SUBSCRIBE NOW! Contact Bee Customer Service Advertise Online I Privacy Policy_I Terms of Use I Help I Site Map http://www.sacbee.com/content/business/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- Wa*art set to super-size in California Page 6 of 6 News I Sports I Business I Politics I Opinion I Entertainment I Lifestyle I Travel I Women Cars I Classifieds I Homes I Jobs I shops g GUIDE TO THE BEE: ( Subscribe I Contacts,I Advertise I Bee Events I Community Involvement [ Sacramento Bee Web sites ] Sacbee.com I SacTicket.com I Sacramento.com Contact sacbee.com Copyright © The Sacramento Bee hq://www.sacbee.com/contentibusiness/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 0 Eureka:Citizens voted in 1999 to reject a traditional Wal- Mart. Chico:A resident filed suit under the California Environmental ,' �, eft- �� i •�, •� � Quality Act over the proposed conversion of a Wal-Mart into a Supercenter,saying�the store would create blight as other Qt�� !t = ( retailers go out of business. Yuba City: Union officials are pushing the City Council to severely limit grocery sales in big boxv stores,a move that ,�► would essentially kill a planned Wal-Mart Supercenter. z: QWoodland: Opposition is brewing over Wal-Mart plans to convert a store into a Supercenter. ,�;�, t t"`�'�' —�- ,x•f T=-. - : Contra Costa County: Citizens will vote in March on a Wal-Mart-backed ballot initiative to overturn an ordinance �- limiting grocery sales in big box stores in unincorporated areas Tf of the county. Martinez:The city passed an ordinance limiting grocery sales in big box retailers. Alameda County:An ordinance banning stores of more Q' �•�_ p than 100,000 square feet has been proposed. L '• Oakland:The,city passed an ordinance limiting grocery Q'sales in big box stores. [� Paso Robles The city.passed an ordinance limiting grocery ysales in big box stores. The fight t Santa Maria:The city°passed an ordinance limiting grocery G over Wal-Martsales in big box stores. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.and its Simi Valley:The city passed an ordinance limiting grocery \. opponents have been fighting W sales'in.big box stores: —_ - - - for years in court, at the ballot r Inglewood:Threatened with a lawsuit by Wal-Mart,the box and before city councils and �. � City Council rescinded anordinance that would have blocked boards of supervisors over the a Supercenter by limiting big box grocery sales.Going a step further,Wal-Mart is sponsoring a ballot initiative that would allow retailer's growth in California.The fight - it to build a Supercenter without City Council approval. is heating up as Wal-Mart prepares to j open grocery Supercenters in the state. A few examples: J WSan Diego:The City Council is considering a ban limiting grocery sales in big box stores. - '' `�y Calexico:Voters overturned a city ordinance liming grocery sales in big box stores, Source:Bee research Sacramento BeelOINia Nguyen RI C W 0 N D E{' EMAILTHIS'PAGE o. PRINTTHISPAGE ,NEWSLETTERS r'r MAKE MY'HDAIIE'PAGE x-close - Surviving Wal-Mart food fight Oklahoma City chain holds its own with low prices, loyal shoppers By Bob Walter -- Bee Staff Writer Published 2:15 a.m. PST Sunday, November 30, 2003 Get.weekday updates:of Sacramento Bee headlines and breaking news.Skin'up•'here OKLAHOMA CITY -- Michelle Rowland and Wendy Miller were pushing their shopping carts at Crest Foods, "Home of the Rock Bottom Prices." "You can get anything you need here," said Rowland, "and it's cheaper." About half a row behind Rowland, Miller shopped with her granddaughter. "The prices are the best," she said. "I can find everything, and the meat is very good here." Rowland and Miller were shopping at ground zero for the supermarket industry. Unlike many grocery chains that fold in the face of competition from Wal-Mart Supercenters, Crest Foods is holding its own. Crest has just four stores, but the grocer is getting national attention for its ability to withstand Wal-Mart. A similar situation may happen in the Sacramento region, where Wal-Mart is planning to build numerous stores in the next few years. Crest Foods actually increased its market share by 3 percentage points during Wal-Mart's ramp-up in Oklahoma City from 1997 to 2002 . Crest did it with low prices, gleaming, well-stocked stores and customers who burst with loyalty. "Oklahoma City has been like the 'War of the Worlds,' " said Burt P. Flickinger III, a New York retail analyst. Since 1997, Wal-Mart has blanketed the Oklahoma City metropolitan area of 1.1 million people with new eight Supercenters. Wal-Mart has also built seven Neighborhood Markets, which are traditional grocery stores, and opened five discount stores plus four Sam's Clubs. Wal-Mart, which had about 6 percent of the grocery business in Oklahoma City in 1997, is now closer to 50 percent. More than two dozen grocery stores have closed. Homeland Foods, the struggling former market leader, has gone into bankruptcy proceedings for a second time. Albertsons, the region's high-end grocer and the only other national supermarket left, has closed stores and seen its market share dip from 13.5 percent to 10 percent, according to the Retail Forward consulting firm and retail analyst Trade Dimensions. While the big chains struggle against Wal-Mart, tiny Crest Foods thrives. "They are battlers," said Jim Watt, vice president of Save Mart Supermarkets. "They've beer' there forever, they own their stores and they're nonunion." Paul Adams, a Kansas-based consultant who spent 20 years in Oklahoma City with Fleming Foods, said Crest had staked out a position as the price leader and has managed to keep it. And David S. Rogers, an Illinois-based analyst, said Crest was a classic example of how "a small independent with fighting spirit can have success while bigger chains go bankrupt." "Bigger is not better when fighting Wal-Mart," he said. "Crest only has four stores,'but it's.by far the strongest competition in Oklahoma City." It would be very un-Oklahoman for anybody from Crest to rave about Crest. "We don't brag about things," said Bruce Harroz, president and son of the founder. Crest doesn't talk about annual sales and says very little about market share. Harroz and General Manager Mike Biggers said the company, after losing some market share this year, was slightly below the market share it held before the Wal-Mart onslaught, despite opening one new store. They credit their "devoted employees,",who receive full benefits and profit sharing, and loyal customers for Crest's success. Signs hanging throughout the Edmond, Okla., flagship store offer clues to the success story. Crest buys direct from 150 manufacturers, pays no rent, spends almost nothing on advertising and offers "no games, no gimmicks, no expensive frills." The chain also gives credit to its biggest competitor. "Really, Wal-Mart did us a favor by coming in," Harroz said. "They made us a better operator. We were doing so much business before that we didn't have time to look for our weaknesses. We couldn't see what we needed to work on." About the Writer --------------------------- The Bee's Bob Walter can be reached at.(916) 321-1215 or bwalter(d)sacbee.com. The—Sa `AMM, tDBefe- Get the whole story every day - SUBSCRIBE NOW! N d v 4f� ��� . 4±, _ '!3 �, .�; �,. a . - �i r � �i ,, �. . �� ��' j�; - f"-. ;�� _ `' •t+ i � �, � t / . . ,.: �` � i �r t. ~_. i - 4�t4� � �, �, , � �, � ''�. — 1 1, }; �� e � ~ �; ��1 ;} — �` � � � �1 ,� .� �h ..` . f ` i {r � 4 �� d. 4 � A �.,. UnionDemocrat.com -The U * Democrat Online Page 1 of 2 �sgiour.�sA *SAv Place + �4' ; : ;� ,� an Adat k frac �AS9��c^ Online . Bmu LBA1)1NG N10%VSPAV Rt 0I TILE N.40TJIeIt L 0 0 e SIKCE td54 �Q�+l��nllfolYdiil it s • Placelo, Play! S►UbSCe'➢ '�' of Sonora I Home Big box ruling on tap 7111F.; UnionDemocrat.com- The U*n Democrat Online Page 2 of 2 • Accurate Time Developers who want buildings larger than Clock 60,000 square feet may apply for development • POWERWATCH agreements. But they would have to meet a laundry list of requirements to qualify, such as proving their projects provide a "public benefit," showing what new products and services would be introduced and having good reasons why buildings must be larger than 60,000 square feet. Developers also would have to complete economic analyses to show the amount of sales tax and other revenue that would be generated for local government as well as the number of people who could lose their jobs as a result of new developments. WESTERN CO MUM,CATIONS IkC. The Union Democrat Online features news and information for residents and visitors to The Mother Lode, Yosemite and the Sierra Nevada.For the weekend visitor or the resident looking for great happenings,there is The Union Democrat calendar.. Tuolumne County has everything you need for a long stay or a weekend get-away,and it's all so close.From the gold rush towns of Jamestown,Sonora and Columbia,to the mountain communities of Twain Harte,Long Barn,Pinecrest,Dodge Ridge,Strawberry,to the Yosemite Gateway community of Groveland,the communities of Tuolumne County are diverse and uniquely rich in beauty and history. Whether you travel to visit the area,or are a life-long resident,you'll find The Union Democrat Online to be the source of information on Yosemite,Sonora,Dodge Ridge,the Mother Lode,the Sierra Nevada,Columbia, Twain Harte,Jamestown,Groveland and all the other fine communities of this area. Home I News I Classifieds I Real Estate ©Copyright 2000-2003 Western.Communications.Inc. http://www.uniondemocrat.com/news/story.cfrn?story_no=12676 12/10/2003 o�vTTFo p �• / o p G \ O INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF BUTTE COUNTY COUNSEL TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Robert W. MacKenzie, Chief Deputy County Counsel • SUBJECT: Proposed Chapter 24 Amendment Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects, Establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Proj ects DATE:12/24/03 Introduction The County Counsel's Office and the Department of Development Services have revised the above proposed ordinance, which would amend Butte County Code, Chapter 24. The ordinance is submitted to your Commission for your consideration at your meeting on January 8, 2004. The proposed ordinance would amend the zoning regulations to require that a Use Permit be obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project. The proposed ordinance would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects only in the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), C-C (Community Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County. The proposed ordinance would also set forth mandatory design standards for Large Retail Projects. The following is a summary of the revisions to the proposed ordinance, which is entitled "Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by Requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects." Summary of the Revisions to the Proposed Ordinance Section 1. This section is a statement of legislative intent. This section has not been revised, except that the reference to "large retail centers" specifies 50,000 square feet, instead of 25,000 square feet. Section 2. This section of the proposed ordinance would add new Section 24-264 to Butte County Code Chapter 24. This section would allow Large Retail Projects, as defined in the proposed ordinance, only in the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), C-C (Community Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts and only pursuant to a use permit. The C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district has been added to this section. Large Retail Projects would be restricted to 100,000 square feet or less in the Community Commercial zoning district. 1 The definition of"Large Retail Project"in this section has been revised to provide: ...Any commercial retail project in which the total gross building area is 50,000 or more square feet, including but not limited to mercantile uses, and/or shopping center uses. For the purpose of determining building area, the total retail area will be considered, including all existing and all additional area, and multiple buildings located closer than 20 feet together shall be considered one building. The revision has narrowed the definition so that it does not include retail projects of less than 50,000 square feet. The definition formerly included all retail projects of 25,000 square feet or more. A typical supermarket is about 50,000 square feet. Perhaps the use permit process would be inappropriate for retail projects of less than supermarket size proposed in commercial zones. The revision is intended to broaden the definition to include additions to existing retail facilities which would result in a total retail area of 50,000 square feet or more. The definition formerly included only new projects. Definitions of a technical nature relating to light sources have been eliminated from Section 2, because specific light shielding requirements have been eliminated from the design standards. Light shielding requirements have been abandoned in favor of a "performance-based" standard, which simply prohibits off-site glare. Mandatory Design Standards The mandatory design requirements of Section 2 have been revised, such that some requirements have been eliminated and most of the remaining requirements have been made more flexible. The amendments to the mandatory design requirements would: 1. Delete the requirement that outdoor light fixtures must be shielded, but would retain the prohibition against off-site glare. 2. Revise the prohibition against uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear feet, so it provides that uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 20 linear feet is prohibited. 3. Delete the requirement that building facades must include patterns at intervals of no more than 30 feet either horizontally or vertically. 4. Revise the requirement that predominant exterior building materials must include architectural or split face block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete with architectural finish, so that such materials are recommended, instead of required. 5. Revise the requirement that applies to a Large Retail Project which is designed to contain individual stores with separate, exterior customer entrances. The requirement for windows at specified heights on building facades has been revised to simply require windows (fenestration). 6. Revise the requirement that formerly required flat roof lengths longer than 100 feet in length to be concealed or addressed utilizing at least one of several specified options. The requirement now provides that such roof lengths shall be concealed from any facade view by adjacent land uses of lesser intensity and public rights-of-way. 2 7. Delete the requirement for design features such as pedestrian amenity areas that include landscaped sitting areas with design components such as covered seating elements and/or other amenities in shaded areas. 8. Delete the requirement that parking areas must be broken up into units of no more than 100 parking spaces, clearly separated by landscaped or weather-protected pedestrian walkways, significant landscape or geographic features and/or by design components of the proposed building(s). 9. Delete the requirement for pervious parking areas of between 5% and 20% of total parking space area, located and configured in order to reduce flood hazards/enhance runoff management. 10. Add a requirement that all parking areas must be designed and maintained and shall be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site. 11. Delete the requirement for foundation landscaping for at least 50% of the facade length and located between the drive aisle and the first vertical wall of the facade of each building. The former requirement now simply provides that foundation landscaping may be required. 12. Retain the requirement that every ten parking spaces must be designed with a minimum of 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands, but delete the requirement that such landscaping must include at least one over-story tree, one under-story tree and six shrubs. 13. Retain the requirement that 50% all parking areas must be shaded at tree maturity, but revise the requirement that your Commission must specify the size of the trees planted and maintained by the applicant. The former requirement now simply provides that your Commission may specify the size of the trees planted and maintained by the applicant 14. Retain the requirement that permanent outdoor display areas not within the building which face a public right-of-way must be shielded, and the requirement that outdoor displays and sales occur only in approved area(s), but delete the prohibition against outdoor displays and sales blocking more than 10% of parking spaces. Section 5. This section is new would add new Section 24-152 to require a use permit for the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial) Zone. This section would restrict Large Retail Projects to 100,000 square feet or less in the Community Commercial zoning district. Former Section 5 has been moved to Section 6. Section 6 requires a use permit for the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the H-C (Highway Commercial) Zone. Action Recommended. The following actions are recommended regarding the subject ordinance: 1. Find that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. 2. Find that adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA 3 Guidelines, Section 15308. 3. Recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors. cc: Paul McIntosh Yvonne Christopher Marion Reeves GAROB\planning commission4.doc 4 Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BUTTE COUNTY ZONING REGULATIONS SET FORTH IN BUTTE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 24 BY REQUIRING THAT A USE PERMIT BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF LARGE RETAIL PROJECTS AND THROUGH THE ADDITION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SUCH PROJECTS The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte ordains as follows : Section 1 . The Board of Supervisors finds the following: 1 . A current, prominent trend in the State involves the construction and operation of large retail centers of 50, 000 or more square feet . . -2 . The construction and operation of each such large retail center presents a correspondingly large potential for adverse impacts to health, safety and aesthetics to the citizens of the area in which it is constructed and operated, including but not limited to visual , traffic, pedestrian safety and air quality impacts . 3 . Due both to the large potential for adverse environmental impacts in the immediate or adjacent area presented by the construction and operation of each such large retail center, and the enormous potential in the County for cumulative health and safety and environmental impacts, including but not limited to those set forth above, presented by the construction and operation of multiple large retail centers, in order to protect the health safety and welfare of the citizens of the County, it is necessary to. a. Limit the construction and operation of large retail centers to specified zoning districts within the County; and b. Require that the construction and operation of each such large retail center occur only after at least one public hearing has been conducted pursuant to the discretionary Use Permit process set forth in Butte County Code Section 24-45, et seq. ; and c . Establish clear and concise community design standards specifically applicable to the construction of large retail centers . 4 . Changes to the Zoning Regulations are required to implement the three objectives set forth above, to ensure compatibility of large retail projects with the unique character of Butte County and also ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of the environmental impacts imposed by such projects are not shifted to County taxpayers . 2 0 Section 2 . Section 24-264 is added to Article V, entitled "Specific Use Requirements" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 1124-264 Large Retail Projects A. Allowed only in specified zones subject to Use Permit Requirement 1 . Notwithstanding any provision in this Code or any regulation to the contrary, the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects, as defined herein, is prohibited unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued after at least one public hearing has been held pursuant the process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et seq. Further, said use shall only be allowed in the C-1 (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) , and H-C (Highway Commercial) and C-C (Community Commercial) zoning districts . Large Retail Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district shall be limited to 100, 000 square feet or less . B. Definitions . 1 . Facade : the front of a building and/or any of its sides facing a public right-of-way whose side is 3 predominantly visible from a public right-of-way, public park or facing an adjacent residential land use . 2 . Large Retail Project : Any commercial retail project in which the total gross building area is 50 , 000 or more square feet, including but not limited to mercantile uses, and/or shopping center uses . For the purpose of determining building area, - the total retail area will be considered, including all existing and all additional area, and multiple buildings located closer than 20 feet together shall be considered one building. 3 . Light Source : a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp and all necessary mechanical , electrical and decorative parts, such as reflectors (mirrored enclosures surrounding the lamp) , refractors (glass or plastic enclosures surrounding the lamp) and lenses, designed to direct light rays . - 4 . Outdoor Light Fixtures : all outdoor illuminating devices, reflective surfaces, lamps and other devices, either permanently installed- or portable, which are used for illumination or advertisement . Such devices shall include, but are not limited to, search, spot and floodlights for: 4 • a. buildings and structures; b. recreational areas; C . parking lot lighting; d. landscape lighting; e . billboards and other signs; f . street lighting; g. product display lighting; h. building overhangs and open canopies . C. Design Standards for Large Retail Projects 1 . Purpose . These standards are intended to provide developers of large retail building development with guidelines for creating safe, efficient, pedestrian- friendly projects with human scale orientation, while discouraging large, nondescript buildings and "unfriendly" pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded parking lots . Further, enhanced Large Retail Project design will accomplish the following objectives : a. Encourage large, single building construction with definition and good architectural design rather than enormous, warehouse appearance with unbroken, blank walls . Good design encourages clearly defined entryways, 5 0 • articulated roof lines to prevent monotony, pedestrian amenity areas, and concealment of unsightly mechanical structures from public view; b. Encourage pedestrian-oriented design which effectively resolves the incompatibility between pedestrians and motorists, while providing interconnectivity between buildings, parking areas, and other internal/external components; C . Encourage parking lot design which meets vehicular needs, while providing a safe, efficient comfortable pedestrian flow; d. Encourage adequate landscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the public benefit and mitigating air pollution and excessive i heat gain which emanate from large impervious parking areas; e . Encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to enhance public safety while avoiding forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent areas . 2 . Design Standards . The following standards shall be required for all Large Retail Projects : 6 0 0 a. Facades . No uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of the facade shall exceed 20 feet in length, and shall include one or more of the following: Architectural features such as pilasters, columns, canopies/porticos, arcades, colonnades, and/or parapets . At least one architectural feature shall be required on each wall plane . 1 . Multiple Stores within a single building. Where a Large Retail Project contains individual stores that are less than 50, 000 square feet of gross floor area each, with separate, exterior customer entrances, the street level facade of each store shall provide fenestration along the horizontal length of the building facade of each store. b. Materials . Predominant exterior building material should include architectural or split face block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete with architectural finish. C . Entryways . All facades shall include at least one customer entrance . Customer entrances shall be clearly defined and should include at least two of the following features : canopies/porticos, overhangs, 7 • 0 recesses/projections, arcades, raised above-the-doorway cornice parapets, peaked roof forms, arches, outdoor patios, display windows, integrated architectural details such as tile work, moldings, planters or wing walls, and/or landscaped sitting areas . d. Service Areas . Service areas which include areas designated for loading and unloading of goods and refuse collection shall be buffered from right-of-ways and residentially zoned areas . Buffering shall consist of construction of a wall between the service area and abutting land use. All other applicable site development standards and regulations must be met in addition to this requirement . e . Roofs . Flat roof lengths longer than 100 feet in length, rooftop equipment and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) units shall be concealed from any facade view by adjacent land uses of lesser intensity and public rights-of-way. f . Pedestrian Circulation. Large Retail Projects shall encourage pedestrian-oriented ingress and egress through design features that enhance pedestrian safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition 8 0 0 between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways . g. Parking areas . Parking lots and access aisle- ways shall be designed utilizing the following standards : 1 . Parking lot design. Vast unbroken parking lots are prohibited. The design of parking lot separators shall consider pedestrian movements, conflict points with vehicles, site distance and angles, security site lighting and safety within the parking lot area. A pedestrian access way shall be provided to main customer entrances . The parking lot shall be designed with traffic calming features along the fire lanes fronting the building facades, as determined by the Planning Commission which shall consider the recommendations of the County Fire Chief and the Director of Public Works . Parking lots shall be designed to reduce vehicle movement along the fire lane . Alternative designs that incorporate existing natural resources are encouraged, subject to approval by the Planning Commission. 2 . Parking Spaces . The total number of parking spaces shall be determined in accordance with Section 24-240, except that the Planning Commission may grant a variance from the formula set forth in Section 9 24-240 if it also approves specific measures for the mitigation of impacts to traffic safety and available parking due to outdoor displays and sales . All parking areas must be designed and maintained and shall be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site . Runoff from the site shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. h. Landscaping. The following landscaping standards shall be incorporated into the design of all Large Retail Projects . 1 . Foundation. Foundation landscaping may be required. 2 . Parking areas . Every ten (10) spaces shall be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands . Grouping of landscaped islands is encouraged to promote the healthy growth of larger trees . Alternative designs are subject to approval by •the Planning Commission. 3 . 50% Area Shading Required. Trees shall be 10 planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so that at tree maturity, 15 years, at least 50 percent of the total paved parking area, not including the entrance drives, shall be shaded at solar noon on June 21 . The Planning Commission may require that the applicant plant and maintain trees of a specified size . On sites with poor soils and/or drainage, additional installation measures may be required to ensure that the shading standard can be reached within a reasonable time after project approval . 4 . Perimeter Buffer. A perimeter buffer may be required along the full length of all streets serving a Large Retail Project . i . Signage. Subject to the restrictions set forth in Business and Professions Code Section 5200 , et seq. , signage shall be designed as part of an integrated project design. The location (s) and design shall be reviewed and approved as part of the overall site plan. The predominant sign material shall be compatible with the principal building design. Notwithstanding the restrictions set forth in Business and Professions Code Section 5200, et seq. , signage shall not create a Public 11 Nuisance, as that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. This subsection (i) does not apply to site directional signage or traffic control signage . j . Outdoor displays and sales . 1 . Any permanent display areas not within the building which face a public right-of-way shall be shielded from view by a wall and incorporated into the overall design of the building. As an alternative, landscaping of the display area in lieu of a solid wall with a minimum height of four (4) feet may be utilized. 2 . Outdoor displays and sales shall occur only in approved area (s) . The location (s) and design of outdoor displays and sales areas shall be reviewed and approved as part of the overall site plan. Outdoor displays and sales areas shall not create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. k. Lighting. Lighting shall not cause off-site glare . In the event that off-site glare results from lighting on the premisses of a Large Retail Project, measures shall be taken to eliminate such glare . 12 0 • D. Compliance. In order to ensure that the development standards required herein are adhered to, in addition to the application requirements of Section 24-45, at a minimum ,each application for a Large Retail Project shall include a complete site plan drawn to scale, with overlays or separate drawings depicting all of the following: 1 . The exact location of each building; 2 . The design of all traffic and parking areas, showing all adjacent public and private streets and roads, traffic signals, traffic lanes, entry ways, fire lanes and all parking areas, including but not limited to a depiction of each required fire lane and parking space; 3 . A complete landscaping plan depicting vegetation, location, species and size; 4 . All designated service areas; S . All pedestrian walkways and sidewalks; 6 . A complete lighting plan, showing location and type of all lighting, including but not limited to building, signage and parking illumination, including specifications on height, intensity 13 or brightness, radiation pattern and required light shielding; 7 . All signage, including location, height, lighting and content ; 8 . A colored facade rendering for each building, except that this requirement may be waived by the Director of Development Services; 9 . Designated Outdoor display and sales area (s) . E. Conflicts with California Building Code . In case of any conflict between these requirements and the California Building Code, the California Building Code shallP revail . F. Violations . Notwithstanding any provision of this Code to the contrary, including but not limited to the definitions of Public Nuisance set forth in Section 32A-2 , any violation of any provision of this Section 24-264 is a public nuisance per se, and the Director of Development Services may utilize the nuisance abatement procedure and provisions of Chapter 32A, as well as all other remedies now or hereafter available, to abate or otherwise regulate or prevent violations of this Section 24-264 . 14 Section 3 . Section 24-142 is added to Article III , entitled "Zone Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : "24-142 Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial) Zone. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 24-140, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 264 , are not allowed in the C-1 (Light Commercial) Zone unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the requirements of Section 24-264 . Section 4 . Section 24-147 is added to Article III , entitled "Zone Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 1124-147 Large Retail Projects in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 24-145, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 264 , are not allowed in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the requirements of Section 24-264 . 15 Section 5 . Section 24-152 is added to Article III , entitled "Zone Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : "Large Retail Projects in the 24-150 C-C (Community Commercial) Zone. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 24-155, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 264 , are not allowed in the C-C (Community Commercial) Zone unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the requirements of Section 24-264 . Large Retail Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district shall be limited to 100, 000 square feet or less . Section 6 . Section 24-157 is added to Article III , entitled "Zone Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : "Large Retail Projects in the 24-155 H-C (Highway Commercial) Zone. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 24-155, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 264, are not allowed in the H-C (Highway Commercial) Zone unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the requirements of Section 24-264 . 16 Section 7 . Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed severable, and the invalidity thereof shall not affect the remaining provisions or other applications of the Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application thereof . Section 8 . Effective Date and Publication. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage . The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is authorized and directed to publish this ordinance before the expiration '-of fifteen (15) days after its passage . This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of the members of the Board of Supervisors voting for and against it, in the a newspaper of general circulation published in the County of Butte, State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, on the day of 2004 , by the following vote : AYES : NOES : 17 ABSENT: NOT VOTING: R.J. Beeler, Chair of the Butte County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: PAUL McINTOSH, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board By g:\ordinance\Big Box Ord.6.wpd 18 o�OTT�o 0 0 0 0 o INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM c�UNI'�y OFFICE OF BUTTE COUNTY COUNSEL TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Robert W. MacKenzie, Chief Deputy County Counsel 4z_ ,4911�__, SUBJECT: Proposed Chapter 24 Amendment Requiring Use Permits for Large Retail Projects, Establishing Mandatory Design Standards for Such Projects DATE: 12/3/03 Introduction The County Counsel ' s Office has prepared a proposed ordinance which would amend Butte County Code, Chapter 24 , pursuant to a request by the Director of Development Services . The ordinance is submitted to your Commission for your consideration at your meeting on December 11, 2003 . The proposed ordinance would amend the zoning regulations to require that a Use Permit be obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project . The proposed ordinance would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects only in the C-1 (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County. Theproposed ordinance would also set forth mandatory design standards for Large Retail Projects . The following is a summary of Sections 1 through 5 of the proposed ordinance, which is entitled "Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by Requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects . " Summary of the Proposed Ordinance > Section 1 . This section is a statement of legislative intent . This section recites reasons why the County zoning ordinance should regulate Large Retail Projects and provides that the purpose of the proposed ordinance is regulation of the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that the expenses of the mitigation of environmental impacts imposed by such Projects are not shifted to County taxpayers . Section 2 . This section of the proposed ordinance would add new 1 Section 24-264 to Butte County Code Chapter 24•This section would allow Large Retail Projects, as defined in the proposed ordinance, only in the C-1 (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) and H- C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts and only pursuant to a use permit . This section would also define "Large Retail Project" as any new commercial retail project, the total gross building area of which equals or exceeds 25, 000 square feet, including but not limited to mercantile uses, and or shopping center uses . Mandatory Design Standards Section 2 would also set forth mandatory design requirements for Large Retail Projects, in order to "provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer, efficient, pedestrian-friendly projects with human scale orientation, while discouraging large, nondescript buildings and unfriendly' pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded parking lots . " As Section 2 indicates, the mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage adequate landscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the public benefit and mitigating air pollution and excessive heat gain which emanate from large impervious parking areas . As Section 2 also indicates, the mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to avoid forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent areas, while enhancing public safety. The mandatory design requirements would: 1 . Require outdoor light fixtures to be shielded, to prevent excessive off-site light emissions, and would also prohibit off- site glare. 2 . Prohibit an uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear feet . 3 . Require building facades to include patterns at intervals of no more than 30 feet either horizontally or vertically. 4 . Require predominant exterior building material to include architectural or split face block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete with architectural finish. 5 . Where a Large Retail Project is designed to contain individual stores with separate, exterior customer entrances, the mandatory design requirements would require windows of specified sizes on building facades . 6 . Require flat roof lengths, longer than 100 feet in length to be concealed or addressed utilizing at least one of several specified options . 7 . Require design features that enhance pedestrian safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition between 2 vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways . • 8 . Require design features such as pedestrian amenity areas that include landscaped sitting areas with design components such as covered seating elements and/or other amenities in shaded areas . 9 . Require that the total number of parking spaces shall be determined in accordance with Section 24-240, except that your Commission may grant a variance from the formula set forth in Section 24-240 if it also approves specific measures for the mitigation of impacts to traffic safety and available parking due to outdoor displays and sales . 10 . Require parking areas to be broken up into units of no more than 100 parking spaces, clearly separated by landscaped or weather-protected pedestrian walkways, significant landscape or geographic features and/or by design components of the proposed building (s) . 11 . Require pervious parking areas of between 5% and 20% of total parking space area, located and configured in order to reduce flood hazards/enhance runoff management . 12 . Require foundation landscaping for at least 50% of the facade length and located between the drive aisle and the first vertical wall of the facade of each building. 13 . Require every ten parking spaces to be designed with a minimum of 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands and include at least one over-story tree, one under- story tree and six shrubs . 14 . Require 50% all parking areas to be shaded at tree maturity and require that your Commission specify the size of the trees planted and maintained by the applicant, so that the 50% shade requirement and the under-story/over-story requirement above are both met within a reasonable time after project approval . 15 . Require that permanent outdoor display areas not within the building which face a public right-of-way shall be shielded, require that outdoor displays and sales occur only in approved area (s) and prohibit outdoor displays and sales from blocking more than 10% of parking spaces . 16 . Require that parking lots be designed with traffic calming features along the fire lanes fronting the building facades, as determined by the your Commission, after recommendations from the County Fire Chief and the Director of Public Works and require that parking lots be designed to reduce vehicle movement along the fire lane . Section 2 would target several specific potential nuisance issues which would arguably typically result from construction/operation of Large Retail Projects : excessive light, aesthetic impacts due to 3 excessive signageexcessive noise and traffi0 hazards caused by outdoor sales and displays and flooding/runoff problems caused by excessive and/or poorly managed runoff . Section 2 provides specifically that neither light, signage, outdoor displays nor runoff from the site shall create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in Butte County Code Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any nearby property. Section 2 would also provide that any violation of any of its provisions is a public nuisance per se, and the Director of Development Services may utilize the nuisance abatement procedure and provisions of Butte County Code, Chapter 32A, as well as all other remedies now or hereafter available, to abate or otherwise regulate or prevent violations of its provisions . Chapter 32A sets forth an administrative adjudication procedure which is a streamlined alternative to filing a legal action in court to abate public nuisances . Thus, Section 2 should provide the Director of Development Services a speedy vehicle with which to address the classic dilemma of how to abate a nuisance which arises only after project approval , in spite of the existence of effective Use Permit conditions . Section 3 . This section would add new Section 24-142 to require a use permit for the construction and operation of * Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial) Zone . Section 4 . This section would add new Section 24-147 to require a use permit for the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone . Section 5 . This section would add new Section 24-157 to require a use permit for the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the H-C (Highway Commercial) Zone . Adoption of the Proposed Ordinance would be Consistent with the General Plan Section 1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan is entitled "General . " Section 1 . 1 is entitled "General Welfare . " Policy l . l .a provides, in pertinent part : . . . .The County' s goal in this document must . . . be the "general welfare" of its citizens or, in other terms, "the quality of life" of its residents and their "pursuit of happiness" . . . The proposed ordinance requires that a use permit be obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project, which necessarily involves a public hearing procedure facilitating public input and a discretionary decision by your Commission, in order that your Commission may impose specific Use Permit conditions requiring neighborhood compatibility. Further, the proposed ordinance requires that specific design features be incorporated 4 into each such P•ect, thereby eliminatinfnitigating adverse aesthetic impacts/requiring a specified degree of shaded areas . By facilitating neighborhood compatibility and requiring that Large Retail Projects incorporate a specified degree of protection from the sun and specified aesthetic improvements, adoption of the proposed ordinance would facilitate a better quality of life for Butte County residents . Land Use Element Policy l . l .a provides that : " [The County should] Provide for the health, safety and well-being of the County' s present and future residents . " The proposed ordinance, through the discretionary permit review process, would necessarily require an environmental review of . each proposed Large Retail Project, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . A CEQA review will facilitate the elimination and/or mitigation of adverse environmental impacts associated with the concentration of large numbers of people in one relatively small location, such as one would expect to find as an inevitable result of the construction and operation of a Large Retail Project . Thus, by facilitating the mitigation of, for example, impacts to air quality associated with increased traffic, adoption of the proposed ordinance would be consistent with protecting the health of Butte County residents, pursuant to Policy l . l .a. Further, the proposed ordinance requires that parking lots be designed with traffic calming features along the fire lanes fronting the building facades and requires that parking lots be designed to reduce vehicle movement along the fire lane . Enhancing firefighting capabilities and protecting the safety of pedestrians are both consistent with the goals of Policy l . l .a. Land Use Element Policy 1 . 6, entitled "Intergovernmental Coordination, " provides that coordination of the various federal, State and local government agencies involved in the various aspects of the development of the County is necessary in order to enhance maximum cooperation and avoid haphazard and costly development . I am informed by Development Services Department (DDS) staff that DDS informs and requests comments from a variety of governmental agencies, most notably the cities within the County, as a standard procedure inherent in the processing of proposed project applications subject to discretionary review. Since the proposed ordinance requires a discretionary review, adoption of the proposed ordinance would necessarily facilitate intergovernmental coordination, thereby facilitating the goal of Policy 1 . 6 . Land Use Element Policy 2 . 5, entitled "Air Resources, " provides that the relatively high quality of the air resources in the County has attracted people to the County and that increased air pollution in the County can not only damage human health and impair visibility, but also has the potential to decrease the productivity of agriculture and industry. I am informed by Planning Division staff that a significant reason behind the 50% of parking area shaded at tree maturity requirement in Section 2 of the ordinance is that recent scientific studies have found that in seasonal weather conditions typical to climates such as that which 5 exemplifies Butte County, vehicles parked in Pie shade emit lower amounts of air pollution from organically volatile substances such as gasoline . Because adoption of the proposed ordinance would facilitate a reduction in certain types of air pollution, the ordinance is consistent with the goal of Policy 2 . 5 : protecting productivity and economic opportunities in the County by preventing, to the extent possible, increases in air pollution due to increased development . Land Use Element Policy 4 . 5, entitled "Compatibility of Business Activities, " provides, in pertinent part : Not all commercial and industrial uses are compatible with each other or with other uses . Similar business uses sometimes group together to serve working relationships or to attract each other' s customers . . . A functionally efficient business environment is . . . facilitated by the separation of incompatible types of use . The proposed ordinance, as discussed above, incorporates public input and a discretionary decision by your Commission, in order that your Commission may impose specific Use Permit conditions requiring neighborhood compatibility. Adoption of the proposed ordinance would further Policy 4 . 5 and enhance the economic viability of the County by also facilitating business compatibility. Land Use , Element Policy 6 . 1, entitled "Compatibility of Business Activities, " provides, in pertinent part : The relatively low intensity of land use in much of the County has created a generally safe and pleasant living and working environment . Many types of land use, especially some commercial . . .activities, can be detrimental to the health and safety or [sic] nearby residents and workers. However, the blighting effects of many "objectionable" uses can be minimized by requiring suitable locations and mitigating design measures. Adoption of the proposed ordinance would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects only in the C-1 (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County, thereby facilitating the location of Large Retail Projects in suitable areas. Further, adoption of the proposed ordinance would further the goal of minimizing potential blighting effects of Large Retail Project uses, by facilitating the location of such Projects in suitable areas through the discretionary review process and also as a direct result of the mandatory design requirements set forth in Section 2 of the ordinance. For the reasons set forth above, adoption of the proposed ordinance would be consistent with the General Plan. 6 Adoption of The Pro•sed Ordinance would be Exemmit from CEQA Review. Adoption of the above described ordinance would be exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308 . Section 15308 provides that where a local agency' s regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment, certain actions such as the adoption of ordinances or regulations to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment . CEQA Guidelines, Section 15360 defines "environment" as the physical conditions which exist within the area which will be affected by a proposed project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. "Environment" includes both natural and man-made conditions. The proposed ordinance requires a use permit for the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects and therefore requires a CEQA review and, hence, mitigation of significant environmental impacts which would flow from the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects. Further, the proposed ordinance requires compliance with mandatory design standards intended to mitigate adverse environmental impacts such as air pollution. Thus, the ordinance is intended to protect the "environment. " Therefore, adoption of the ordinance would be categorically exempt from the CEQA process pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308 . Action Recommended. The following actions are recommended regarding the subject ordinance: 1 . Find that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. 2 . Find that adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a categorical exemption as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15308 . 3 . Recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors. cc: Paul McIntosh Yvonne Christopher Marion Reeves G:\ROB\planning commission3.wpd 7 1 2 Ordinance No. 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BUTTE COUNTY ZONING REGULATIONS SET FORTH IN BUTTE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 24 BY REQUIRING THAT A USE PERMIT BE 4 OBTAINED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF LARGE RETAIL PROJECTS AND THROUGH THE ADDITION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SUCH PROJECTS 5 6 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte ordains as follows : 7 8 Section 1 . n following: 9 The Board of Supervisors finds the e 10 1 . A current, prominent trend in the State involves the 11 construction and operation of large retail centers of 25, 000 or more 12 square feet . 13 2 . The construction and operation of each such large retail 14 center presents a correspondingly large potential for adverse impacts 15 to health, safety and aesthetics to the citizens of the area in which 16 it is constructed and operated, including but not limited to visual, 17 traffic, pedestrian safety and air quality impacts . 18 3 . Due both to the large potential for adverse environmental 19 impacts in the immediate or adjacent area presented by the 20 construction and operation of each such large retail center, and the 21 enormous potential in the County for cumulative health and safety and 22 environmental impacts, including but not limited to those set forth 23 above, presented by the construction and operation of multiple large 24 retail centers, in order to protect the health safety and welfare of 25 the citizens of the County, it is necessary to: 26 a. Limit the construction and operation of large retail 27 centers to specified zoning districts within the County; 28 1 1 and 2 b. Require that the construction and operation of each such 3 large retail center occur only after at least one public 4 hearing has been conducted pursuant to the discretionary 5 Use Permit process set forth in Butte County Code, Section 6 24-45, et seq. ; and 7 c . Establish clear and concise community design standards 8 specifically applicable to the construction of large retail 9 centers . 10 4 . Changes to the Zoning Regulations are required to implement 11 the three objectives set forth above, to ensure compatibility of large 12 retail projects with the unique character of Butte County and also 13 ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of the environmental 14 impacts imposed by such projects are not shifted to County taxpayers . 15 16 Section 2 . Section 24-264 is added to Article V, entitled 17 "Specific Use Requirements" of the Butte County Code to read as 18 follows : 19 20 "24-264 Large Retail Projects 21 A. Allowed only in specified zones subject to Use Permit 22 Requirement 23 1 . Notwithstanding any provision in this Code or any 24 regulation to the contrary, the construction and operation 25 of Large Retail Projects, as defined herein, is prohibited 26 unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued after 27 at least one public hearing has been held pursuant the 28 2 I process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et 2 seq. Further, said use shall only be allowed in the C-1 3 (Light Commercial) , C-2 (General Commercial) and H-C 4 (Highway Commercial) zoning districts . 5 B. Definitions . 6 1 . Facade: the front of a building and/or any of its 7 sides facing a public right-of-way whose side is 8 predominantly visible from a public right-of-way, public 9 park or facing an adjacent residential land use . 10 2 . Large Retail Project : Any new commercial retail 11 project, the total gross building area of which equals or 12 exceeds 25, 000 square feet, including but not limited to 13 mercantile uses, and or shopping center uses . For the 14 purpose of determining building area, multiple buildings 15 located closer than 20 feet together shall be considered 16 one building. 17 3 . Full-cutoff light fixture : a light fixture 18 designed such that no light is projected at or above a 90- 19 degree plane running through the lowest point on the 20 fixture where the light is emitted and less than ten 21 percent (10%) of the rated lumens are projected between 90- 22 degrees and 80-degrees . 23 4 . Semi-cutoff fixture : a fixture that projects no 24 more than five percent (5%) of the rated lumens above a 90- 25 degree plane running through the lowest point on the 26 fixture where the light is emitted and less than twenty 27 percent (20%) of the rated lumens are projected between 90- 28 3 1 degrees and 80-degrees . 2 5 . Light Source : a complete lighting unit consisting 3 of a lamp and all necessary mechanical, electrical and 4 decorative parts, such as reflectors (mirrored enclosures 5 surrounding the lamp) , refractors (glass or plastic 6 enclosures surrounding the lamp) and lenses, designed to 7 direct light rays . 8 6 . Outdoor Light Fixtures : all outdoor illuminating 9 devices, reflective surfaces, lamps and other devices, 10 either permanently installed or portable, which are used 11 for illumination or advertisement . Such devices shall 12 include, but are not limited to, search, spot and 13 floodlights for: 14 a. buildings and structures; 15 b. recreational areas; 16 C . parking lot lighting; 17 d. landscape lighting; 18 e. billboards and other signs; 19 f . street lighting; 20 g. product display lighting; 21 h. building overhangs and open canopies . 22 C. Design Standards for Large Retail Projects 23 1 . Purpose . These standards are intended to provide 24 developers of large retail building development with 25 guidelines for creating safe, efficient, pedestrian- 26 friendly projects with human scale orientation, while 27 discouraging large, nondescript buildings and "unfriendly" 28 4 I pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded 2 parking lots . Further, enhanced Large Retail Project 3 design will accomplish the following objectives : 4 a. Encourage large, single building construction with 5 definition and good architectural design rather than 6 enormous, warehouse appearance with unbroken, blank walls . 7 Good design encourages clearly defined entryways, 8 articulated roof lines to prevent monotony, pedestrian 9 amenity areas, and concealment of unsightly mechanical 10 structures from public view; 11 b. Encourage pedestrian-oriented design which 12 effectively resolves the incompatibility between 13 pedestrians and motorists , while providing 14 interconnectivity between buildings, parking areas, and 15 other internal/external components; . 16 c . Encourage parking lot design which meets vehicular 17 needs, while providing a safe, efficient comfortable 18 pedestrian flow; 19 d. Encourage adequate landscaping that allows large 20 buildings and their components to blend with their 21 surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the 22 public benefit and mitigating air pollution and excessive 23 heat gain which emanate from large impervious parking 24 areas; 25 e . Encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to 26 enhance public safety while avoiding forms of nuisance and 27 intrusiveness into adjacent areas . 28 5 1 2 . Design Standards . The following standards shall be 2 required for all Large Retail Projects : 3 a. Facades . No uninterrupted and/or unadorned length 4 of any portion of the facade shall exceed 100 linear feet . 5 Interruptions of such continuous lengths of the facade 6 shall include wall plane projections and/or recesses of not 7 less than five feet in off-set, and 20 feet in length, and 8 one or more of the following: Architectural features such 9 as pilasters, columns, canopies/porticos, arcades, 10 colonnades, and/or parapets . At least one architectural 11 feature shall be required on each wall plane. 12 1 . Multiple Stores within a single building. 13 Where a Large Retail Project contains individual stores 14 that are less than 25, 000 square feet of gross floor area 15 each, with separate, exterior customer entrances, the 16 street level facade of each store shall provide 17 fenestration such as windows between the height of a 18 minimum of three (3) feet and a maximum of eight (8) feet 19 above the walkway grade, for no less than 60 percent of the 20 horizontal length of the building facade of each store . 21 2 . Detail features . All facades shall include 22 patterns at intervals of no more than 30 feet either 23 horizontally or vertically. Such patterns shall include 24 windows, color changes, texture changes or material module 25 changes, and/or surface modeling changes such as offsets, 26 reveals, or ribs of no less than 12 inches in width. 27 b. Materials . Predominant exterior building material 28 6 1 shall include architectural or split face block, brick, 2 glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete 3 with architectural finish. 4 C . Entryways . All facades shall include at least 5 one customer entrance, or be screened from public view with 6 no less than a ten (10) foot wide buffer with foundation 7 landscaping in planters or planting beds which extend a 8 minimum of 18" from the building along the entire length of 9 the ten foot buffer with a minimum of one over-story tree 10 every 30 feet . Customer entrances shall be clearly defined 11 and include at least two of the following features : 12 canopies/porticos, overhangs, recesses/projections, 13 arcades, raised above-the-doorway cornice parapets, peaked 14 roof forms, arches, outdoor patios, display windows, 15 integrated architectural details such as tile work, 16 moldings, planters or wing walls, and/or landscaped sitting 17 areas . 18 d. Service Areas . Service areas which include areas 19 designated for loading and unloading of goods and refuse 20 collection shall be buffered from right-of-ways and 21 residentially zoned areas . Buffering shall consist of 22 construction of a wall between the service area and 23 abutting land use . All other applicable site development 24 standards and regulations must, be met in addition to this 25 requirement . r 26 e. Roofs. Flat roof lengths, longer than 100 feet 27 in length shall be concealed or addressed utilizing at 28 7 0 1 least one of the following options . 2 1 . Effective concealment of flat roof lines, 3 rooftop equipment and heating, ventilating, and air 4 conditioning (HVAC) units from any facade view by adjacent 5 land uses of lesser intensity, and public rights-of-way by 6 constructing a parapet . The parapet design shall be a 7 minimum of three feet in height and shall incorporate a 8 three dimensional cornice treatment . Alternative designs 9 such as varying the parapet height for a minimum linear 10 distance of 100 feet, and a minimum vertical height of two 11 feet shall be subject to approval by the Planning 12 Commission. 13 2 . Two or more sloping roof planes that extend 14 a minimum of three (3) feet above the eave . 15 f . Pedestrian Circulation and Amenities . Large 16 Retail Projects shall encourage pedestrian-oriented ingress 17 and egress through design features that enhance pedestrian 18 safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear 19 definition between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways . 20 1 . Sidewalks . Pedestrian connectivity between 21 the building facade and each grouping of parking spaces, 22 public sidewalks, out parcel buildings, and transit stops 23 shall be clearly indicated through the use of landscaped 24 areas and sidewalks . Along each facade with customer 25 entrances there shall be a sidewalk along the full length 26 of the facade . For multiple store developments all 27 facades with multiple customer entrances shall include a 28 8 1 covered sidewalk connecting all entryways . For single 2 store developments, a covered canopy shall be provided from 3 the entryways to the edge of the sidewalks connecting to 4 the remote parking area. Sidewalks remote from the 5 building shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in width and 6 provide a minimum of three (3) feet of green/landscaped 7 area between the edge of sidewalk and the vehicle use area. 8 2 . Pedestrian Amenity Area. Large Retail 9 Projects shall include design features such as pedestrian 10 amenity areas that include landscaped sitting areas with 11 design components such as covered seating elements and/or 12 other amenities in shaded areas . One pedestrian amenity 13 area shall be required for each retail establishment with 14 a building area between 25, 000 and 100, 000 square feet . For 15 each retail establishment with a building area greater than 16 100, 000 square feet, an amenity area shall be provided for 17 each customer entrance. The amenity areas should be placed 18 in areas which have the highest pedestrian traffic . 19 g. Parking areas . Parking lots and access aisle- 20 ways shall be designed utilizing the following standards : 21 1 . Parking lot design. Vast unbroken parking 22 lots are prohibited. Parking areas shall be designed so 23 that no more than 100 spaces of the total number of spaces 24 required pursuant to Section 24-240 are part of a clearly 25 defined grouping of spaces . Such groups shall be broken 26 into individual areas and/or clearly separated by 27 landscaped or weather-protected pedestrian walkways, 28 9 1 significant landscape or geographic features and/or by 2 design components of the proposed building (s) . The design 3 of these separators shall consider pedestrian movements, 4 conflict points with vehicles, site distance and angles, 5 security site lighting and safety within the parking lot 6 area. Separations shall be no less than eight (8) feet in 7 width at any point . A pedestrian access way shall be 8 provided to every customer entrance . The parking lot 9 shall be designed with traffic calming features along the 10 fire lanes fronting the building facades, as determined by 11 the Planning Commission which shall consider the 12 recommendations of the County Fire Chief and the Director 13 of Public Works . Parking lots shall be designed to reduce 14 vehicle movement along the fire lane . Design features may 15 include cross driveways, 90 degree parking space design, 16 and consideration of site access points . At least 20 17 percent of the required parking spaces shall be placed in 18 the rear or side areas of the proposed development if 19 feasible as determined by the Planning Commission. 20 Alternative designs that incorporate existing natural 21 resources are encouraged, subject to approval by the 22 Planning Commission. 23 2 . Parking Spaces . The total number of parking 24 spaces shall be determined in accordance with Section 24- 25 240, except that the Planning Commission may grant a 26 variance from the formula set forth in Section 24-240 if it 27 also approves specific measures for the mitigation of 28 10 1 impacts to traffic safety and available parking due to 2 outdoor displays and sales . Each parking space in excess. 3 of the minimum shall require an additional landscaped area 4 of ten (10) square feet to be placed within the internal 5P arking area, and/or right-of-way buffer. Pervious parking 6 areas, including turf block or grass shall be used for at 7 least five (5) percent but no more than 20 percent of the 8 total constructed parking spaces, subject to approval by 9 the Planning Commission. If grass parking is proposed, the 10 parking shall be designed and constructed with a structural 11 support (i .e. go-grid, go-block, etc . ) . The area 12 designated for pervious parking must be maintained and 13 shall be located and configured in such a manner as to 14 provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff 15 management for the site, in relation - to the surrounding 16 properties . Pervious parking locations at the perimeter of 17 the parking lot and remote from building (s) are preferred. 18 The pervious parking area does not count as part of the 19 landscaping requirements . Runoff from the site shall not 20 create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in 21 Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any 22 nearby property. 23 h. Landscaping. The following landscaping standards 24 shall be incorporated into the design of all Large Retail 25 Projects . 26 1 . Foundation. Foundation landscaping shall be 27 required for at least 50 percent of the facade length and 28 11 1 located between the drive aisle and the first vertical wall 2 of the building facade. A minimum of 25 percent of the 3 required foundation landscaping shall be placed between the 4 required sidewalk and the first vertical wall of the 5 building facade . The foundation landscaping shall be in 6 planters or planting beds that extend a minimum of 18 7 inches from the building- 8 2 . Parking areas . Every ten (10) spaces shall 9 be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping 10 to be placed in medians or islands and shall include at - 11 least one over-story tree, one under story tree and six (6) 12 shrubs . No median or island shall be less than five (5) 13 feet in width. No row of parking spaces shall have more 14 than ten (10) spaces without landscaping interruption. 15 Grouping of landscaped islands is encouraged to promote the 16 healthy growth of larger trees . The Planning Commission 17 shall require that the applicant plant and maintain trees 18 of a size sufficient to meet both the requirements of this 19 subsection 2 and subsection 3 below within a reasonable 20 time after project approval . Alternative designs are 21 subject to approval by the Planning Commission. 22 3 . 50% Area Shading Required. Trees shall be 23 planted and maintained in planters or landscaped areas so 24 that at tree maturity, 15 years, at least 50 percent of the 25 total paved parking area, not including the entrance 26 drives, shall be shaded at solar noon on June 21 . On sites 27 with poor soils and/or drainage, additional installation 28 12 1 measures may be required to ensure that the shading 2 standard can be reached within a reasonable time after 3 project approval . 4 4 . Perimeter Buffer. A perimeter buffer shall 5 be required along the full length of all streets serving a 6 Large Retail Project . The buffer shall be a minimum of 35 7 feet in width and comprised of retained natural vegetation, 8 or planted with native plant species . 9 i . Signage . Subject to the restrictions set forth 10 in Business and Professions Code Section 5200, et seq. , 11 signage shall be designed as part of a complete development 12 system. The location (s) and design shall be reviewed and 13 approved as part of the overall site plan. The predominant 14 sign material shall include architectural or split faced 15 block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, or 16 stone and be compatible with the principal building design. i 17 Notwithstanding the restrictions set forth in Business and 18 Professions Code Section 5200, et seq. , signage shall not 19 create a Public Nuisance, as that term is defined in 20 Section 32-A, nor constitute a private nuisance to any 21 nearby property. This subsection i does not apply to site 22 directional signage or traffic control signage . 23 j . Outdoor displays and sales . 24 1 . Any permanent, display areas not within the 25 building which face a public right-of-way shall be shielded 26 from view by a wall made from architectural or split face 27 block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, 28 13 I stone, or concrete with architectural finish and 2 incorporated into the overall design of the building. The 3 wall must extend a minimum of four (4) feet in height . As 4 an alternative, landscaping of the display area in lieu of 5 a solid wall with a minimum height of four (4) feet may be 6 utilized. 7 2 . Outdoor displays and sales shall occur only in 8 approved area (s) and shall not obstruct more than 10 percent 9 of on-site parking spaces, nor create a Public Nuisance, as 10 that term is defined in Section 32-A, nor constitute a 11 private nuisance to any nearby property. 12 k. Lighting. All outdoor light fixtures emitting 13 2050 or more lumens shall be shielded as follows : 14 1 . Within 30 feet of the property boundary must 15 be full-cutoff fixtures . 16 2 . All other outdoor lighting fixtures must be 17 semi-cutoff or full-cutoff fixtures . 18 3 . Lighting shall not cause off-site glare . In 19 the event that off-site glare results from lighting on the 20 premisses of a Large Retail Project, measures shall be 21 taken to eliminate such glare . 22 D. Compliance . In order to ensure that the development 23 standards required herein are adhered to, in addition to 24 the application requirements of Section 24-45, at a minimum 25 each application for a Large Retail Project shall include 26 a complete site plan drawn to scale, with overlays or 27 separate drawings depicting all of the following: 28 14 1 1 . The exact location of each building; 2 2 . The design of all traffic and parking areas, 3 showing all adjacent public and private streets 4 and roads, traffic signals, traffic lanes, entry 5 ways and all parking areas, including but not 6 limited to a depiction of each required parking 7 space; 8 3 . The design of all required landscaping, including 9 but not limited to all foundation landscaping, 10 all buffer areas, depicting vegetation location 11 and type; 12 4 . All designated service areas; 13 5 . All pedestrian walkways, sidewalks, pedestrian 14 amenity areas, depicting type of amenity; 15 6 . A complete lighting . plan, showing location and 16 type of all lighting, including but not limited 17 to building, signage and parking illumination, 18 including specifications on height, intensity or 19 brightness, radiation pattern and required light 20 shielding; 21 7 . All signage, including location, height, lighting 22 and content; 23 8 . A colored facade rendering for each building, 24 depicting all required architectural features; 25 9 . A depiction of designated Outdoor display and 26 sales area (s) . 27 E. Conflicts with applicable building codes . In case of 28 15 I any conflict between these requirements and the 2 requirements contained in Butte County Code, Chapter 26 3 and/or the California Building Code, those codes shall 4 prevail . 5 F. Violations . Notwithstanding any provision of this 6 Code to the contrary, including but not limited to the 7 definitions of Public Nuisance set forth in Section 8 32A-2 , any violation of any provision of this Section 9 .24-264 is a public nuisance per se, and the Director 10 of Development Services may utilize the nuisance 11 abatement procedure and provisions of Chapter 32A, as 12 well as all other remedies now or hereafter available, 13 to abate or otherwise regulate or prevent violations 14 of this Section 24-264 . 15 16 Section 3 . Section 24-142 is added to Article III , entitled "Zone 17 Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 18 "24-142 Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial) 19 Zone. 20 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 21 24-140, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 22 264 , are not allowed in the C-1 (Light Commercial) Zone 23 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 24 requirements of Section 24-264 . 25 26 Section 4 . Section 24-147 is added to Article III, entitled "Zone 27 Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 28 16 1 "24-147 Large Retail Projects in the C-2 (General 2 Commercial) Zone. 3 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 4 24-145, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 5 264, are not allowed in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone 6 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 7 requirements of Section 24-264 . 8 9 10 Section 5 . Section 24-157 is added to Article III, entitled "Zone 11 Districts" of the Butte County Code to read as follows : 12 "Large Retail Projects in the 24-155 H-C (Highway 13 Commercial) Zone. 14 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 15 24-155, Large Retail Projects, as defined in Section 24- 16 264, are not allowed in the H-C (Highway Commercial) Zone 17 unless a Use Permit is obtained, subject to the 18 requirements of Section 24-264 . 19 20 Section 6 . Severability. 21 If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to 22 any person or circumstances is for any reason held to be invalid by 23 a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed 24 severable, and the invalidity thereof shall not affect the remaining 25 provisions or other applications of the Ordinance which can be given 26 effect without the invalid provision or application thereof . 27 Section 7 . Effective Date and Publication. This Ordinance shall take 28 17 I effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage. The Clerk of 2 the Board of Supervisors is authorized and directed to publish this 3 ordinance before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its 4 passage . This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of 5 the members of the Board of Supervisors voting for and against it, in 6 the , a newspaper of general 7 circulation published in the County of Butte, State of California. 8 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of 9 Butte, State of California, on the day of , 10 2001, by the following vote : 11 AYES : 12 NOES : 13 ABSENT: 14 NOT VOTING: 15 16 R.J. Beeler, Chair of the 17 Butte County Board of Supervisors 18 19 ATTEST: 20 21 PAUL McINTOSH, Chief 22 Administrative Officer 23 and Clerk of the Board 24 25 By 26 27 g:\ordinance\Big Box Ord.5.doc 28 18 Paradise Post ' Declaration of Publication State of California County of Butte ` Declarant Says: That at all times herein mentioned Declarant is and was a resident of ;, [` •Mf* �_'F,.. e�•. .Tf'$j! =<,�`i'f����?;�r�)'S`+hsSl,�i•�'�'..., -' •'.�,.�.pr :....,qn_:``, G+r`� 1 V•r - -"''.+l's said county of Butte over the age of twenty-one years;not apart to nor 7'`i' �. , '.,+.`�, BUTTErCOUNTYxPLANNING COMMISSION',', , interested in the within matter;that Declarant is now and was at all '+''�-� 'x�, NOTICEOFxINTENTION •TO'CONSIDERrORDINANCEs:�;fFs�` times herein mentioned the Legal Clerk of the Paradise Po s a tri- a, � t, 7� ySUMMQRYjOF�PROPOSED ORDINANCE weekly newspaper,which said newspaper was adjudged a news a er of F" t, `.` .• ,` . ' } t '`� P P �' '''+.•^., " ,iii arX. ,+ r .~� _ .�,a. ,y; ,. general circulation on November 12, l 946,by Superior Court Order •Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday No.22262 as entered in Book 30 Page 223 of said Courtand that said Cente D8,d2004oville Calrfo rile;ton the fodllow"ngpervisor's Rohm;•County'Administration Building,,,25 County,r;, newspaper is printed and published every Tuesday, Thursday and -"` Saturday in Paradise in said County of Butte; and that the `;ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW . I +:' til t.. l7,­r, ,� +„ i The following is a summary,of the'Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte;•' Public Notice ff,CountyyCode Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior,to the Construction and Operation of,Large Retail Projects andeThrough the Additionof Design'Standards for Such Projects: , County of Butte +d"'!=•.0*-r','`•+r:z<k+t .:'rai'►�fi^`.:°#,-, -M,• x�:.sF..t•+`rte+k,:+:. ...-•r t t++; ., o ,;,-d W �,';.�r DDS-ZCA 04-02 Retail Store 04, he proposed ordinance is intended to.regulate the construction and operation of Large Retail Protects for the` ' purpose ot'ensuring that e`nvironm'ental impacts which`errianate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated bythe Legal#005-04 owner of,the Large(Retail,Protects din order'}to ensure that the'expenses.of;the mitigation of,such impacts are Of which the co PY. not shitted.toiCountytaxpayers � - copy annexed on the margin hereof is a true printed co �T66 ord mice would add new�sections to the"County's Toning"regulafions whicFi'would require that a use`per '= was published in said newspaper in the issues of "miti6e bbtained.in,order,to`construct'and`operate'a Large.Retaii Project:'The new sections would!ail.ow.the'"'{ 3�. construction and operation of I:argd;R6tail Projects in the C-1'(Light Commercw) C-2•(General Commercial), January 1, 2004 �,C'C`(Corrimundy Commercial)and H C(Higtiway,Commercial)zoning'districts'of the unincorporated areas of znButtefCountyiLarge Retail'Protects in the C-C+(Community Commercial) zoning*district would'be.1imited to' and that such Publications was made in the regular issues of said a er. r"100 000'§quare feet or less'YThe new e_ctions would also set forth design standards for Large Retail Projects., (and not in any supplemental edition or extra thereof). P P �_"�,• .�* >:✓wr.x�sn.r ` �fThe ordinance would defiQ,:1 rge,Retail Protect":as any.commercial retail project in which;the.total•gross.i; building area or is'50;000 more square feet including but not limited to•mercantiie uses,and/or shopping den-' I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing js true and correct. eki t n'6 daAlltadd t onal areatland multiple buildings local d closa, the erbe20 feetail,area ltitoeether�shalel bet considered+� . ted on January 1,2004 „ 9 ,r , p �'Jf .,• 9,. ; �.onebuilding 1<�� , {a, 2�r F it r 7f :?t;'Jitx17, aradi a California. '..,,,-�I �,•, k , ,�� r� Kati xf+ � : •_ �..�..tf ' The ordinance would add'a new section,to Butte County's zoning regulations prohibiting the construction and;,* operatlon`of Large Retail Projects unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued pursuant to the process ,,, uset tortKin'Butte County'Code-Secii6hi,24=45'et:seq.'That process necessarily involves at least one noticed �? ublic`hearin in4front of theButte'Count Plarinin Commission n- pr,6v�ptG•-^ji'!r7ti:g j`c,'yM,Y +.^ r�rfY g" .,... q'�Vy, y'�r `?+-ter • '' 'ti.^rr 1 :_Ti +ir. .,The ordinance set forth mandatory,design requirements'for Large:Retail'Projects to provide developers; 1'of Large Retail IProjects'with?guidelin6s for creating safer;efficient,,pedestrian-friendly protects''witWhOman Declarant *scale oeleritation,�,while rdiscouraging Ilarge,1nondescript buil_dings•and "unfriendly"'pedestrian design,•limited• . 4. landscaping,"and,vast non-shaded parking � itku{�.'�•±¢+ec`I'in�"z`-y�'�,�r"f?r°.r't ..+•?r•a.C,l r w. .�.�-. �:. :- • . Sr"' . � .. ,ir F The mandatorydesign requirements would also be.intended to encourage adequate landscapingGhat allows large buildings and their components to'blend with their surroundings;while providing'screening and shade for; ,.the public'benefit5'_",rc+t ?;; rkR yi��r✓i# :6 .� m:y r ! .n'4�zt{4" 1l'w .1 A :')tr ,} ,,�The!mandatoryidesign requirelm6nts�,wouid'als6 be intendedito,encourage`enhanced Iighting,and.signage w; 1"design toTavoid:forms of.nuisance'and intrusiveness into'adjacent'areas while"enhancing public:safety.'The, mandatory,design'requirements would prohibit project lighting'from causing aff-site glare. , , r • 9..�fLkj r,r : r..'. ,t• .. 1-r y 'f..' .. - - .�.'.-Z..+.• The mandatory design requirements,wouId prohibit an uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade'exceeding•20 linear feet fhe'mandatory design requirements,would require flat roof lengths ' lncealed from anonger,than 100feet in length tobecoy facade view,by adjacent land uses of lesser.intensity ;and public-rights of-way Ft 4t +?�`fe �y+� ti '', `, �' �}. .1 rc" +—�'_: i 7: � �s , ,y.is i .y }TS.1fr1,.•:!vf -3p • r•t ..�,•fFr +, �.i+.., r 'roi+..�U' 7.,Yr •.f '+uj+Mr �i7i:::tom, �^w,.} k :......•.« ,'4The mandatory design7(+requirerif- ments would require design features,that enhance pedestrian,safety,�6fficiency,? sand connectivity~with;a`cIea'r,de-fin.ition between;vehi6uIai,areaslarid rp6d6strian walkwa9s'NT tietmandat6ry,7, i4 designjrequirements would;prohibit;yast runbroken parking+lots',tAll;parking'areas;would ibejrequired;to';b' " itdesigned and maintained and:would beµrequired,to'be`located and configured in such a'•manner;as to provide' %e ma imum feasible'de gree of,flood control/runoff management and'agwfer:recharge for,�the;site 4 i. a`v h . ` y�C�is•, ,t 4•:, , .,+?. f y, ',.Pursuant to`the mandatory design requirements foundation landscaping may required:Every ten(10)park„+,{ \ ;*'ting spaces would be required to 6`1 00 with a!minim6r64 0 square feet of landscaping to be placed m • medians�or;islands��r�4�;`y i�`,;��•''ry�l. ��;' :1 � ,: {R,�,��;,�is � <• �tt,;,�:t•�< 1�J r �j�'n.; Y u3�, �;,,,, ( .sS+'iv7t?,`!t .he'L- +',aEk', t .�� S+'4t.1�'�•fi: yr t,{. �tJe++�S �tFs; t:":, t.. t�.r'4't�M�vua.S�•.��+'-t°:l�-ef'�'�•A't Pursuant to the mandatory,,designlrequirements,50%,shading of all parking areas would be required!at,tree4. �,&atuInty�HAiperimeter,buuffer.m�ay�bi�iequired.along the f6ll 16 grh,of alIl streets serving La_Large Retai P-ojecE�<' ;t Pursuant toAheimandatory,design:reguirements;:alLsignage'would,be;required. be,designed,as'part;ofan�,. ;Iintegrated;protect designPermanent outdoor•display areas would be required to be shielded fromtview byya w? 1 applyl'roAv?dedei"n a6rerpa6s�)rk;eTdh'ein�k o- overaoverall design-of*the.b� m9'4*4 ' fS�ld,klursuantto{themandatoryidesign requirements';outdoor)displaysand,sales wouitSb{�e",prYo;h.ib�ifte;d�i exceJjprt m+i y, locations)and dsign'of all outdoor displays and sales`areasewould berequiredto beW` ;. , - - ? - - fit'ti7,7" [ -4�e;,;2t�{ �� bt• -.ri+Y v+�, t.:�'y+•I".:" �y reviewed and approved as partof tfie overall site plan:• ;Purs!'}', i 'X++: �'Y>ry5.1•'�'' {s•..i1yy'^:7'r+ � =i"*^1RN,l'<S S- 4-..•, �S•.J.;c{.t•y W..wR;r'JLR.. .-1 .' :'4 � ,� ?a q�.y'+. uant to the oidinance;ianyviolation of,any,provision of the ordinance would be a'public nuisance per.se ',' ;'Pursuant and.the"ordinance would.authorize the Director of Development Services•tc utilizethe nuisance abatement prod. acedure and provisions of;Chapter 32A as welt as all other available remedies to abate or otherwise regulateor, • E+��prevent violations of the o`rdinancet�!':,�"" ."u 't a'i 'Yd}+'L+�:i'��i��1�z;�1�°} 46.#iz. x�T,gr"�*_:.'s•sre.tt rf�r.'n! t7'tl .t•f eta .' rd`�yr...Vti a.t a'' -lin ,%"(V-fi: r..�- `+J.• .,. - ;,{'}.y'!,, �4 The ordinance would be�effective;throughout the unincorporated area:of;Butte*County All permit applications. would be subject''to revieww.p ursuant to the California Environmental ti" �. • to "�� t - .a-iy- '.-r T'Y t �"��, Y'� ,r„ tr.r.d' � �+r.. rrt xA cooy,of the above mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at the office of the County Counsel .a .,� - b'r F 25 County Center Orovtlle CA t�.k ^'L + j rr s i,; ? +•••t N r a, ,S 2 r x r y 1 1 .c s �t r�, 5 .� rr'Cg.1 4.kr s ' A £� r,5- •�, Mr'`fyr�(+f +•+ ,� r'�7yn?d` y tf F E fi• ,r �•.i.l ,+►•i �R'��f3.I K��, fir,-r`."` ". " ,d-{}n,z� ra 1.fav z tt t ' _ •u.;aJ. •'+� �''pI .�Ul xYvonne Christopher -; ray f a ° �� Director of,Development Services t"January1�'2004kry i +✓�E : r -� _,r.S •r' � _ , �' �i'f. � sf'•rt f�.j„�.' ,� t ,4,-S ta .,� '�M,• I,. 005-04,A4. �.5'k4•,�. k^i's r.: -,,�y.•�; -i •*' si F.� e.'!4 d. a`t7.a..' a k'+flf• .1 E"l;iF* ve Naf;,'w y. It l' J , J (SPACE FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE In The Matter Of Notice of Intention to Consider Ordinance No. Summary.of Proposed Ordinance. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION M"X BUTTE;COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSiON State of California NOTICE'OP INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE' County of Butte ss. SUMMARY{OF-PROPOSED ORDINANCE ' . The undersigned resident of the county of Notice Is hereby given by the Butte County.Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday,January 8,2004,at Butte,State of California,says: 9:00 a.m.In the Board of Supervlsors Room,;County Administration Building,25 County Center Drive,.Orovilie,California,In the following. ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT That I am,and at all time herein mentioned n , . • FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW was a citizen of the United States and not a party to nor interested in the above entitled matter; The following summary of the ordinance amending Butte County'Zoning Regulations Set Forth In Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that,a use permit be obtained prior to the commission and operation of large retail projects and through the addition of that I am the principal clerk of the printer and design standards for such projects: li of ub P shat 'The proposed ordinance is Intended to regulate the construction and operation of large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental Impacts which•emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owner of the large Retail Project,in The Chico Enterprise-Record order that the expenses of the mitigation of such Impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. r The Oroville Mercury-Register The ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations which would require that a use permit be obtained in order to construct and operates Large Retail Project.The new sections would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-1(Light Commercial),G2(General Commercial),C-C(Community Commercial)and H-C(Highway Commercial). That said newspaper is one of general circula• Zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County.Large Retail Projects in the C-C(Community Commercial Zoning dis- tion As defined by Section 6000 Government trict would be limited to 100,000 square feet or less.The new sections would also set.forth design standards for large Retail Code of the State of California,Case No.26796 Projects. by the Superior Court of the State of California, The ordinance would define urge Retail Project'as any commercial retail project in which the total gross building area is 50,000 in and for the County P of Butte;that said news a- or more square feet,Including but not limited to mercantile uses,and/or shopping center uses.For the purpose of determining building area,the total retail area will be considered,including all existing and all additional area,and multiple buildings located per at all times herein mentioned was printed closer than 20 feet together shall be considered one building. and published daily in the City of Chico and The ordinance would add a new section to Butte County's Zoning.regulations prohibillng the construction and operation of Large County of Butte;that the notice of which the Retail Projects unless and until a Use Permit is approved and Issued pursuant to the process set forth in Butte County Code annexed is a true tinted co was published in Sections 24-45 ct'soq.That process necessarily involves at least one noticed public hearing in front of the Butte County Planning P Pyr P Commission. said newspaper on the following days: The ordinance would set fourth mandatory'requirements for Large Retail Projects to provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer,efficient,pedestrian-friendly,projects with human scale orientation,while discouraging Large,non- Dec.29,03. descript buildings and°unfriendly°pedestrian design,limited landscaping;and vast non-shaded parking lots, The ordinance design requirements would also be intended to encourage adequate tandscaping that allows buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings,while providing screening and shade for public benefit. The mandatory design requirements would also be intended to encourage enhanced lighting and•signage design,to avoid fors of nuisance and intrusiveness Into adjacent'areas,while enhancing public safely.The mandatory design requirements would prohibit Dated_January 2,2004. lighting from casual off-site glare. at Chico,California. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit an uniterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade, exceeding 20 linear feet.The mandatory design.requirements would require Oat roof lengths,longer than 100 feet In length to be concealed from any facade view by adjacent land uses of lessei intensity,and public rights-of-way. The mandatory requirements would require design features that enhance pedestrian safety,efficiency,and connectivity with a clear (Signatur definition between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways.The mandatory design requirements would prohibit vast,unbroken parking lots.All parkingareas would be required to be designed and maintained and would be required to be located and config- ured in such a manner is to provide the maximum feasibility degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements,foundations landscaping may be required.Every ten(10)parking spaces would be required to be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping to be.placed in medlans or islands. Pursuant to the mandatorydesign requirements,50%shading of all parking areas would be required at tree maturity.A perimeter buffer may be required along the full length of all streets serving a Large Retail Project. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements,all signage would be required to be designed as part of an Integrated project design.Permanent outdoor display areas would be'required to be shielded from view by a wall and Incorporated Into the overall t design of the building. ' Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements,outdoor displays and sales would be prohibited,except In approved area(s).The ' IoeadOn(s)and design of all outdoor displays and sales areas would be required to be reviewed and approved as part of the overall site plan. 'Pursuant to the ordinance any violation of any provision of the ordinance would be a public nuisance per se,and the ordinance would authorize The Director of Development Services to utilize a nuisance abatement procedure and provisions of Chapter 32A, as well as all other available remedies to abate or otherwise regulate or prevent violations of the ordinance. The ordinance would be effective throughout the unincoorporated area of Butte County.All permit applications would be subject to review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). A copy of the above mentioned ordinancels available for public inspection at the office of the County Counsel,25 County Center, OmAlle;CA.11' Yvonne Christopher.`. Director of Development Services Y ` BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING QW9MMM PROOF OF t NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE �,..-. .- �4 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE Notice is�heretiy given by the Butte,County Planning Commission that a public PUBLICATION hearing will beheld on Thursday, January Builds, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board:of e, Supervisors Room, County;Administration Building, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville;,California on the.following: ITEM DETERMINED TO 13E CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT ; ,:.-, = FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The following-is a summary of the Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects: No. The proposed ordinance is intended to regulate the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owner of the Large Retail;Projects, in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such In The Matter ofd impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. —The ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations.which IVA01 �/V//' /`�1� wouldrequire that a use permit,be obtained in order to.construct and operate a Large Retail Pro1'ect.The new sections would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2(General Commercial), C-C(Community Commercial)'and II-C(Highway Commercial)zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County. Large Retail Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial)zoning district would be limited to 100,000 square feet or less. The new sections would also set forth design standards for Large Retail Projects. The ordinance would define "Large Retail Project" as any'commercial retail project in which the'total gross building area is 50,000 or more square feet,including 11 but not limited to mercantile uses,and/or shopping center uses. For the purpose of (State of California) F' determining building area;the total retail area will be considered including all existing and all additional area,and multiple buildings located closer than 20 feet together (County of Butte) as shall be considered one building. .The ordinance would.add a new section to Butte'County's zoning regulations prohibiting the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects unless and'until a The undersigned resident of the County of Butte, Use Permit is approved and issued pursuant to the process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et seq.That process necessarily involves at least State of California, says: one noticed public hearing in fiont'of the Butte County Planning Commission. ';:.The.ordinance,would set forth mandatory design requirements for Large Retail That I am, and at all time herein mentioned Projects to provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer,"efficient,=pedestrian-friendly projects with human scale orientation, while was a citizen of the United States and not a party todiscouraing,largge;nondescript buildings and"unfriendly"pedestrian design,limited nor interested in the above entitled matter' that I , landscapuig,'and vast non shaded parking lots. P rThe mandatory design requirements would also be intended to encourage am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of: l; 'adeguate;Iandscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their,surroundings,while providing screening and shade,for,the public benefit. } he;mandatoryidesign`requirements"would also be intended to encourage The Gridley Herald enhanced a lighting•and signage-design,,•to avoid forms of nuisance and inti'siveness`mto,adjacent areas, while enhancing public safety. The mandatory i design`requirements would prohibit project lighting from causing off-site glare. That said newspaper is one of general �. ;: ;The,mandatory design requirements,would prohibit an uninterrupted and/or circulation as defined b Section 6000 GOYernment unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 20 linear feet.The y maridatoryidesign requirements would require flat roof lengths,longer than 100 feet Code of the State of California,Case No.27,207 b inaen tFi.to be<concealed from an facade view b adjacent land uses of lesser y s .. v Y I the Superior Court ofthe State of California,in and intensity,apublic rights-of-way.- RIPr . +, 3The,madatory design requirements would require design features that for the County of Butte; that said newspaper at all enhance pedestrian safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition �,� herein vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways. The mandatory design ti,mcs .erein mentioned was printed and published requirements would prohibit vast,unbroken parking lots.All parking areas would be twice a week (on Wednesdays and Fridays) in the required to be designed and maintained and would be required to be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood City of Gridley and County of Butte; that the notice control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site. of which the annexed is a true printed copy, was Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements;foundation landscaping may be required. Every ten (10) parking spaces would be required to be designed with a published in said newspaper on the following days: minimum 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements 50% shading of all parking areas would be required at tree maturity.A perimeter buffer may be required along j/ the full length.of all streets serving a Large Retail Project. „Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements,all signage would be required '. to be designed as,part-of an integrated project design. Permanent outdoor display I certifiy(or declare),under penalty of perjury, that areas.would be required to be shielded from view by a wall and incorporated into the foregoing is true and correct, at Gridley, the overall designofthe building. $ $ y Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements, outdoor displays and sales California. would be prohibited,except in approved area(s).The location(s) and design of all outdoor displays and';sales areas would be required to be reviewed and approved //� as part of the overall site plan. Dated Pursuant to the,ordinance,any violation of any provision of the ordinance would be a public nuisance•per se, and the ordinance would authorize the Director of at Gridley,C ifOrnia Development Services to utilize the nuisance abatement procedure and provisions of Chapter 32A, as well as all other available remedies to abate or otherwise.regulate or prevent violations of the ordinance. I. ,i,;The ordinance,would.be effective throughout the unincorporated area of Butte Si nature i County?'All permit applications'would be subject to review pursuant to the California (Signature) I Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). A copy of the above mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at the office of the Couhty Counsel,25 Countv Center Oroville.CA. Yyonne;Christopher, Director.of.Development Sewices" ,. Publish:December 31,2003:"r," e Gridley Herald) (SPACE FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE In The Matter Of Summary of Proposed Ordinance. _No . BUTTE;000NTY-.PLANNING•COMMISSION,t AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION k NE�OF INTENTIO OTICN.TO: State of California , ' •1CON$IDER:ORDINANCE: d ,77 County of Butte SS. 77 7 ''SUMMARY�•OF�PROPOSED ORDINANCE ''Notice.'ishereby given by:tlie Butte'CIV ounty Planning Commission•that a public hearing The undersigned resident of the county of will:be.held,on Thursday,?Decembei';a.1;:2003;'at 9:00,j.m:`in the Board of,Supervisors' Room,County'Admrmstration$wilding 25 County.Center Drive,.Oroville,California;on \\ Butte, State of California, says: the following:".' ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM That I am, and at all time herein mentioned n ::, ";."'`" »=:� 'ta"ENWRONMENTAI REVIEW was a citizen of the United States and not a party The followrng'is`,a summary of'theOrdinance,Amending Butte County Zoning to nor interested in the above entitled matter; Regulations Set Forth in.Butte County;Code.Chapter,24 by Requiring That a Use _ that I am the principal clerk of the tinter and "Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects. P P P and Thiough'the'Addition"of Design Standards for Such Projects: publisher of The proposed'ordinance.is ihtended'to regulate the construction and operation of Large;Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring thatenvironmental impacts which.. ' The Chico Enterprise-Record emanate from Large Retail.Prcjects are.mitigated by the owner of the Large Retail, Projects;in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are The Oroville Mercury-Register not shifted to:couImytaxpayers. ,;..,..- The ordinanoe�would add new'.sections of the Bounty's zoning regulations which That said newspaper is one of general circula- would'require•drat.a use permit be'., ..fined in order to construct and operate a tion as defined b Section 6000 Government `Largg Retail Project..The:new sectionswouldallow'the construction and operation Y of.Large Retail Projects in the C-I;(Light Commercial),C-2(General Commercial) Code of the State of California, Case No. 26796 'and x-C(Ilighway CommeroW).,zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of b the Superior Court of the State of California ,Butte"County.The.new sections would also set forth design standards for Large in and fortheCount of Butte that said news a- ,,ReWIProjects.y., ` • - Y p The ordinan*e ould define"Large Retail Project"as any new commercial retail- per at all times herein mentioned was printed project,;the.total gross building area of which equals or exceeds 25,000 square feet, and published daily in the City of Chico and iriclgding but.not limited to mercantile uses,and or shopping center uses. County of Butte; that the notice Of which the The ding add a new.section to,Butte County's zoning regulations pro- hibiting the' ons ctruction-and operation of Large Retail Projects unless and until a. annexed is a true printed copy,was published in .;Use Permit is approved and.issued pursuant to the'process set forth in Butte County said newspaper on the following days: "Code Sections 24A5 et'seq.That process necessarily involves at least one noticed r public hearing in front of the Butte,County Planning Commission... The•ordinanceiwould set forth'mandatory design requirements.for Large Retail;' NOV. 27, 03. •Projects to provide developers of Large'Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer,efficient,:pedestrian-,friendly-projects with many scale orientation,while dis-.- couraging large,'nondescript'buildings:and"unfriendly"pedestrian design,.limited landscaping;and vast non-shaded parking lots. The mandatory design requirements,ue'also intended to encourage enhanced.light- 1,,ingand signage design,:to_avoid.forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent,' Dated December 10,2003. areas„whileenhancing`public,s;f, The1mandatory design requirements would at Chico, California. •require'outdoor,light fixtures to;be shielded, to4prevent excessive ofd site light emissions.. _ I The.mandatory.design,requi•rements,would'prohibit an'uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear.feet.The mandatory design requirementswould require building facades to include patterns (Sign e) at intervals of no more than 30 feefeither horizontally or vertically.The mandatory .,,-design lrequiiements,would�require predominant exterior building material:to. include architectural of split face block;brick;glass„wood;stucco;artificial stucco, stone•or concretelwith architectural finish.Where a Large Retail Project is designed to contain individual stores with.separate,exterior customer entrances,the manda r tory design�r quirements would to ire windows'of specified sizes on building., 1 r,,;,facades. a' ?','•v ,x � =� ` • t 'The mandatory design requirements would requireflat roof lengths,longer than 100 feet in length to beconce'aled or addressed utilizing at least one of several specified. ;o)tions„The mandatory;de_sign'requireme'nts_would•require design featuresthat' enhance pedestrian.safety, efficiency"and,connectivity with a.clear definition ,between''yehcular-areas and'pedestriaq walkways.The mandatory design require - nients,would require'design features,such,"as pedestrian amenity,areas that include landscaped'sitting'areas with design components such,as covered'seating elements or other amenitiesin shad4areas r fhe`man ndatory design requirements would require parking areas to be broken up pinto units ofjno more than'100:parking spaces;clearly separated by landscaped or f .,weather•protectWd ped!s'oaniwalkways;,signifieant'landscape or geogiaphicJea- tures and/or by design components of the proposed building(s). Pursuanf•to.the mandatory design requirements;foundation landscaping'would be' required for'ai letist fifty percent(50%);of the facade,length and located between the „.' drive:ai' and the frrstyertical,wall of the,facade of each building.Every ten(10) 'parkitig'spaces would be required to be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of ...'. ° landscapmg.tobe placed;in'mMans.or rslands.and include'at least one over-story 4tree,one under story,tree and six shrubs} The ordinance would be:effective ibroughout-the unincorporated area of Butte County.All pennit,applications'would be subject"to,review pursuant to the California Environmental, Quality Act(CEQA) ",r ;;, If you challenge the Zoning Code Amendment in court,you may be limited to raising only. . ;.those issues youpr'someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in:=. written eortespondence 'delivered-to.the Planning Division at,or prior to;,the public hearing t` * • '-', �•, r : ,..'• ,,', :'A copy of the:above'mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at'the office of the County Counsel,25 County Center Drive,,Oroville,CA.. r' - ':Yvonne Christopher,Director of Development Services, ' Paradise Post Declaration of Publication State of California County of Butte } Declarant Says: That at all times herein mentioned Declarant is and was a resident of said county of Butte over the age of twenty-one years;not a part to nor interested in the within matter;that Declarant is now and was at all times herein mentioned the Legal Clerk of the Paradise Post,a tri- weekly newspaper,which said newspaper was adjudged a newspaper of general circulation on November 12, 1946,by Superior Court Order No.22262 as entered in Book 30 Page 223 of said Court;and that said newspaper is printed and published every Tuesday,Thursday and Saturday in Paradise in said County of Butte;and that the Public Notice County of Butte DDS-ZCA 04-02-Large Retail Legal#619-03 Of which the copy annexed on the margin hereof is a true printed copy, was published in said newspaper in the issues of, December 2,2003 and that such publications was made in the regular issues of said paper (and not in any supplemental edition or extra thereof). I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on December 2,2003 Paradise,California. Declarant BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION r r. ' NOTICE'OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE, . i _SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE ; .,Notice is hereby given:by the Butte County,Plantung Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday,December.11, 2003; at 9.00;a.m: iri the Board of Supervisors Room, County u Administration Building,25 Courity Center Drive; Oroville,California,on the following: 'ITEM DETERMINED TO•BE'CATEGORICAL'LY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The'following is•a summary of the Ordinance Amending-Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte SCounty Code Chapter 24:by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained°Prior to the Construction and Operation ;. . -=^of Large Retail Projects and.Through the Addition of Desigti Standards for Sueh Projects: The proposed ordinance is intended to regulate the construction and operation of Lazge.Retail Projects for the" .purpose of ensuring that environmental impact`s which emanate from Large Retail Project's are mitigated by the , Rowne 5f the Large�R�e ,tail Prolects',an_or`deLto ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are pp t„not shifted to Couii y taxpayer ;a...Aa_ o,,,_.cPrt,nnc_rn..thP County s_zonine_reeulations which would require that a use,perms ` BUTTE COUNTY P NG COMMISSION NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE, . SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 9:00 a.m: in the Board of Supervisors Room, County Administration Building,25 County Center Drive, Oroville,California,on the following:. ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The following is a summary of the Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects: The proposed ordinance is intended to regulate the construction and operation of Large-Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owner of the Large Retail Projects,in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. The ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations which would require that a use per- mit be.obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project. The new sections would allow the con- struction-and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-1(Light Commercial),C72(General Commercial)and H-C(Highway Commercial)zoning districts of the unincorporated areas.of Butte County.The new-sections would also sef forth design standards for Large Retail Projects. ' The ordinance would define"Large Retail Project"as any new commercial retail project,the total gross build- ing area of which equals or exceeds 25,000 square feet,including but not limited to mercantile uses,and or shopping center uses. z The ordinance would add a new section to Butte County's zoning regulations prohibiting the construction and. operation of Large Retail Projects unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued pursuant to the process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45.et seq. That process necessarily involves at least one noticed public hearing in front of the Butte County.Planning Commission. The ordinance would set forth mandatory design requirements for Large Retail Projects to provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer,efficient,pedestrian-friendly projects with human scale orientation,while discouraging large,nondescript buildings and"unfriendly"pedestrian design,limited landscaping,and vast non-shaded parking lots. The mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage adequate landscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings,while providing screening and shade for the public benefit. The mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage enhanced lighting and signage design,to. avoid forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent areas,while enhancing public safety. The mandatory design requirements would require outdoor light fixtures to be shielded,to prevent excessive off-site light emis- sions. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit an uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear feet.The mandatory design requirements would require building facades to include patterns at intervals of no more than 30 feet either horizontally or vertically.The mandatory design requirements would require predominant exterior building material to include architectural or split face block, brick,-glass,wood,stucco,artificial stucco,stone or concrete with architectural finish..Where a Large Retail Project is designed to contain individual stores with separate, exterior customer entrances, the mandatory design requirements would require windows of specified sizes on building facades. The mandatory design requirements would require flat roof lengths,longer than 100 feet in length to be con- cealed or addressed utilizing.at least one of several specified options. The.mandatory design requirements would require design features that enhance pedestrian safety,efficiency;and connectivity with a clear defini- tion between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways.'The mandatory design requirements would require design features such as-pedestrian amenity areas that include landscaped sitting areas with design components such as covered seating elements and/or other amenities in shaded areas. . The mandatory design requirements would require parking areas to be broken up into units of no more than 100 parking spaces,clearly separated by landscaped or weather-protected pedestrian walkways, significant land- scape or geographic features and/or by design components•of the proposed building(s). Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements•Foundation-landscaping would be required for at least fifty . (50%)percent of the facade length and located between the drive aisle and the first vertical wall of the facade of.each building.Every ten(10)parking spaces would be required to be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in median's•or islands and include at least one over-story tree,one under-story tree and six shrubs. The ordinance would be effective throughout the unincorporated area of Butte County.All permit applications would be subject to review pursuani to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). If you challenge the Zoning Code Amendment in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the.public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Division at,or prior to,the public hearing. A copy of the above mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at the office of-the County Counsel, 25 County Center Drive,Oroville,CA. Yvonne Christopher December 2,2003 Director of Development Services. 619-03 I'S�.."�i.'_�{,`s.,;v:.:�Fi.,3'�s!'.w,�.:._,.,µ,.�¢ !.`� �ii.'h��;::�lt"*.:�St;W,:••_.:_ ;..«.�..:..•,• — ROOF OF , 4 - BAN �-:i � _ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION t*SW. :^w tNOTICE OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE I'`" w�Y!`� '_...—.. '•SUMMARY-OF-PROPOSED ORDINANCE PUBLICATION I hearin lice's hereby given by ah,,Dette,Crib Pl003,a,Co 0 a.m.in that a public heanng.w,ll be held on,Thursday;December 11{2003,at 9:00 a.m.in the Board of S Supervisors Room;!County Admmistration'IBuilding,"25'County Center Drive, ; Orovtlle;CahforniaPon.the following ; NTEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW i,AF ° s^-Thb j6llowing is, summary,of Amending Butte;County.Zoning Regulations;Set Forth linrButte CountyYCode Chapterf24•by requiring that a Use �7 Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation'of Large Retail Projects 1V o. and Through-the:Add,tion'of Design Standards for Such Projects - - j ., r, .,The.proposed;ordinance is..intendedto regulate the construction.and operation of'Large,Retail,P.rojects for the.purpose of'ensuring J that environmental impacts Which;emanate-from'L`arge'Retail�Projects are,pitigated 6 the owner of'Large . In The Matter of Retail"Projects lin$order�.to.ensure<that+,the expenses+bf the mitigatiori'of such " impacts are,not shifted to County tax`payers;>t, , 1'fir. ;r ?' : ,;The'ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations which would require that'aiuse permitibe obtained1ri orderJo'construct,and.operate a e LarmFletail,Project The;new sections would'allow'the construction and'operation of Large.Retail-Projects;in`,the'C-1;(Light Commercial),C-2 (General Commercial) aridl;l-C (Highway'Commercial)"zoning"districts;of;the-unincorporated areas of Butte County.The new.sectiohs;would also set forth design standards for,Large Retail'Projects., ; {;` }p t4�.f+t.; ;{ . -, -'The ordinance would defineLa " rge RetaiLProject>.as.any new commercial retail project;the'total gross building;area,of.,'Which equals"or exceeds 25,000 square feet,including but not limited to mercantile"uses;and.or shopping center uses. ;{ ..The ordinance,would set forth maridatory.design,requirements for Large Retail Projects to'provide developers of l.argeiRetail Projects with guidelines for creating (State of California) safer,fefficient, pedestrian-friendly projects with human.scale orientation, while (County of Butte) as discoura9ing:large;,nondescHot buildings'and"unfriendly"pedestrian design,limited land_scaping;.and vast non-shaded parking lots ria.'„»; . a,; •';y:, ,t i �. The mandatory designjrequirements are also intended to encourage adequate The undersigned resident of the County of Butte, landscaping that allows=large,buildingsland theii,components;tolblend with their surroundings;while providing screening and shade for the public benefit. State of California, Says: k . Ttie,mandatory,design':requirements are�also''intended to encourage enhanced 1 lighting•and'signage,,,design,.to.avoid',forms:of nuisance'and intrusiveness into That I am, and at all time herein mentioned V adjacent areas;while enhancing public safety.'The`mandatory:design requirements i would;require„outdoor!light;fixtures to,be shielded:`to prevent excessive off-sight was a citizen of the United States and not a party to ! light emissions ` . s. . L - TheImandato' design requirements would,prohibit aniuninterrupted•and/or ! nor interested in the above entitled matter; that I j unadomed'length of anyportion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear feet'.The i am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of: mandatory,design:regwrements would require-building facades to include patterns at intervals of,no-more than 30 feet either horizontally or vertically.The mandatory design requirements would-require predominant exterior building material to Include The Gridley Herald architectural or split face.block;brick;glass;wood:stucco,artificial stucco,stone or concrete'_with.architecturalJfinish`Where a Large Retail Project is designed to contain;individual stores!:withpseparate,'.exterior.'customer,,entrances, the That said newspaper is one of general 4 mandatory design requirements;would:regwre'w,ndows'of;specified sizes,on circulation as defined b Section 6000 Government building facades. W.n y ;t The mandatory design requirements would require flat roof lengths;longer than Code of the State of California,Case No. 27,207 by 10o feet in'length to be concealed;or addressed utilizingrat.least;one of several the Superior Court of the State of California,in and i specified!options.•Y:The mandatory^desig'nrequirements would'require'design p features that enhance,pedestrian:sail ety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear for the County of Butte; that said newspaper at all definition between°vehicular;4areassand?pedestrian,walkways.,.The.mandatory design'req`uirement's would::require design features such as pedestrian amenity times herein.mentioned was printed and published areas that include',6ndscaped:§ittinglareas'.with;design components such as twice a week (on Wednesdays and Fridays) in the covered'seating elements and/or,other amenities in shaded areas:'-: .5,,-The mandatory,design requirements,would require,parking areas to be,broken City of Gridley and County of Butte; that the notice up into units of no more than.1100 parking spaces,clearly separated by landscaped of which the annexed is a true printed copy, was or weather-protectedlpedesteian;walkways; significant,landscape or geographic features and/or by'design components of the proposed.building(s). published in said newspaper on the following days: , Pursuant to,the`mandatory:design'requirements Foundation landscaping would be required_:for..at;least;f,fryj(50%),percent•of,.the.facade length and located between the drive aisle and first,vertical,wall of the facade of each building. Every tin:(10) parking spaces would;tie required to tie.designed:with a:minimum 400 s square feet of landscaping to'be:placed in medians or,islands and include at least ` one over story tree:one.under-story,tree'and six:shrubs , I certifi or declare), under enalt ofperjury, that- lThe ordinance Would ibe;effective.throughout the unincorporated area of Butte. the foregoing is true and correct, at Gridley, County.All"permit applications would be subject to review pursuant to the California g $ y Environmental Quality'Act'(CEQA).” California. If you,challenge,the Zoning Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to /2 raisingg only those issues',you4or.someone else-raised•at•the public hearing / described-in'this notice;or in.written,,correspondence,delivered to the Planning Dated // /03 : Division at;or prior.to;the public hearing: �; � € " ^;t_, for x,A'copy•of•the_above,mentioned'ordinance is available public inspection at the at Gridley,California office of,the'County Counsel,-25 County Center Drive,Oroville,CA. Yvonne;Christopher.,: . Director of Development Services� Publish:November 28,2003. -` �� �_- : e Gridley Herald (Signature) �. r I I sacbee.com --Business -- Wal1Vlart set to super-size in California • Page 5 of 6 But not even the Supercenters will knock Raley's from the top of the charts in the Sacramento area, said Burt P. Flickinger III, a noted New York-based retail analyst. Wal-Mart will move from nowhere into the second spot, he said, mostly at the expense of Ralphs, Albertsons and Safeway. "The national chains will be caught in the middle," unable to compete with Wal- Mart's low prices or the loyalty of Raley's customers, he said. Safeway spokesman Alexander Winslow wouldn't talk about competing with Supercenters but said Sacramento is a major market for Safeway, which has grown to two dozen stores in the capital region. Trade Dimensions said Safeway has increased its market share in the last two years from about 13 percent to 17 percent. Ralphs spokesman Terry O'Neil said his Kroger-owned firm has not grown as fast as planned in the Sacramento area and, in fact, closed five stores last year. Ralphs' market share dropped from almost 9 percent in 2001 to about 5 percent this year, Trade Dimensions said. But O'Neil said Sacramento still holds an important place in Ralphs' long-term plans. Kroger has plenty of experience against Wal-Mart in other states, he said, "and we'll compete with what we do best: higher quality, better variety and better service." Albertsons declined to comment. David S. Rogers, the Chicago-area academic, and Paul Adams, an Olathe, Kan.- based analyst, agreed that the national chains were the most vulnerable. "I think you will see significant division closures," Rogers said. "There is no God- given reason that anybody will survive, big chain or not." Graphic: Wal-Mart overview About the Writer --------------------------- The Bee's Bob Walter can be reached at(916) 321-1215 or bwalter0sacbee.com. T e8ac=nentoBee - Get the whole story every day - SUBSCRIBE NOW! Contact Bee Customer Service Advertise Online I Privacy Policy_I Terms of Use I Help I Site Map hq://www.sacbee.com/contentibusiness/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 sacbee.com --Business -- Wai jart set to super-size in California 0 Page 6 of 6 I News I Sports I Business I Politics 10 inion I Entertainment I Lifestyle I Travel I Women Cars I Classifieds I Homes I Jobs I Shopping GUIDE TO THE BEE: I Subscribe I Contacts I Advertise I Bee Events I Community Involvement [ Sacramento Bee Web sites ] Sacbee.com I SacTicket.com I Sacramento.com Contact sacbee.com Copyright© The Sacramento Bee r http://www.sacbee.com/content/business/story/7875497p-8815049c.html 12/4/2003 n IN BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE, SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, January 8, 2004, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board of Supervisors Room, County Administration Building, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, on the following: ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The following is a summary of the Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects: The proposed ordinance is intended to regulate the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owner of the Large Retail Projects, in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. The ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations which would require that a use permit be obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project. The new sections would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), C-C (Community Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County. Large Retail Projects in the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district would be limited to 100,000- square 00,000square feet or less. The new sections would also set forth design standards for Large Retail Projects. The ordinance would define "Large Retail Project" as any commercial retail project in which the total gross building area is 50,000 or more square feet, including but not limited to mercantile uses, and/or shopping center uses. For the purpose of determining building area, the total retail area will be considered, including all existing and all additional area, and multiple buildings located closer than 20 feet together shall be considered one building. The ordinance would add a new section to Butte County's zoning regulations prohibiting the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued pursuant to the process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et seq. That process necessarily involves at least one noticed public hearing in front of the Butte County Planning Commission. The ordinance would set forth mandatory design requirements for Large Retail Projects to provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer, efficient, pedestrian-friendly projects with human scale orientation, while discouraging large, nondescript buildings and "unfriendly" pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded parking lots. The mandatory design requirements would also be intended to encourage adequate landscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the public benefit. The mandatory design requirements would also be intended to encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to avoid forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent areas, while enhancing public safety. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit project lighting from causing off-site glare. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit an uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 20 linear feet. The mandatory design requirements would require flat roof lengths, longer:than 100 feet in length to be concealed from any facade view by adjacent land uses of lesser intensity, and public rights-of-way. The mandatory design requirements would require design features that enhance pedestrian safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit vast, unbroken parking lots. All parking areas would be required to be designed and maintained and would be required to be located and configured in such a manner as to provide the maximum feasible degree of flood control/runoff management and aquifer recharge for the site. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements, foundation landscaping may be required. Every ten (10) parking spaces would be required to be designed with a minimum 400 square feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements, 50% shading of all parking areas would be required at tree maturity. A perimeter buffer may be required along the full length of all streets serving a Large Retail Project. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements, all signage would be required to be designed as part of an integrated project design. Permanent outdoor display areas would be required to be shielded from view by a wall and incorporated into 2 i the overall design of the building. Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements, outdoor displays and sales would be prohibited, except in approved area(s). The location(s) and design of all outdoor displays and sales areas would be required to be reviewed and approved as part of the overall site plan. Pursuant to the ordinance, any violation of any provision of the ordinance would be a public nuisance per se, and the ordinance would authorize the Director of Development Services to utilize the nuisance abatement procedure and provisions of Chapter 32A, as well as all other available remedies to abate or otherwise regulate or prevent violations of the ordinance. The ordinance would be effective throughout the unincorporated area of Butte County. All permit applications would be subject to review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). A copy of the above mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at the office of the County Counsel, 25 County Center Oroville, CA. Yvonne Christopher Director of Development Services 3 • . f 0 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE, SUMMI� OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board of Supervisors Room, County Administration Building, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, on the following: ITEM DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The following is a summary of the Ordinance Amending Butte County Zoning Regulations Set Forth in Butte County Code Chapter 24 by requiring that a Use Permit be Obtained Prior to the Construction and Operation of Large Retail Projects and Through the Addition of Design Standards for Such Projects: The proposed ordinance is intended to regulate the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects for the purpose of ensuring that environmental impacts which emanate from Large Retail Projects are mitigated by the owner of the Large Retail Projects, in order to ensure that the expenses of the mitigation of such impacts are not shifted to County taxpayers. The ordinance would add new sections to the County's zoning regulations which would require that a use permit be obtained in order to construct and operate a Large Retail Project. The new sections would allow the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects in the C-1 (Light Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial) and H-C (Highway Commercial) zoning districts of the unincorporated areas of Butte County. The new sections would also set forth design standards for Large Retail Projects. The ordinance would define"Large Retail Project" as any new commercial retail project, the total gross building area of which equals or exceeds 25,000 square feet, including but not limited to mercantile uses, and or shopping center uses. The ordinance would add a new section to Butte County's zoning regulations prohibiting the construction and operation of Large Retail Projects unless and until a Use Permit is approved and issued pursuant to the process set forth in Butte County Code Sections 24-45 et seq. That process necessarily involves at least one noticed public hearing in front of the Butte County Planning Commission. The ordinance would set forth mandatory design requirements for Large Retail Projects to provide developers of Large Retail Projects with guidelines for creating safer, efficient,pedestrian-friendly projects with human scale orientation, i 0 while discouraging large, nondescript buildings and"unfriendly"pedestrian design, limited landscaping, and vast non-shaded parking lots. The mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage adequate landscaping that allows large buildings and their components to blend with their surroundings, while providing screening and shade for the public benefit. The mandatory design requirements are also intended to encourage enhanced lighting and signage design, to avoid forms of nuisance and intrusiveness into adjacent areas, while enhancing public safety. The mandatory design requirements would require outdoor light fixtures to be shielded, to prevent excessive off-site light emissions. The mandatory design requirements would prohibit an uninterrupted and/or unadorned length of any portion of a building facade exceeding 100 linear feet. The mandatory design requirements would require building facades to include patterns at intervals of no more than 30 feet either horizontally or vertically. The mandatory design requirements would require predominant exterior building material to include architectural or split face block, brick, glass, wood, stucco, artificial stucco, stone or concrete with architectural finish. Where a Large Retail Project is designed to contain individual stores with separate, exterior customer entrances, the mandatory design requirements would require windows of specified sizes on building facades. The mandatory design requirements would require flat roof lengths, longer than 100 feet in length to be concealed or addressed utilizing at least one of several specified options. The mandatory design requirements would require design features that enhance pedestrian safety, efficiency, and connectivity with a clear definition between vehicular areas and pedestrian walkways. The mandatory design requirements would require design features such as pedestrian amenity areas that include landscaped sitting areas with design components such as covered seating elements and/or other amenities in shaded areas. The mandatory design requirements would require parking areas to be broken up into units of no more than 100 parking spaces, clearly separated by landscaped or weather-protected pedestrian walkways, significant landscape or geographic features and/or by design components of the proposed building(s). Pursuant to the mandatory design requirements Foundation landscaping would be required for at least fifty(50%)percent of the facade length and located between the drive aisle and the first vertical wall of the facade of each building. Every ten (10)parking spaces would be required to be designed with a minimum 400 square 2 60 feet of landscaping to be placed in medians or islands and include at least one over-story tree, one under-story tree and six shrubs. The ordinance would be effective throughout the unincorporated area of Butte County. All permit applications would be subject to review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If you challenge the Zoning Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Division at, or prior to, the public hearing. A copy of the above mentioned ordinance is available for public inspection at the office of the j County Counsel, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA. Yvonne Christopher Director of Development Services To be published in Chico Enterprise Record, Oroville Mercury, and Paradise Post on Thursday, November 27, 2003, in the Gridley Herald on Friday, November 28, 2003. 1/8 Page Display Ad Dark Border 3