HomeMy WebLinkAbout039-530-018•
]Vlemorandum'o -- °"-
TO: Land Conservation Act Advisory Committee Members
Meeting of February 21, 2006
FROM: Dan Breedon, Principal Planner and Steve Troester, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Request for Immediate Partial Cancellation of Williamson Act Contract of
M&T Incorporated, 1976.
APNs: Portions of. APN 039-530-018 and 020.
Project Size: Two sites, 106.6 acres and 43.76 acres, adjacent to Little Chico Creek.
Location: Approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of Chico Urban Limits on
River Road, approximately 2.6 miles south of the intersection of Chico
River Road and River Road, Butte County.
Landowner/Petitioners: Pacific Trust Realty Associates L.P. (Pac Trust)
DATE: February 14, 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Department of Development Services
Planning Division
Pacific Trust Realty Associates is. requesting Immediate Partial Cancellation of the
Williamson Act contract on a 106 -acre portion of land contained within portions of
Assessors Parcel Numbers 039-530-018, 020. It is staff's .a assessment and
recommendation that the. findings required in government code Section 51282 for the
Board of Supervisors to approve the tentative cancellation can be made.' Those findings
are found detailed in this staff report.
The original M & T Inc. Williamson Act contract of December 11, 1975 (see Attachment
A) applies to 9,101 acres of land. Pacific Trust Realty owns approximately 8,000 acres
of this contracted land. The petitioners are requesting immediate cancellation of 106
acres only on Assessor's Parcel Numbers. 039-530-019, 020 (see Petition, Attachment B).
The proposed cancellation is for land located on land zoned A-40, with General Plan
•
-■ Butte County Department Of Development.Services IR
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
■ Page Iof16■
• designation of Orchard and Field Crops. This land is a portion of the M&T Chico Ranch
approximately 1.5 miles east of the Sacramento .River:- The project site is located on
property historically used for agriculture, and consists of graded and un -graded areas. The
proposed alternative use of this land is for a gravel mining and processing facility.
The LCA contract on this property allows sand and gravel operations as a permitted use
subject to a use permit granted by the County. The Development Services Department is
currently processing the landowner's Mining Project application, which includes a use
permit and reclamation plan. A Draft Environmental Impact Report has been circulated
for this mining application and Williamson Act cancellation. Pursuant to the November
18, 2002 comments from the Department of Conservation (DOC) on the Draft EIR
stating that the proposed mining project was incompatible with the Williamson Act, on
October 11, 2005 the applicant voluntarily submitted a Petition of Partial Cancellation
(Attachment B).
The Land Conservation Act advisory committee will review the petition for cancellation
and study findings which may support the requested cancellation. The Committee will
then make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on this petition for cancellation.
The Department of Conservation has provided comments on this immediate cancellation
petition (see DOC letter of November 28, 2005, Attachment C). The staff analysis
detailed herein concludes that it is possible to make the findings required for approval of
this cancellation request.
•
Proposed Alternative Use:
The applicant proposes to replace the current agricultural uses with a long term off -
channel construction aggregate mining operation located adjacent to Little Chico Creek.
The proposed project would include sand and gravel surface mining on approximately
106 acres of "cancellation" land, eventual mining on 85 acres (land now under "non-
renewal", expiration 2015), and 44 acres of land (now under "non -renewal", expiration
2015) for crushing and screening operations. Approximately six acres would be mined
each year. In total, a 235 -acre area would be in use by the project over a 20 to 30 -year
period. The end use of the mine site would include an over -wintering pond for waterfowl
and associated' aquatic and wetland fauna. Mined areas would be reclaimed
incrementally to open—water, wetland wildlife habitat and agriculture. Concurrent
reclamation would begin after the first five years of mining. Approximately 600 linear
feet of lake perimeter would be created each year. Temporary topsoil stockpiling would
take place on approximately two acres. The aggregate would be processed on an
approximately 40 -acre area of the site. The applicant is no longer proposing ready -mix
concrete and asphaltic concrete preparation on this project site.
U
Background:
On April 22, 1996 Baldwin Contracting Company (BCC) and the owner of the M&T
Chico Ranch, Pacific Realty Associates, L.P. executed a lease for approximately 626
acres on the M&T Chico Ranch. A sand and gravel operation is proposed for a 235 -acre
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06702)■ February 14, 2006
■ Page 2of16■
• portion of this land. On August 30; 1996' BCC filed a use permit and reclamation plan
application with the County to mine sand and gravel from approximately 235 acres of the
Ranch. In September 2002 the County released the Draft EIR and received the
November 18, 2002 comments from the Department of Conservation (DOC) stating that
the proposed mining project was incompatible with the Williamson Act. On October 11,
2005, the applicant voluntarily submitted a Petition of Partial Cancellation (Attachment
B) for a 106 -acre portion of the land. In addition, Pac Trust filed a Notice" of Partial
Nonrenewal for the 106 acres to be cancelled (Attachment D). On November 28, 2005
DOC commented on the applicant's Petition for Partial Cancellation and concurred that
the "consistency" findings required for cancellation could be met (see page 3, DOC
Letter, Attachment Q.
Butte County Process:
The landowner's request for partial cancellation is in addition. to other land use
entitlements being requested by the applicant. These entitlements include approval of a
mining permit and reclamation plan, under a project EIR. The Land Conservation Act
(LCA) Committee will review and assess only the request for immediate cancellation and
will make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission will
consider certification of the EIR and will take action on the mining permit and
reclamation plan applications. The Petition for Immediate Cancellation must be reviewed
by the Board of Supervisors. If the Planning Commission's decision is appealed, then the
entire entitlement package, along with the Petition for Immediate Cancellation, will go
• before the Board of Supervisors for decision. If no appeal of the Planning Commission's
actions is filed, the Board will only take action on the Petition for Immediate
Cancellation, based on the LCA Committee's recommendations. The Draft EIR prepared
for the project also assesses the immediate cancellation of the Williamson Act I contract
for environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA.
STATUS OF LAND
The land proposed for cancellation consists of approximately 106.6 acres out of
approximately 8,000 acres under the LCA Contract. The land to be cancelled is located
on Assessor's Parcel Numbers ("APN") 039-530-019 and 020. References to the Draft
EIR in this report are intended as a source of background information. The County
recognizes that the Planning Commission has authority to consider certification of the
EIR under CEQA prior to acting on, the project. The subject property has a General Plan
designation of Orchard and Field Crops and it is zoned Agricultural 40 -acre minimum.
Attached is a Diagram Depicting the Nonrenewal and Partial Cancellation Parcels, which
are adjacent to Little Chico Creek (Attachment E).
Current Agricultural Uses/Potential:
The proposed cancellation is located in an area generally considered to be productive
irrigated farmland. _ However, the cancellation land itself is not irrigated. Due to the
• unleveled and hummocky terrain of the land, the operator of the agricultural operation
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
■ Page 3of16■
• has considered this land to be less valuable than other lands on the M&T Chico Ranch.
The DRAFT EIR conducted on the project concluded that, "based on an evaluation of the
project soils, flooding frequency, crop records from pervious years and other data, the site
does not meet the Williamson Act criteria for prime farmland". Most of the project, and
all of the mining activities, would occur on un -graded land. - The current uses on the site
include infrequent dry -land safflower and wheat farming and a small, abandoned gravel
barrow site.
Aggregate Production Potential:
Under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) (Cal. Pub. Resources § 2710
et seq.), the State Geologist/Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) is required to
classify, based solely on geological factors, areas specified by the State Mining and
Geology Board as areas that may contain one of the following:
(1) Areas containing little or no mineral deposits.
(2) Areas containing significant mineral deposits.
(3) Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which requires
further evaluation.
(Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 2761(b).)
The primary goal of this mineral classification is to ensure that the mineral resource
potential of lands is recognized and considered before land -use decisions that could
• preclude mining are made. In 2000, the SMGB approved a petition by KRC Holdings,
Inc., and ordered DMG to assess and classify mineral resources on the M&T Chico
Ranch, including the land to be cancelled (Attachment 5, DMG Open -File Report 2000-
04, Mineral Land Classification of the KRC Holdings Inc: M&T Chico Ranch Site; Butte
County, California, for Construction Aggregate Resources). The DMG classifies the land
based on its value to the region as an aggregate resource. DMG evaluates the deposit and
its suitability as a marketable commodity based on available tonnage, volume, and quality
of the resource.
The DMG concluded that, with appropriate processing, the aggregate reserve on the
M&T Chico Ranch is a significant mineral reserve, and therefore, the DMG classified the
property MRZ-2a. The MRZ-2a classification is defined under ' state regulations as
follows:
Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate that
significant measured or indicated resources are present. NI Z-2 is divided
into MRZ-2a and MRZ-2b on the basis of degree of knowledge and
economic factors. Areas classified MRZ-2a contain discovered mineral
deposits that are either measured or indicated reserves as determined by
such evidence as drilling records, sample analysis; surface exposure, and
mine information. Land included in MRZ-2a is of prime importance
because it contains known economic mineral deposits.
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
0 Page 4 of 16 ■
• (DMG Open -File Report 2000-04, Mineral Land Classification of the KRC
Holdings Inc. M&T Chico Ranch Site, Butte County, California, For Construction
Aggregate Resources, p. 4 [Attachment F])
Mineral Land Classification in Northern California:
The California State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB has established guidelines for
the classification and designation of mineral lands throughout the state. The California
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975 mandated initiation of Mineral
Land Classification by the State Geologist to help identify and protect mineral resources
that may be subject to urban expansion or irreversible land uses which would preclude
mineral extraction. SMARA also allowed the SMGB, after receiving classification
information from the State Geologist, to designate lands containing mineral deposits of
regional or statewide significance.
Currently, the State Geologists' SMARA classification activities are carried out under a
single program for urban and non -urban areas of the state. Mineral lands are mapped
according to jurisdictional boundaries (by county) using the California Mineral Land
Classification System. Priority is given to areas where future mineral resource extraction
could be precluded by incompatible land use or to mineral resources likely to be mined
during the 50 -year period following their classification (Susan Kohler, Aggregate
Availability in California, 2002 [Attachment G]).
• The State Geologist, in preparing Mineral Land Classification Reports, prepares an
estimate of the total quantity of construction aggregate that will be needed to supply the
requirements of the county or marketing region for the next 50 years. A marketing region
is defined as the area within which such material is usually mined and marketed. The
amount of construction aggregate needed for the next 50 years is projected using past
consumption rates adjusted for anticipated changes in population. Statewide, the
California Geological Survey has identified 32 aggregate resource areas that cover only
about 25 percent of the state, and supply aggregate to about 90 percent of California's
population. The northern portion of the state includes Butte County. While the California
Geological Survey identifies Aggregate Production Areas within the northern portion of
the state, it does not compare 50 -year demand to permitted. resources. This is because
this northern area is not one of the state's major population regions and because area -
wide mineral land classification studies have not been completed. No area -wide mineral
land classification studies are planned for this northern area of the State.
50 -Year Aggregate Reserve Shortage in Butte County:
As there have been no area -wide mineral classification studies completed for Butte
County, the October 2003 Final EIR for the project undertook a detailed analysis to
estimate Butte County demand and supply for construction aggregate. The EIR assessed
factors such as local population growth, per capita statewide consumption rates, market
area, local demand, and local supply from the 16 current construction aggregate
operations in Butte County. The analysis in the EIR concludes (pp. 4.09-19) that:
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
■ Page 5of16■ .
• "When compared to the current estimates of supply, the County may currently have
approximately 40 percent of its 50 -year demand and, without permitting of
additional reserves for development, could exhaust aggregate supplies before 2030.
While actual conditions will vary based on a number of factors, including actual
unreported supplies and production levels (which vary in response to the economy
and local growth) it is clear that the. County will. need new aggregate production if
demand is to be met."
CANCELLATION ANALYSIS
Williamson Act Cancellations
A Williamson Act contract is an enforceable restriction pursuant to Article 13, section
8 of the California Constitution and §51252. Williamson Act contracts are not
intended to be cancelled and in fact, cancellation is reserved for unusual situations.
Therefore, the nine-year nonrenewal process has been identified as the legally
preferred method for terminating a Williamson Act contract. .
2. The Supreme Court has stated that cancellation is not appropriate where the
objectives served by cancellation could be served by nonrenewal, (See Sierra Club v.
City of Hayward (1981) 28 Cal.3d 840, 852-853).
• 3. The State of California's Attorney General's Office has opined that nonrenewal is the
preferred contract termination method: "If a landowner desires to change the use of
his land under contract to uses other than agricultural production and compatible uses;
the proper procedure is to give notices of nonrenewal pursuant to section 51245." (54
Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen 90, 92 (1971)).
4. Williamson Act Contracts may nevertheless be immediately cancelled in
circumstances when Cancellation Findings can be made and a cancellation fee is paid
in accordance with the Williamson Act and as discussed in the following three
sections.
Williamson Act Cancellation Findings
1. Depending on the date of contract approval, some of Butte County's Williamson Act
contracts require that both public interest and consistency findings be made in order
to approve an LCA contract cancellation. Per the requirements outlined in the
original M & T Inc. Williamson Act contract of 1975, the Board of Supervisors may
grant tentative approval for Cancellation of a Williamson Act contract if it makes
either public interest or consistency findings. The County's LCA implementing
resolution 2000-49, Section I. 1. states that, "Immediate cancellation may occur if the
requirements and findings of Government Code Section 51282 are satisfied. " Section
51282 requires only that either public interest or consistency findings be made. The
two categories of findings that could be made to cancel this contract:are as follows:
0 Butte County Department Of Development Services e
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
■ Page 6of16■
• A. Public Interest Findings:
• In order to find that the cancellation is in the public interest , GC 51282 (a)
and (c), the Board of Supervisors must find:
(1) That other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the
Williamson Act; and,
(2) That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both available and
suitable for the proposed use, or, that development of the contracted land
would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (GC
§51282(c)): _
OR
B. Consistency with Williamson Act Findings:
• In order to find that the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the
Williamson Act, GC 51282 (b), the Board of Supervisors must find:
(1) That the cancellation is for land on which a notice of nonrenewal has been
served.
(2) That cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands
from agricultural use
• (3) That cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent with the
applicable provisions of the city or county general plan.
(4) That cancellation will not result in discontiguous patterns of urban
development.
(5) That there is no prokimate, noncontracted land which is both available and
suitable for the proposed use or that development of the contracted land would
provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (GC §51282(b)).
Cancellation Applicant's Petition and Proposed Findings: .
The applicant's Petition to Cancel Land Conservation Agreement (Attachment B) was
received October 17, 2005. In this petition the applicant presents supporting arguments
and justification for both "public interests" -and "consistency" findings for cancellation, .
even though only one or the other set of findings is required.
FINDINGS SUPPORTING CANCELLATION PREPARED FOR LCA
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION:
The Department of Development Services staff analysis concludes that it is possible to
make the findings required for approval of this cancellation request. In its comment letter
•
e Butte County Department Of Development Services ■ .
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
■ Page 7of16■
• of November 28, 2005, the Department of Conservation, "concurs that the consistency
findings required to cancel the contract can be met". While staff believes that it is only
necessary to make "consistency" findings in order to approve the tentative cancellation,
request, the applicant has requested that "public interest" findings also be presented for
consideration. Staff has therefore prepared the following draft findings for consideration
by the LCA Committee, as provided by,the applicant:
A. Public Interest Findings:
In order to find that the cancellation is in the public interest GC 51282 (c), the Board of
Supervisors must find as follows:
(Public Interest Finding 1) That other public concerns substantially outweigh the.
objectives of the Williamson Act.
The aqpplicant offers the following in evidence to support this finding:
a) There are several public concerns that substantially outweigh the
objectives of this chapter, including the local and statewide aggregate
shortage, the County's need for more affordable housing, and the
County and statewide need for reduced air pollution.
• b) The shortage of aggregate throughout the State and Butte County is
an ongoing and serious problem. Aggregate makes up. products
ranging from homes, hospitals, roads, airports, shopping centers, to
sewer and stormwater systems. (M&T Chico Ranch Final DRAFT
EIR, pp. ' 4.0-9 — 4.0-22; Susan Kohler, Aggregate Availability in
California (2002)' [Attachment G]). The average 1,500 square -foot
home with infrastructure requires approximately 328 tons of sand and .
gravel and 202 cubic yards of concrete.I( bid.) The California
Department of Conservation estimates that every person in California
consumes approximately seven tons of aggregate per year. (Ib� 'As
the state's population increases, its need for aggregate increases,
while available sites and reserves decrease.
c) On a state level, California has a tremendous shortage of aggregate.
(M&T Chico 'Ranch, Final DRAFT EIR, pp. 4.0-9 — 4.0-22; Susan
Kohler, Aggregate Availability in California (2002) [Attachment G]).
On a local level, the County only has 'approximately 40 percent of its
50 -year demand for aggregate permitted. Put another way, the
County has a 60 percent aggregate deficitI( bid.).
d) Butte County, also has a shortage of low-income housing. (Butte
County General Plan, Housing Element). This sand and gravel mining
operation will provide an additional source of local available
M Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
■ Page 8of16■
iaggregate. This, combined with lower costs from , shorter
transportation distances ,will result -in -lower priced aggregate and,
among other things, lower. construction costs that will facilitate,
economic construction and more affordable low income housing.
Susan Kohler, Aggregate Availability in California (2002) [Attachment
G]).
e) Lastly, by ensuring a local. supply of sand and gravel, the County will
maximize the opportunities for potential air emissions reductions
associated with haul trucks. The demand for aggregate is based on
population, and as such there is a constant increase in the demand for
aggregate regardless of location. If there are insufficient local sources
of aggregate, aggregate will be. hauled in from outside the County.
This means longer truck trips within the County and more air pollution
related' to haul truck emissions. By locating another local sand and
gravel source within the County, the County maximizes its
opportunities for air emissions reductions.
Analysis of the Applicant's Proposed Public Interest Finding 1:
Staff has reviewed and assessed the five proposed findings offered by the applicant above
and concludes (given the information and evidence currently available) that the following
may be considered as -valid findings of "public interest":
• (Public Interest Finding 1)
• When compared to the current estimates of supply and demand carried out by
the project EIR, Butte County appears to currently have approximately only
40 percent of the permitted aggregate mining operations. needed to meet its
50 -year demand for construction aggregates.
• Without the permitting of additional aggregate mining reserves for
development by .the County, current permitted aggregate supplies . could
I xhaust before 2030. It is clear that the County will need new aggregate
production if projected demand is to be met.
• The benefits of cancellation of Williamson Act limitations on the subject land
to allow aggregate mining would substantially outweigh the objectives of the
Williamson Act.
•
It is staff's assessment that, should the applicant wish the County to consider the.findings
they have proposed related to air pollution reduction and production of affordable
housing, the applicant would need to provide additional substantive evidence of facts,
fact -related reasonable assumptions, and analysis for County consideration in support of
those findings.
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
LCA Committee— M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
■ Page 9of16■
• (Public Interest Finding 2) That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both
available and suitable for the proposed use, or, that development of the contracted land
would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (GC §51282(c)).
a) As used in this subdivision "proximate, noncontracted land" means land not
restricted by contract pursuant to this chapter, which is sufficiently close to land
which is so restricted that it can serve as a practical alternative for the use which
is proposed for the restricted land.
•
b) As used in this subdivision "suitable" for the proposed use means that the salient
features of the proposed use can be served by land not restricted by contract
pursuant to this chapter. Such nonrestricted land may be a single parcel or may be
a combination of contiguous or discontiguous parcels.
c) To serve as a "practical alternative" any alternative land must have a sufficient
mineral reserve to support the proposed sand and gravel operation. "Suitable"
means "the salient features of the proposed use can be served by land not
restricted by contract pursuant to this chapter." (Ibid.) "Available" means
"property that is available for sale." (Friends of East Willits Valley v. County of
Mendocino (2002) 101 Cal.AppAth 191, 207-208)..
d) It is therefore reasonable to find that there is no proximate, noncontracted land
which is both available and suitable for the proposed use, as the land immediately
surrounding the proposed project site is under Williamson Act contract (see
Attachment H, Surrounding Williamson Act Land Map). It is also reasonable to
find that there is no other land, proximate or otherwise, in Butte County that
DMG has classified as a significant aggregate mineral resource (Draft EIR, p. 4.0-
17).
(Public Interest Finding 2 Alternate)
The finding option, "that development of the contracted land would provide more
contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate noncontracted
land," does not appear to reasonably apply to the situation of this petition for
cancellation. The subject property is approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of
Chico, amongst large tracts of agricultural land, and does not directly involve expansion
or development of a new or existing urbanized area.
B. Consistency Findings:
The second category of findings under which the Board of Supervisors could approve a
tentative Williamson Act contract cancellation is "consistency" findings. In order to find
that the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act, GC 51282 (b),
the Board of Supervisors must find as follows:
(1) That the cancellation is for land on which a notice of nonrenewal has been
served.
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
E LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0February 14, 2006
■Pagel0ofl6■
(2) That cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands
from agricultural use
(3) That cancellation is for an, alternative use which is consistent with the
applicable provisions of the city or county general plan.
(4) That cancellation will not result in discontiguous patterns of urban
development.
(5) That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both available and
suitable for the proposed use or that development of the contracted land would
provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (GC §51282(b)).
Consistency Finding 1: That the cancellation is for land on which a notice of
nonrenewal has been served.
a) A notice of non -renewal was provided on October 17, 2005 by the applicant
in accordance with the Government Code.
Consistency Finding 2: That cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of
adjacent lands from agricultural use.
a) The Agricultural Commissioner expressed a concern about fugitive dust
from the gravel mining operations impacting mite populations in adjacent
orchard lands. The Draft EIR prepared for this project proposes seven
mitigation measures (4.5-1b through 4.5-1h) to reduce fugitive dust
emission from the gravel operations to a less than significant level. The
Agricultural Commissioner also comments that much of this property is
within the 100 -year flood zone, and is unsuitable for cultivation.
b) All of the parcels immediately adjacent to the project are zoned
Agricultural 40 -acre minimum, and are located outside of the Chico urban
sphere of Influence. The project would not extend any urban services to
this area that would encourage non-agricultural development resulting in
removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use.
C) In general, the nature of sand and gravel .operations discourages
urbanization on adjacent lands, thus reducing the threat of conversion of
adjacent agricultural lands due to possible urban uses..
d) The project will be required by way of the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act (SMARA) to reclaim the area that is mined to re -use as .
open space land. Creation of open space land is compatible with adjacent
agricultural operations and is not likely to result in removal of adjacent
lands from agricultural use.
e) The adjacent prime agricultural lands are not likely to be removed from
agricultural production because those lands to the north, south and east are.
•
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services N
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
■Pagellofl6■
• under Williamson Act contract. The 173 -acre parcel (APN 039-020-005)
directly to the west of the project site is not 'restricted by the Williamson
Act, but is bisected by River Road and Little Chico Creek, and contains
orchards only on the northwest side of Little Chico Creek.
f) The Draft EIR specifically' states that the project will . result in the
conversion of non -prime agricultural farmland to open space, and that the
amount of agricultural land surrounding the site is abundant. In terms of
prime agricultural land loss, no significant cumulative land use impacts
are expected to result as a result of this project (Draft EIR, § 6.1.2, p. 6-3).
g) The Draft EIR also states that proposed mining and reclamation activities
would be similar in scope and equipment used when compared to ongoing
large-scale agricultural operations on other portions of the project site and
surrounding areas. It also states that the dust generated by the gravel
mining would be less than the dust generation associated with agricultural
operations. This supports that the impact of the gravel mining would
generate no greater impact than that of the existing agricultural operations
on adjacent land. (Draft EIR, § 4.2.3, p. 4.2-7). This concurs with the
DOC November 28, 2005 comment letter which concluded that the
proposed mining operation is unlikely to result in urban development
leading to the removal of adjacent land from agricultural use.
Consistency Finding 3: That cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent
with the applicable provisions of the city or county general plan.
a) The subject property proposed for cancellation carries the General Plan
designation of OFC Orchard and Field Crops. The "primary uses". in the
OFC designation are cultivation, harvest, storage, processing, sale and
distribution of all plant crops. One of the allowed "secondary uses" within
the OFC is resources extraction and processing. Therefore, the proposed
gravel mining use is found to be consistent with the allowable uses for this
land.
b) Policy 2.6.a. of the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element states as
follows: Encourage extraction and processing of identified deposits of
building materials and other valued mineral resources. Policy 2.6.b. also
states: Encourage the reclamation of lands subject to mineral extraction.
The proposed alternative use ,for the lands on which cancellation are
requested is consistent with both of these policies.
C) Policy 6.6.a. of the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element states as
follows: Encourage the creation and expansion of natural and wilderness
areas. The project proposes that mined areas will be reclaimed
incrementally to high-quality open —water, wetland wildlife habitat and
agriculture. Concurrent reclamation will begin after the first five years of
mining. Approximately 600 linear feet of lake perimeter will be created
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006
0Page 12 of 16■
each year. Creation of new wildlife habitat is consistent with this policy
of the General Plan.
Consistency Finding 4: That cancellation will not result in discontiguous patterns of
urban development.
The majority of the adjacent property is farmland enrolled in the. Williamson Act. The
proposed land use following the partial cancellation is for a sand and gravel' operation.
Once mining is complete, the land will be reclaimed as open space (Draft EIR, § 4.2.2, p.
4.2-6, Reclamation Plan, p. 10). The processing area will be reclaimed for agricultural
uses (Draft EIR, § 4.2.2, p. 4.2-6). Courts have interpreted "contiguity" to require "actual
contiguity to existing urban development, either at the time of cancellation or soon
thereafter," or a "showing the owners of intervening parcels have the current ability and
intent to develop their land within a reasonable time." (Honey Springs Homeowners
Association v. Board of Supervisors (1984) 157 Ca1.App.3d 1122, at p: 1145). Thus,
anticipated urban development must be actual or pending, not speculative.
a) Under these principles; the cancellation and alternative use ,will .not
generate "discontiguous urban development" because there is no evidence
that adjacent properties will be developed in the foreseeable future. To the
contrary, prime agricultural lands enrolled in LCA contracts surround the
section of the parcel to be removed from the LCA Contract. These
• surrounding prime agricultural properties act as a "buffer," preventing
discontiguous urban development for the foreseeable future. This position
is . supported by the M&T Chico Ranch Draft EIR cumulative impact
analysis, which states:
Though the project will result in the conversion of non -prime
agricultural farmland to open space, the amount of agricultural
land surrounding the site is abundant. In terms of prime
agricultural land loss, no significant cumulative land use
impacts are expected to result as a result of this project (Draft
EIR, § 6.1.2, p. 6-3).
b) The .Draft EIR also supports the finding that the cancellation and
alternative use will not result in discontiguous patterns of urban
development by way of "significant growth -inducting impacts" (Draft
EIR, § 6.2, p. 6-4). The Draft EIR states:
The proposed project will not result in a significant increase
in employment or any increase in housing. No new roads or
public services would be installed as a result of the project
that will remove obstacles to growth. The project. would
make available aggregate materials used in a variety of
activities, including road buildings and maintenance and
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)E February 14, 2006
■Page 13 of 16■
construction. While the project will make these materials
available, it cannot be considered to be facilitating the
activities using aggregate materials. The project is not the
only source of these materials, and these activities will occur
regardless of the availability of the additional resources made.
available in this project. Therefore, the project would not
encourage or facilitate activities and create environmental
effects other than those addressed in this Draft EIR (DEIR, §
6.2, pp. 6-4 — 6-5).
C) The proposed use of the cancelled property as a sand and gravel mining
operation could -discourage urban. development in the surrounding area,
and thus, actually assist in the preservation of the prime agricultural. land
surrounding the sand and gravel operation.
d) The DOC has taken the position that the M&T Chico Ranch Mine will not
generate urban development. In a letter dated November 28, 2005, DOC
stated:
The proposed mining operation is unlikely to result in urban
development leading to the removal of adjacent. land from
agricultural use. The proposed mining operation is' consistent
with the County's General Plan. Findings related to urban
development are not applicable, as no urban development is
proposed. (Letter from Dennis J. O'Bryant, DOC Acting
Assistant Director, to Butte County, dated Nov. 28, 2005, p.
2 [emphasis added] [see Attachment Q.
Consistency Finding 5: That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both
available and suitable for the proposed use or that development of the contracted land
would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (GC §51282(b)).
Please refer to the analysis provided for this finding on page 10 of this report,
Public Interest Finding 2.
CANCELLATION FEE
1. The cancellation fee is payment made to cancel a Williamson Act contract .that
provides a private benefit that tends to increase the value of the property (GC
§51283(f)).
2. Prior to any action by. the Board of Supervisors approving tentative cancellation of
any contract, the county assessor must determine the current fair market value of the
land as though it were free of the contractual restriction (GC §51283(a)).
3. According the Butte County Assessor the cancellation, valuation for this property is
$920,000.
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
0Page 14 of 16■
• 4. Per the current Butte County Williamson Act implementing resolution, #2000-49, a
25 percent cancellation fee is required for lands that are immediately cancelled; one
half payable to the State pursuant to government code 51283, and one-half payable to
the County of Butte:
5. In this case, the cancellation fee payable to Butte County is equal to $115,000, 12.5
percent of the cancellation valuation of the property ($920,000): This amount was
determined by the Butte County Assessor's Office by their certification of valuation
of January 17, 2006 (Attachment I).
ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
Staff recommends that the Land Conservation Act Advisory Committee take some or all
of the following actions:
1. Review this Cancellation Petition suggested findings, the comments provided by
the Department of Conservation,. and the Findings Supporting Cancellation
Prepared for LCA Committee Consideration included herein.
2. Assess the adequacy and appropriateness of the findings for cancellation..
contained in this report..
3. If the Committee determines that the proposed required findings can be supported,
• pass a motion recommending that the Board of Supervisors approve the tentative
partial cancellation of the Williamson Act Contract for M&T Ranch Inc.
(Assessor's Parcel Number: 039-530-019, 020, Instrument No. 23188, recorded.
February 26, 1976) subject . to the condition of payment of the applicable
cancellation fee, approval of a mining permit and reclamation plan application for
the proposed sand and gravel operation, certification of the project EIR by the
Planning Commission, with the findings summarized below, pursuant to
Government Code Section 51282.
4. If the Committee determines that the proposed required findings are inadequate,
instruct the applicant to expand, modify, and/or provide additional analysis and
supporting evidence and analysis for any findings as appropriate. Staff will then
provide such modified findings and analysis for action by the Committee at a
subsequent meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A M & T Inc. Williamson Act contract of December 11, 1975.
Attachment B Applicants Petition for Cancellation.
Attachment C DOC Letter of Comment, November 28, 2005.
•
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee — M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)0 February 14, 2006
0Page 15 of 16■
• Attachment D Notice of Partial Nonrenewal,
Attachment E Diagram Depicting Nonrenewal and Partial Cancellation Parcels.
Attachment F DMG Open -File Report 2000-04, Mineral Land Classification of M&T
Chico Ranch Site, Butte County, CA Construction Aggregate Resources.
Attachment G Aggregate Availability in California (2002), Susan Kohler.
Attachment H Surrounding Williamson Act Land Map.
Attachment I Determination by the Butte County Assessor's Office of Valuation.
■ Butte County Department Of Development Services ■
■ LCA Committee - M&T Ranch Cancellation (CANC 06-02)■ February 14, 2006 .
■Page 16 of 16■