Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout041-260-059 (2)BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2006 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: - The meeting convened at 9:06 a.m. II. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Lambert, Marin, Wilson and Leland and Chairman Nelson ALSO PRESENT: County Counsel Felix Wannenmacher, Deputy County Counsel Development Services Pete Calarco, Assistant Director Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner Mark Michelena, Senior Planner Tina Bonham, Office Specialise, Senior Public Works Eric Schroth Environmental Health Doug Fogel III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA - Commission members and staff may request additions, deletions, or changes in the Agenda order. Commissioner Lambert asked if the Handi-Riders Use Permit and Tentative Parcel map could be switched. Stacey Jolliffe said the Negative Declaration must be taken'first. Agenda was accepted with no changes. IV. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR ON ITEMS NOT ALREADY ,ON THE AGENDA (Presentations will be limited to five minutes. The Planning Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking x action on any item presented if it is not listed on the Agenda) None. V. CONSENT AGENDA Consent items are set for approval in one motion. These items are considered non- controversial. No presentations will be made unless the item is pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Any person may pull an item from the consent agenda. The Chair will ask if any Commissioner or member of the public wishes to pull a consent item for discussion. None VL ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. Any items pul ed from the Consent Agenda will be considered. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION'■ MINUTES. December 14. 20(6 ■ PAGE I s None VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS The Chair will call for staff comments. The hearing will be opened to the public for proponents, opponents, comments, and rebuttals. The hearing will be closed to the public and discussion confined to the Commission. The Commission will then make a motion and vote on the item. It is requested that public initiated presentations be limited to a maximum of 5 minutes so that all interested parties will have an opportunity to address the Commission. Following your presentation, please print your name and address on the speakers sheet so that the record will be accurate. The recommendation of County staff is indicated below. It is only a recommendation and has not yet been considered by the Planning Commission. Copies of the Staff Report are available at the Planning Division Office i A. TPM 05-22 Staff recommends approval Name:. Terry and Ruth Smith' Project: Tentative Parcel Map TPM 05-22 Planner: Mark Michelena APN: 041-260-059 Zoning: U Location: On the north and south sides of Oregon City Trail, approximately 1600 feet east of Oregon Gulch Road, at 142 Oregon City Trail, Oroville. Proposal: Application to divide a 74 acre parcel into 3 parcels (21.46 acres, 20.06 acres and 32.73 acres). Mark Michelena gave a brief summary. He indicated that Public Works has a possible issue with Condition 12 that will create the need for a continuance. They need to determine if the applicant has legal access. Commissioner Lambert asked about Condition 16 which addresses access to each parcel from a County maintained road. Commissioner Leland asked if they would have to condemn an easement. Felix Wannenmacher said the County cannot delay recording of a map due to off site conditions. The applicant needs to prove a legal easement prior to approving the project. Mr. Michelena continued his summary. Commissioner Lambertasked about Condition 10 and what road the maintenance agreement was for. Mr. Eric Schroth said the road is Oregon City Trail. The road is private and maintenance of the road is up to the land owners. Chairman Nelson asked Mr. Schroth to address the easement issue. Mr. Schroth explained that if the project was approved and there was not a legal easement the Board of Supervisors would have to condemn an easement. He said that it appears the current legal easement is 250 feet short. Commissioner Leland asked what road the easement came out on. . ' ■ RT TTTE COT JNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES_ December 14. 2006 o PAGE 2 ■ Mr. Schroth said Oregon City Trail. Commissioner Leland wanted to know what would happen if the condition was deleted.. Mr. Wannenmacher answered that it is a standard requirement and allowing the project to go through without the condition can create large problems. He advised keeping the condition. Ms. Stacey Jolliffe said that under normal circumstances the Planning Commission would not have been presented with this project until the access issue was resolved, but the easement was missed and the project went farther than normal. Commissioner Leland asked if the project should be continued. Ms. Jolliffe said yes. Chairman Nelson asked which parcel didn't have the legal easement. Mr. Schroth said it was a 250 -foot segment on Oregon City Trail. Chairman Nelson opened the hearing to the public. Ms. Lorraine Lundy of L & L Surveying addressed the Commission. She gave a brief history of the project. She said that she did not receive a call about the easement issue until 4:15 the day prior. She was unable to do any research in such a short time' frame and said- that. it was handled unprofessionally. She asked that the project be approved with a condition to show a legal easement. She brought up Condition 17 Storm Water Permit. She would like it to say "may require a construction storm water permit". She said that other than that they are fine with the conditions and mitigation requirements. Ms. Ruth Smith addressed the Commission asking if they could get permission from the other two property owners for access. She said she has done all maintenance on that part of the road for years and the neighbors are happy for it. Chairman Nelson said it sounded like there wasn't going to be any problems with it, but the Commission needs to protect itself. Commissioner Lambert asked if there was a current road maintenance agreement. Ms. Smith said she could provide one, but that currently there isn't one in writing. Mr. John Christofferson from GDA Engineering told the Commission that in 1979 the properties immediately adjacent and easterly to this project came before the Planning Commission'and they obtained a Tentative Subdivision Map. The access to that subdivision was via Oregon City Trail. It is his opinion that there is legal access to that area. He brought up the fact that in the Subdivision Map Act it states that if the project owner is unable to obtain easements required for his subdivision ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 3 ■ then he takes it to the Board of Supervisors for their action and condemnation and the project owner has to pay for it. Chairman Nelson asked if anyone else would like to address the Commission. Seeing no one he closed the public hearing and confined comments to the Commission and staff. Commissioner Lambert brought up Mitigation 1. She has a problem with the language. She said she knows that it isn't in Orchard and Field Crops and that it isn't in Grazing and Open Land, but it is still agricultural land and she doesn't agree that the language is appropriate. She believes it can be changed to be re-evaluated and reconsidered once it has been removed from the Williamson Act, but they shouldn't require that the property remain under the Williamson Act in order for the 300 -foot buffer to be required. She keeps seeing the language and would like the Commission to think about it. She said that whether it is in the Williamson Act should have no bearing on whether the land should need to be protected by a 300 -foot buffer. Commissioner Leland asked if the agricultural element applied to the Unclassified zone. Mr. Chuck Thistlethwaite said there was final action taken through the Board of Supervisors through the adoption of a resolution that determined that the application of Agricultural Element Program 2.2 would be in areas designated Grazing and Open Lands or Orchard and Field Crops and also areas outside of established city limits or community boundaries. His understanding is that this no longer becomes a General Plan consistency issue, but is more a land use issue for the Commission to consider. Commissioner Lambert asked if this would still require the 300 -foot setback even though it is in the Agricultural Residential designation. Mr. Thistlethwaite said it is not required, but the Commission may impose a condition of approval to protect the agricultural use on the Land Conservation Act parcel. Commissioner Lambert reiterated her reasons why she does not like the language on Mitigation 1 Commissioner Leland said you have 3 reasons for imposing the 300 -foot setback. One, it is a General Plan requirement in an agricultural zone. Two, is because they need to protect the Williamson Act lands in order to get the County's subvention payments. Three, is just as a matter of general land use planning. The Commission would have to find that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the neighborhood. He wants to be careful because if they apply it here they would have to apply it to any subdivision that is next to an agricultural use. Commissioner Lambert said that is why she suggested changing the language, but not arbitrarily saying it's no longer required. Ms. Jolliffe said when this mitigation would come to bear would be when the map has been recorded and either the Smith's or some subsequent owner came forward to build a home. At that point in time they normally wouldn't be coming to the Planning Commission. She said that it would be helpful if the Commission gives the discretion to someone because if the Planning Commission ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES. December 14.2006 ■ PAGE 4 ■ imposes a condition or mitigation it would typically have to come before the Commission to reconsider it. Commissioner Lambert would be happy if the whole sentence was left out regarding the Williamson Act. Mr. Thistlethwaite said the staff report was prepared prior to the action taken by the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors still wants many conversations regarding Agricultural Element Program 2.2. Chairman Nelson requested to go over the easement issue again. He asked if staff wanted to deal with it prior to moving forward with approving the project. Mr. Thistlethwaite said staff would like more time to look into the easement issue. He said the reason is that the County could be placed into the position of having to act on behalf of the applicant to acquire property by exercising eminent domain. Commissioner Marin asked about going forward with a Motion of Intent. Chairman Nelson said he doesn't have a problem with the map, but he wants County Counsel and staff to feel comfortable before going forward. Commissioner Leland said he wants to continue the item until the applicant can show legal access. The Commission needs to look at making decisions on the 300 -foot setbacks on a case by case basis. His inclination for this project is to not provide that protection. Commissioner Lambert asked when staff and the applicant thought they would be ready to continue the item. Ms. Lundy said she would like January 11, 2007. It was moved by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Marin and unanimously carried to re -open the hearing and continue the item until January 11, 2007. B. UP 05-06 - Staff recommend approval Name: Handi-Riders of Northern California Project: Use Permit UP 05-06 Planner: Mark Michelena APN: 041-140-072 Zoning: U Location: On Flag Creek Road, approximately 3,500 feet east of Coal Canyon Road, Oroville Proposal: Use Permit to allow a Therapeutic Horseback Riding Center. Phase I of the project is proposing an enclosed arena. Phase II will include a classroom, office, tack room, and restrooms in the arena. The site is currently used as a horse facility. { Mr. Mark Michelena gave a brief summary of both projects. He did mention two additional handouts that were given to the Commission that were received after the initial packets were sent out. Ms. Jolliffe asked if the Commission would like to hear about the Tentative Parcel Map at this time or take it as a separate matter. Commissioner. Leland said there is so much new information that he thinks the item should be continued. ChairmanNelson asked if all the information had just come in. Mr.' Michelena ' answered that all new information was received from December 7h through December 13th: He expected the Commission would want to continue the item, but felt it was important that the Commission hear from Environmental Health and Public Works. Commissioner Lambert asked if there are any designated riding trails and if they are shown anywhere. Mr. Michelena said there are existing trails, but they are not proposing any new trails and they will not be allowed to ride off site. Commissioner Leland asked to hear about the Tentative Parcel Map and then provide everyone with an opportunity to discuss both items together. C. TPM 06-12 — Staff recommends approval Name: Handi-Riders Project: Tentative Parcel Map TPM 06-12 Planner: Mark Michelena APN: 041-140-069; 0772 Zoning: U Location: On the east side of Coal Canyon Road, one mile south (a southerly direction) of HWY 70 & Wheelock, and at the end of Flag Creek Road. approximately 3,500 feet East of Coal Canyon Road, North of Oroville Proposal: A tentative parcel map to divide a 133.0 acre parcel into two parcels (62 acres and 71 acres). A dwelling, accessory agricultural structures and a therapeutic riding center are located on the 71 acre (eastern) parcel. Mr. Michelena gave a brief summary. Commissioner Wilson asked if there was a small orchard and if it is being fanned. Mr. Michelena said yes there is a small orchard, but he doesn't know if it is being farmed. Chairman Nelson asked Environmental Health about the water. Mr. Doug Fogel said that Environmental Health is relying on a letter concerning the State Water System signed by Craig Erickson. The Use Permit will require that Handi-Ricers operation obtain a ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14,200-5) ■ PAGE 6 ■ State water permit for the operation of the water system. Craig was the person who assessed the site for water availability and quality. The source is primarily from springs. There is no evidence of contamination from the surface water. He did find chloroform bacteria so he has made the requirement to have a chlorination system. Having a water system will require they take samples from the water on a quarterly basis (which could be increased to monthly) and a complete inspection of the system every two years. There is a, requirement for a chemical analysis every three years. Regarding the Tentative Parcel Map the applicant was required to drill a well to provide water to the new parcel and it was found that water was available from that well. Environmental Health made the determination that if necessary a well could be drilled to obtain ground water which they feel is an acceptable source of water. Chairman Nelson opened the public hearing. Fredricka Holochwost is the President of the Board of Directors of Handi-Riders. She said there are some trails cut into the property. The trails were there when they bought it. She talked about the fact that students think a trail ride is going a short distance up the driveway and back. The majority of all classes are done in the corrals. She talked about the safety precautions taken with lead ropes and side -walkers. She wanted to explain that the private lessons are only for those individuals who can not function in a group class. There are no commercial lessons at all. She doesn't feel that speed is an issue on the road. All of their training, handouts, and orientation stress the speed limit.. She mentioned the only night lighting would be motion lights. Mr. John Christofferson from GDA Engineering said there are two projects. If the Use Permit is declined the applicant still wants to go forward with the Tentative Parcel Map. He asked the Commission to take action on the Tentative Parcel Map today instead of rolling the projects together and possibly continuing both projects. He said that all the new documentation received was for the Use Permit project. Mr. Jeff Carter is the attorney for Handi-Riders. He said that Handi-Riders was formed as a 501 C3 corporation. They have been in four locations prior to this one. He said this property is ideal. He believes staff has shown that the project is compatible with the area. He also believes that all the new information brought forward has been addressed by staff already. Commissioner Lambert asked who owned the land. Mr. Carter said that Mr. Nichols owns the land, but there is a lease option if the Tentative Parcel Map is approved. Commissioner Marin said he was reading the Minasian letter. He referenced page 4 line 3 which says the proposed development would turn a road utilizing the farming properties to move cattle into a major business thoroughfare. He said that he felt that farming is for business. He doesn't see a problem with that. Mr. Carter said he doesn't feel traffic will be an issue. Mr. Kurt Albrecht is a landowner south of the project. He said he has three concerns regarding water, Williamson Act, and Use Permits. He said he is concerned that test wells have not been done ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 n PAGE 7 ■ on site that shows adequate water supply for cattle, dust control, etc. In regards to the Williamson Act he doesn't think. the project was sent to the Department of Conservation. He is concerned that the applicant's intent for the Use Permitwould change after the Use Permit is =ssued. He asked that a condition be made that if Handi-Riders moved away the new owners couldn' t take the Use Permit and change it to a commercial operation. Commissioner Lambert asked if the Commission could. do that. Mr. Michelena said the Use Permit is very specific. It is a Use Permit for a therapeutic riding facility. c Mr. Carter said that as a non-profit corporation Handi-Riders can't sell for profit. If the corporation was dissolved it would have to give its assets to another non-profit corporation. Ms. Andrea Flood said the General Plan designation is Agricultural. She said Handi-Riders would have an impact on cattle and olives. She said that litter can cause death in cattle if consumed. She said her harvest trucks have been impeded. She doesn't agree with Mark Michelena's assessment of 10 trips per day. She thinks it is half that much. Her harvest is not during Handi-Rider's off season: She said that she put up the speed limit signs. She also said that although the reservoir belongs to the Nichols the water does not. Commissioner Leland asked where her parcel was. Mr. Michelena pointed it out on the map. Mr. Dan Nichols spoke about the water issues. He said that at no time have tie spring boxes gone dry. Two years ago he discovered two valves that control the flow in and out of the spring boxes to maintain a consistent water level. He said he does have the water rights to the reservoir which they will give over to Handi-Riders. Chairman Nelson closed the public hearing and confined comments to the Commission and staff. Commissioner Leland said he thinks that the new issue brought up is water, bu= they have testimony that there is a well. He would be willing to make a motion or decision. Commissioner Marin concurred. Commissioner Lambert said she doesn't have a problem with the'Tentative Parcel Map. Mr. Michelena wanted to clarify that the whole parcel is not under Williamson Act and the item did go to the Department of Conservation. No comments were received. Chairman Nelson asked if the Handi-Rider parcel would be under the Williamson Act. Mr. Michelena said no it had never been under the Williamson Act. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: ■ MINUTES, December 14, 200E ■ PAGE 8 ■ Commissioner Lambert asked if the water in the reservoir belongs to the oLve orchards can Mr. Nichols assign his water rights to Handi-Riders. Mr. Nichols. said that he has a water sharing agreement and that his allotment is designated for any use. Mr. Felix Wannenmacher said he hadn't seen the agreement. He said in tells of availability of water he would need to rely on Environment Health staff and the evaluation j_hat was done. Mr. Fogel said that Mr. Erickson knew the full scope of the project prior to making his recommendation. Ms. Flood said, that the Commission could contact Jim Bundy at PG&E who has copies of the contracts. Chairman Nelson asked if regardless of the reservoir is there adequate water.. Mr. Fogel said there is adequate water for people. He said that dust control was not part of the consideration. Commissioner Lambert asked if it was drinkable water. Mr. Fogel said there are no known sources of ongoing contamination and all wells are deemed drinkable water. Chairman Nelson asked if the environmental documentation was for both prcjects Ms. Jolliffe said there is one Initial Study for both projects. The Commissio-a would first need to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to taking action on either project. It was moved by Commissioner Leland, seconded by Commissioner Lambert and unanimously carried to adopt Resolution PC06-71 and approve the Tentative Parcel Map 0& 12 for Handi-Riders adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in connection with 6e staff report dated December 14, 2006, subject to the findings and conditions. The following is the motion for the Use Permit for Handi Riders. It was moved by Commissioner Leland, seconded by Commissioner Wilson and carried to adopt Resolution PC06-72 and approve the Use Permit 05-06 for Handi-Riders and relying on the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in connection with staff report dated December 14, 2006, subject to the findings and conditions by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Leland, Marin, Wilson, and Chairman Nelson NOES: Commissioner Lambert ABSENT: No one. ABSTAINED: No one ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14,200E ■ PAGE 9 ■ UP06-0020 - Staff recommends approval Name: Smucker Quality Beverage Project: Use Permit UP06-0020 Planner: Mark Michelena APN: 040-310-030 and 010 Zoning: M-1 Location: On the north side of Speedway Avenue, approximately 1800 ft. east of Midway, south of Chico. Proposal: A Use Permit for expansion of the existing Smucker Quality Beverage facility. The expansion includes a new 22000 sq. ft. cold storage building, a new truck access drive, with limited use between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., and a relocated employee parking area, less that 100 ft. from a residential zone Mr. Mark Michelena gave a brief summary and history of the prior project. Commissioner Leland asked where the trucks would travel from. Mr. Michelena pointed out on the map where the truck route would be between 6a.m. and 9p.m. It is a circular route. Commissioner Lambert asked if the trucks could come in and back out off Speedway Mr. Michelena said that wouldn't be a feasible alternative. Commissioner- Lambert asked if it was physically possible. Mr. Michelena said yes and he would allow the applicant to address the truck routes. Commissioner Wilson asked how many trucks a day would be using that route. Mr. Michelena said he believes the number is fifteen. He said that since they are putting the cold storage on-site it would eliminate trips to and from the off-site cold storage area. Commissioner Wilson asked why a sound wall wouldn't do any good. Mr. Michelena answered that the person who did the noise study was available to comment on that question. Commissioner Wilson said he would wait until then. Chairman Nelson opened the public hearing. Mr. Randy Day thanked the staff for a thorough job. He said there are three items that need to be addressed about the business need for this project. The first one is new food safety regulations related to the Patriot Act. They have to control the raw materials from the time they purchase them. Quality is another item. The off-site cold storage facility they are using now is not adequate as far as temperature. Employee safety and cost are other issues. He said that the traffic flow now is very m. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 10 ■ congested with trucks sitting and idling out on Midway. He said that he believes with the new improved traffic flow that things will be better. Chairman Nelson asked if Smuckers had looked at putting the cold storage facility in a different area of the property. Mr. Day said they had. They hired Rolls, Anderson, & Rolls to look into circulation patterns, turning radius, etc. He said they have increased landscaping next to the residential area and on the building permit they have moved the building further south by twenty feet. Chairman Nelson asked what type of wall the applicant planned on putting in. Mr. Day said it is PVC light barrier. He said an analysis was done on the benefit of a sound wall. Mr. Al Beck from Eco -Analyst gave the Commission a summary of his analysis. His analysis showed that a sound wall would not do any good in this particular case. Chairman Nelson asked about parking lot noise. Mr. Beck said there could be some noise from shift changes or conversations occurring on breaks in the parking lot. Smuckers has worked to educate the workers that they are next to a residential zone. Chairman Nelson asked where the compressors are. Mr. Beck said the compressors will be internal. He continued with his noise analysis. Mr. Mark Carlson a resident near Smuckers spoke of how noisy it is to live there. He said that if. a sound proof wall works along freeways it should work for the neighbors. He asked for an 8 - foot wall and a 45 -foot setback. Ms. Jerrie Katz spoke of the toxic plume that is believed to be located on the Smuckers property. She asked that the project not be approved until the source of the toxic plume is identified. She also requested a sound proof wall. Mr. Shane Cummings said he was contracted by Smuckers to do a test with ground water and soil samples. He said that in his opinion the ten acres where the project site is located is not associated with the toxic plume. Commissioner Leland asked that Mr. Cummings address a letter received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control dated August 4, 2006, titled Draft Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Determination. Mr. Cummings said that he has not seen that letter. Stacey Jolliffe handed. -nm a copy. He said it may be Smuckers property that is the origination of the toxic plume, but Smuckers was not'the one to cause the .problem. It occurred years before under a different owner. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 20D6 ■ PAGE 11 ■ Commissioner Leland asked if the new construction on the property could release toxins in water or air and contaminate the neighbors. Mr. Cummings said he didn't believe that would happen. He spoke of the railroad who owned the property years before. Commissioner Lambert asked if the water level is shallow. Mr. Cummings said they encountered water at 12 feet. He said the water tests came back negative for various toxins. Mr. Michelena talked about Attachment M which was an email that was received the prior day from Eric Rappaport of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. He said the Regional Water Quality Control Board had determined that there was a high concentrated chlorine solvent dumped somewhere on the parcel, but where Smuckers is going to build the: amounts detected were minimal and is not believed to be the cause of the problem with the infiltration into the aquifer. Mr. Eric Rappaport spoke about testing the water for different neighbors near Smuckers. He gave a history of the parcel. He went over the email he sent that is now Attachment M. He said one of the concerns brought up was if Smuckers builds over the area that is determined to be the source of the toxins, then Smuckers would have to remove the building and slab so that cleanup can done. Commissioner Leland asked if construction on the parcel would make it worse. Mr. Rappaport said that a building may actually act as a buffer, but the toxic source needs to be cleaned up. Chairman Nelson asked about drilling a few wells to find the source of the toxic plume. Mr. Rappaport said it would help. He went into detail of what could be dor-e and talked about what you could or couldn't ask an applicant to do to test for toxins. Ms. Diane Gomer said she had submitted a letter regarding her concerns with diesel vehicles and the health effects of diesel fuel. She spoke of a guideline from the new Air Quality handbook. She said it stated that there should be 1000 -foot setbacks. Ms. Carolyn Lundberg went over the history of the property. She read aloud the letter she submitted regarding the Environmental Impact Report. She suggests that at the least Smuckers should provide more greenery and landscaping. Mr. Fred Woodmancy indicated his house is only 22 feet away from Smuckers. His biggest issue is the parking lot noise and lights at night. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14,2006 ■ PAGE 12 ■ Mr. Ken Reimers, said he. had just bought a house in the area. He asked if there was a plan to extend Speedway out to Entler Avenue. He also gave an example of a sounc wall on Tage Avenue to help with noise level. Mr. Beck answered that the reason there is a wall on Tage is because the hoLses are within 15 feet. He talked about the difference between County allowed noise levels ar_d what is considered irritating noise. His noise analysis shows that noise levels are within the legally acceptable range. Commissioner Leland said there are going to be fifteen trucks a day. He asked if they would be stacking the trucks. Mr. Beck said they will not be stacking the trucks. He showed on the map where the truck route was going to be. Mr. Michelena said that there is a condition that the trucks can't idle within 100 feet of a residential zone. Commissioner Leland asked if there is a certain length of time or if they are not allowed to idle at all. Mr. Michelena said they are not allowed to idle at all. Commissioner Leland asked where the trucks would be parking and possibly idling. Mr. Day went to the map on the back wall and showed the Commissioners flhe truck route. Chairman Nelson asked if there will be any additional employees. Someone answered that no additional employees will be needed. Commissioner Leland said Ms. Gomer was correct that the environmental c.ocument only talked about construction dust. It does not address trucks bringing in pollutants from diesel fuel. Mr. Michelena answered that staff analyzed it under existing conditions and that the number of trips would be reduced by having the cold storage facility on-site so the impact to the area would be reduced. He told the Commission that the condition that addresses idling is Condition 9. Commissioner Lambert asked if the trucks are currently going through the area now Mr. Michelena answered that the area she is referring to is an employee parking lot. Commissioner Lambert said that if it was currently a parking lot then technically the truck traffic is increasing in that area with the new proposal not decreasing. She asked if the trucks will exit on the ten acre parcel or will they be using part.of the twenty acre parcel ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 20 )6 ■ PAGE 13 ■ Mr. Day said one way to exit is through the ten acres. He said they would be willing to address the Woodmancy residence since it is so close to the operation. Chairman Nelson closed the public hearing and confined comments to the Commission and staff. Commissioner Lambert asked if it was permissible or possible to use the lea;h field area for parking. Commissioner Marin talked about the Kmart and Albertsons parking lot being on a leach field in Paradise. Mr. Fogel said he believes that if the soil is sandy they may be able to pave over it and park on it. Commissioner Lambert brought up the fact that the Commission can't tell applicants what to use their property for, but the additional acreage is riot being used and if used the impacts on the neighbors would be less. She said there is a difference between what is legally allowed for noise levels and what is morally allowed. The Commission has to make the finding that the project is compatible with the neighborhood. Commissioner Leland said he could approve this project with whatever mitigations are needed to make the neighbors happy. He agrees with Commissioner Lambert regarding the noise measurements and making the finding of compatibility. He would like to see some sort of masonry sound wall at least between the two parcels closest to the project. _-Ie isn't worried about the pollution in the ground water based on the reports he has seen. Commissioner Wilson said he could see the sound wall all the way down th-, line. Commissioner Lambert agreed: There was some discussion on where the wall should be on the north boundary. Mr. Felix Wannenmacher had the following corrections on page 13 Mitigation 2 the second part of the sentence needs to be changed to say "not impact". The same correction needs to be made in the environmental document. The Commission will need io make a separate finding under action one in the Resolution that would change Mitigation 2 to make it equEl or better because of an inadvertent omission in the language. Also, on page 16 number 11 it indicates that the site plan is Exhibit D, but it is Exhibit G. He would like to point out that Commissioner Leland brought up items that were not addressed in the environmental document, b --it in discussing those items with staff the Commission was made aware there was analysis on tho3e items. He also.said there was testimony that there was no discussion of the toxic nature of the site and he wonders whether there was circulation to the entity responsible for that. Mr. Michelena said that the Department of Toxic and Substance Control did not receive the document. . Commissioner Leland was concerned with all the materials that were brought forward and ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 14 ■ making sure that the Commission had addressed all those items. Mr. Charles Thistlethwaite said that although the document was not circulated to the Department of Toxic and Substance Control itwas routed to the Governors Office of Planning and Research. He believes that with the supplemental studies and other information the Commission can move forward with a decision today. Commissioner Leland asked if the Mitigated Negative Declaration properly addressed all the concerns brought forward today. Mr. Thistlethwaite said that if there were any new significant impacts that were not analyzed then more work would need to be done. If the Commission believes that a fair argument can be made based on substantial evidence in the entire record of the proceedings before them that an impact will not occur then they can move forward. Commissioner Lambert said -they should proceed with caution. Commissioner Marin said he believes that it is compatible with the zoning. Commissioner Leland said that he does feel comfortable with going forward with the motion with the changes requested by County Counsel. It was moved by Commissioner Leland, seconded by Commissioner Wilson and unanimously carried to adopt Resolution PC06-73 and approve the Use Permit 06-0020 for Smuck.ers Quality Beverage adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration dated November 9, 2006, w th staff report dated - December 14, 2006, subject to the findings and conditions, making the follow -rig changes requested by County Counsel, Mitigation 2 the second part of the sentence needs to be changed to say "not impact". The same correction needs to be made in the environmental document. The Commission will need to make a separate finding under action one in the Resolution that would change Mitigation 2 to make it equal or better because of an inadvertent omission in the languag,, on page 16 number 11 it indicates that the site plan is Exhibit D, but it is Exhibit G, recognizing all the new material brought forward in the meeting, and adding a new Condition 24 that requires the applicant to install an 8 -foot masonry sound wall along its north borders, the design is to be approved by the Director of . Development Services Department, and renumbering subsequent conditions. LUNCH BREAK -.1.50 p.m. to 2:20 p.m. 2:20 p.m. MIN 05-01 (UP 93-36) - staff recommends approval. Name: Mineral Resources, LLC Project: Morris Ravine Quarry Amended Use Permit Planner: Dan Breedon ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 200E ■ PAGE 15 ■ Assessor Parcel Numbers: 41-400-003, 41-220-050, 41-22C-051, 41-300-001, ' .41-300-047 Location: The Morris Ravine Quarry is located approximate' _y four miles north of the City of Oroville. The site is located on the eastside of Cherokee Road, near the intersection of Shirmer Ravine Road, in the Table Mountain area. Cherokee Road is located about two miles north of the Forebay Canal Bridge. Proposal: The proposed project under review proposes to amend the current Use Permit, UP 93-36 to: ' • Allow bulk -fuel storage at the site (diesel) • Change the hours of operation to°allow nighttime operations • Change materials to be mined from "silica sand" to include quarry. byproducts of aggregate, clay, and overburden rock • Make operational the above -ground waterline along Schirmer Ravine Road to augment water supply. at the quarry (this above-gr3und water line and associated storage tank have been already installed, but are not currently, operational) Commissioner Lambert asked if they need a reclamation plan since they are changing the materials mined. Mr. Dan Breedon said.there is not a proposal to change the reclamation of tf_e site. Commissioner Lambert asked if there was a reclamation plan in place. Mr. Breedon answered yes. He said it was approved in 1994. Mr. Breedon gave a brief summary of the project. He said that the applicant originally proposed a fifth project which they have now omitted. He tried to delete any references to that project in the staff report, but there may still be references in other documentation. He is adding a condition based on the Agricultural Commissioner's office request. They want to see a condition that states "Prior to mining permit issuance submit a weed management plan to the Agricultural Commissioners office for approval". He said on Condition 13 page 15 "construction" was misspelled and a space is needed between "above" and "ground". Also, on page 8 the reference should be "Attachment F Mr. Breedon wanted the Commission to be aware that this project incorporates all the old conditions. Commissioner Leland said page 9 Condition 18 should be Condition 19. Mr. Breedon went over a power point presentation. Four to five letters were received from the public and included in the staff report. Mr. Paul Ballard of Ballard Acoustical Consulting gave the Commission a summary of his analysis. Commissioner Marin asked what the definition for night time is when doing these types of studies. Mr. Ballard said 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. is the standard. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 16 ■ Mr. Breedon spoke of lighting and its impact and what conditions are being required to mitigate those impacts. Commissioner Lambert asked if the applicant was restricted regarding the bulk fuel storage. Mr. Breedon answered that the applicant did not originally ask to have bulk fuel storage on site in 1994. Commissioner Leland asked where the condition is that prevents the applieant from crushing any materials until a noise analysis can be done. Mr. Breedon said the project is not permitted to doing any crushing. He said they could get more information from the applicant on whether they intend to do any crushing at he site. Chairman Nelson opened the public hearing. Mr. Jim Prouty the manager of Mineral Resources said that the business plan is to make silica sand. They do not intend to do any crushing. He showed pictures and examples -of materials they are mining. Commissioner Lambert asked that since crushing materials was addressed in the environmental document how would the Commission not allow it. Mr. Breedon said the current amendment doesn't allow for crushing materials so if later on Mineral Resources wants to crush materials the applicant would have to amend the mining permit. Mr. Prouty went over their mining processes. Commissioner Lambert asked what the off peak hours are for PG&E. Mr. Prouty answered that during the summer off peak starts at 11 p.m. to 8:30 a.m., 8:30 a.m. to noon is partial peak, and peak is from noon until 6 p.m. He said that earlier this year they received a temporary permit to operate during off peak times and they reduced their operzting expense by $1.00 a ton during that time. Mr. Bill Ewing is a property owner adjacent to the mining operation. He is concerned with a pile of dead trees rotting on the property. He spoke of the noise from the backing app alarms. He is also concerned about the lighting. He asked how to find out about the reclamation plan. Mr. Breedon gave him his business card. Mr. Lee Edwards said there are two large modular structures on the property. He asked if they were permitted. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 17 ■ Mr. Breedon said that he had observed the two buildings. One building is a teEting lab and the other is an office. He doesn't believe they were permitted under the existing Use Rzrmit and he needs to speak with the applicant about them. Mr. Edwards does not believe the site is adequately screened. He asked if any Athe Commissioners had been up at the site. Commissioner Leland said he had been up at the site. Mr. Edwards asked if Commissioner Leland thought it was adequately screened from the road. Commissioner Leland said he did think the project was adequately screened. He said there was only a brief period while driving that he could see the site. Mr. Edwards said he does not believe that it is adequately screened. He went over a history of violations. He asked if the Commission could require a fence. Mr. Jeff Wyles had a question and comment about the noise level. He thought the noise analysis seemed short. Ms. Barbara Vlamis from Butte Environmental Council asked if there are any Use Permit violations and how many site inspections the county has done. She suggested using ar_ outside independent consultant for inspections. She also would like the public to know how to report violations when they see them. Mr. Ewing had more questions regarding the trucks and who is monitoring the actual loads per day. Chairman Nelson said he doesn't believe that anyone monitors how many trucks come and go at the project site. Ms. Ellen Simon said that Mineral Resources takes care of litter clean up on Cherokee Road and does a good job. She also asked about how flammable the diesel fuel tank will be and what is being done for that. Mr. Breedon addressed some of the comments made. He said that Mr. Ewinp comments about the wood would not be a permitted use on the property and the County would make it a requirement to have it removed. In regards to Mr. Edwards comments he said the mine was inspected last month by a third party and the inspection report is not completed. When it is completed the issue of the modular structures will be addressed. Chairman Nelson asked if the applicant pays for the independent consultant. Mr. Breedon said yes. The process started this last year and he has been working with the mining applicants on it. He addressed Mr. Edwards's concern that the visual mitigation has failed. He is putting a requirement in regarding a fence. He talked about using fast grow --ng tree species along with the fence requirement. He said he spoke with the Regional Water Qual_ty Control Board and was told that all violations were prior items that have been addressed and resolved on March 30, ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 18 ■ 2005. Nothing further has been cited. A permit was not required for the water pipeline due to its being agricultural land., Chairman Nelson asked where the public calls to report violations. Mr. Breedon said to call Butte County Development Services to report any complaint. He reiterated that the County is contracting out the mining inspections. He asked Paul Ballard to return and address the noise concerns that were brought up. Mr. Ballard said that the County's noise standard is 60 decibels and that the nearest neighbors only showed 35 decibels. Commissioner Lambert asked if the mine wanted to operate 24 hours 7 days a week. Mr. Prouty said yes. He also stated that the traffic is 72 round trips. Not 144 round trips. He talked about the different backing alarms they are using prior to the loud backing up alarm being activated. Chairman Nelson asked if the water system was permitted. Mr. Prouty said not from the building department. Commissioner Leland asked if the two structures were permitted. Mr. Prouty said they aren't using them and will be removing them. Commissioner Leland asked if there was a seasonal variation with noise level. Mr. Ballard said that atmospheric conditions can make sound travel further. They did their measurements in.November and he is comfortable that they have a good conservative snapshot of the noise level. Mr. Breedon said that there were 3 site inspections in the last year. Two had to do with Surface Mining and Reclamation Act and the third was an inspection with the Planning Manager Charles Thistlethwaite. He said with regards to fire hazards the California Department of Forestry did review the project. They had two requirements and they are in the loop regarding the ground fuel storage. Chairman Nelson asked if that meant that California Department of Forestry will be part of the inspection process. Mr. Breedon said yes. Chairman Nelson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wilson said he does not like 7 days a week. Commissioner Lambert said she agreed. ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 19 ■ 3 J Commissioner Leland said he drove out and looked at the site. He said there are very few houses and people out there. He said it isn't unreasonable for the applicant to want to go with a 24 hour 7 day a week operation. It gives the applicant the flexibility to do things more efficiently. Commissioner Marin said he concurs with Commissioner Leland. It was moved by Commissioner Wilson, seconded by Commissioner Lambert and unanimously carried to continue Use Permit 93-36 for Mineral Resources closed until January 25, 2007, adding the Condition "Prior to mining permit issuance submit a weed management plan to the Agricultural Commissioners office for approval", allow a 5 day per week 24 hour operation, and all required permits must be obtained, also making the following corrections Condition 13 page 15 "construction" was misspelled and a space is needed between "above" and "ground", page 8 the reference should be "Attachment F", and page 9 Condition 18 should be Condition 19. MIN 96-03 — staff recommends certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and approval of the project. Name: M&T Chico Ranch Mine Project: Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Mining Permit and Reclamation Plan, MIN 96-03). Planner: Pete Calarco APN: 039-530-019, 039-530-C20. Location: On a portion of the M&T Chico Ranch approximztely 1.5 miles east of the Sacramento River and approximately 5 -miles southwest of rhe City of Chico in an area north of and adjacent to Ord Ferry Road, east of and partially adjacent to River Road. Access to the site would be provided by River Road. Proposal: The project consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation. The mining would take place on 193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over a 20 to 30—year period. Reclamation would occur incrementally and would consist of the creation of open -water wetland wildlife habitat and agricultural uses. Th: aggregate would be processed (washed and screened) on a 40 -acre area at the site. An Environmental Impact Report is proposed for this project - In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act � CEQA), A forty-five (45) day public review period for the DEIR was previously p-ovided. This review period began on October 10, 2002, and ended November 25, 2002. The Planning Commission had considered certification in 2003; however, an additional issue regarding the California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act) needed to be addressed. As a result, the applicant filed a request for immediate cancellation from the Williamson Act contract for a portion of the property. The immediate cancellation request will be considered by the Board of Supervisors at a later date. Copies of the Final EIR were available for review on Novenber 20, 2006 on the Butte County Department of Development -Services website www.buttecounty.net/dds/planning and various County libraries. The Planning Commission will first consider certification of the FEIR as consistent with the ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 200E ■ PAGE 20 ■ I requirements of CEQA and then take action on the project. Please see attached transcript for the minutes of this item. VIII. GENERAL BUSINESS - This section of the agenda is to be utilized by the Planning Commission and Director of Development Services on items of interest, general discussion, or items for which staff has been directed to do research,and bring back to the Commission. Items A, B, & C may not always be addressed at every hearing, but will always be listed as part of the agenda. A. Directors' Report None. B. General Plan/Zoning Ordinance Update Mr. Charles Thistlethwaite gave an update on the General Plan. He explained the goals and informed the Commission of upcoming meetings they are invited,to attend. C. Legislative Case Law update None. D. Planning Commission Concerns None. IX. CLOSED SESSION X. MINUTES — None XI. COMMUNICATIONS - Communications received and referred. (Copies of all communications are available in the Planning Division Office) None XII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Cha' an Lambert . . ■ BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ■ MINUTES, December 14, 2006 ■ PAGE 21 ■