Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-099a~ •,~ # h4t~ y- 4 ~' ~r , ~ta~~sb a a ~ y ~~ ° w~3~:r~ .''~ ~iE~solution No. al-o9~ ,JOIN'T' RF,SOLI TTION OF TIIT? BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF "I'IIE COUN'TT OF BL,`TTF, APPROVING "1'IIE ADOI'"1'ION O1'' "1'HF, FOLL<)~~'ING GENERAL. PLAN AMEND~~F,N'1;S FROYI AC7RICUI~T't'R:~1I, R1~:,SID1,;N'T,IAI. TO LO~V DENSI"1'1' RESIDF,N'I'LAI.; FRO~~I ()RCHAI2D FIELD CI20PS I'O L(:~Mi~~1F,RCIAL; AND AN Ai11END~1T?N'1' "1'O "1'II1: DURHAM-DAYTON-NEh,SON PLAN FROM AGRICUI~ 1'URAL RESIDENTIAL. TO LOVt' DENSITY RESIDEN'T'IAL. V~'I IF,R1?AS, a private individual, Lee Colby, has petitioned tkre Butte Corrrrt}~ Plarlnil~g Corinuission anti Board oh Supetviscn~s, tlrrouglr cur appropriate application, to mend the Butte County Gcrrera] Plan Laird Usc Elcnrent surd Durhairr-Dayton-Nelson Plan for a change ti~onl .lgricultural Residential to Lc~~n~ Density Residential, for that. property identified on Exhibit A-1 attac•hcd hereto; and ~~~IIER1?AS, private inchviduals, Keith c~. Cheryl Arrclerson a.nd Greg ~ Linda Anderson, have. petitiorrcd the Butte County Planning Cornrnission and Board of Supervisors, through an appropriate. application, to amend the Butte County General P]a~r Ladd L1sc Element Tor a change fi~onr Orchard alyd Field Crops to Conuncrcial, for that. property idcntilicd ou I~xhibit B-l altachcd hereto; and ~~IIEREAS, the proposed General Plan Arnendrrrerrts have been studied and rcviclvcd by t.hc Butte County Plvlning Gornrnission and a public hearing held pursuant. to IaGV, at wliicli tirnc all interested persons wcrc hcru~d; a~rri ti's/I II?REAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has reviewed and considered the. contents of the Initial Studies {Exhibit A-2, B-2) prepared orr fire ainerrrhnent pursuairt to the C~ili(ornia l:~rvironnrcntal (duality Act; and ~VI IEREAS, the Butte County Board of Supervisors has heldhearirrg~s orr fire General Plan r'1n~endnrents at which all interested p~u~ties wcrc heard; and ~'IIEREAS, t11e Butte County Bo.u~d of Supervisors finds that the proposed anrcndnicnts comply «~itlr all clcnrents of the Butte Corrnt}~ General Plan and con~rprise an overall i~rtcrna]]y cc~nsistcnt whole, specifically: Colby General Ylan Amendment A. The proposed R-1 (Residential) zone is consistent with the proposed Low Density Residential General Plan designation. f3. The property is adjacent to other residentially zoned property to the north anti east and is located in proximity to other similar-sized residential developments in the Durham area. C. The remaining 25 acres of surrounding SR-i zone are not suitable for this General Plan Amendment and Rezone because the Urban Reserve Policy Statements of the Durham-Dayton Nelson Plan restricts large scale residential development until such time Chat adequate infrastructure and services are provided and because information is not available on the suitability of this area for on-site sewage disposal. D, Access to the property is provided by Goodspeed Street, a County road capable of accommodating the additional traffic allowed by the General Plan Amendment and Rezone if the land is subdivided. E. The Environmental Health Department indicates that soil conditions are capable of supporting on-site sewage disposal at the density proposed under the Conditional Zoning Agreement. F. Future development will be required to comply with Public Resources Code Section 42)0 regarding the provision of water availability in amounts adequate for fire protection and other fire safety standards. G. The proposal is consistent with the following Policies from the Durham-Dayton- Nelson Plan and Urban Reserve Policy Statements: This project is subject to the Urban Reserve Policy Statement of the Durham-Dayton- Nelson (D2N) Plan. The D2N Plan indicates that: 1) all property located within the Planning Area shall be managed as an Urban Reserve, not permitting rural residential development and uses on parcels less than three acres until such time as they are needed for adequate development and adequate services are available in the area; and 2) Any proposal for a General Plan Amendment, rezoning or subdivision which would permit parcels of less than three (3) acres to be used for residential use shall be coordinated with all public agencies which provide utility and public services for extension of water, sewer, circulation, drainage and shall be required to submit the following plans prior to or concurrently with the adoption (findings regarding this project have been provided in italics); 1. A capital improvement planlprogram that indicates where and when physical improvements are to be made, the size of these improvements, standards, phasing of treatment facilities and lines to service the area, and how they will be financed. This plan should be based on the desired land use pattern for future growth, the costs of initial service, and the continued operation costs to the designated area. T{te plzysieal improverr~ents of this develop»~e~zt are lir~iited to the access road, and the inzstallcntiora of utilities for 8 parcels, when a subdivision nucp is proposed. Tladsd inaprovennadnts will bd financed by tlae developer, prior to subdivisions nutp recording. Responasibld wul Trusted A~~>encie,c tivere consulted with respect to this project. However, nn off=site innnprovennsentts or infrastructure was deemed warrannted. 2. A park and open space plan that identifies locations and standards for park and recreation areas to serve future growth and natural open space areas that are to be preserved. This proposal will lad limited to the creation of 8 or fewer parcels by a Conditional Zoning Agrdensent. The Durham area is already sensed by the Durhwu Park; di~~,7lst additional pczrcdls would not place signsificant new demand on this park. No off=sits improvements or infrastructure is warranted. 3. An environmental plan that identifies critical areas that should be protected from development if applicable. 71te project was reviewed by stuff under ana Initial Study, which proposes a mitigated negative declaration, pursuwat to the California Environmenstal Quality pct. "1'hc Initial Studv diet not identify way critical areas that should be protected ,front developnaefst within the confines of the 2._5-acrd property. 4. A street and transportation plan that indicates the location, capacity, and nature of the system and off-site transportation impacts. Traffic impacts were reviewed by stuff under an Initial Standy, which proposd.ti~ a mitigated negative deelaratian, pursuant to the Cali~fornsia Environmental Quality Act. Tlae proposed General Plant t~nadndment wad Rdzonte may contribute additional traffic related impacts. However, it is not wtticipated that the eiglst additional batildinag sites allowed by subdivision of this site would generate an_y significant traffic impact. This is supported by data conztainted within the Initial Study, which indicates that 3,650 daily trips occurred on this section of Durltann-Dayton Higlswuy crud 4,090 daily trips occurred on this section of the Midway. The Assdssmdntt indicates that Durham-Daytona Highway and the Midway provides for a Level of Service (LOS) of "B". A LDS of "13" indicates an tcnrdstricted flow of trcnffic. 5. Health Department standards for control of septic systems and water wells. Areas where wells and septic systems are not permissible should be identified. The E~~vironf~ieratal Health Division indicutes that projects exceedilag IO110 gcdtons of sewage per acre should not be approved i~a tfae I~urhmn area to preve~u overloadi~tg flee gro~uidwuter wit{z nitrates. For this reason, t{u' applicant disclosed plults to conform to Environmental Healtft Division's reduirentents throttglz a proposal to develop 8 residelztial parcels, approximately 11,560 square feet in size. A Conditional Zoning Agreeme~at will er2sure that the Rezoned property cannot be developed at a higher density thaiz what has been approved by the Efwiroiametatal Health. 1)ivisian. The applicant has obtained water service, for the future 8-parcel subdivision from the Durham Irrigation District. No wells are proposed for the, future development ut this time. 6. A fiscal plan that identifies the proportion of costs of public facilities and services that is to be reimbursed from new subdivisions. This proposal will be limited to the creatinn of 8 or, fewer parcels by a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Water service will be provided by the Dunc~un Irrigation District. Sewer service is proposed by individatial on-site septic systems. The fi.rtztre access road will be installed by the developer. The proposed future H-parcel suhdivisirm will root involve the constructioat of public facilities or additional public sen~iees and all site inaproveme~zts will be funded b_y the developer. No off-site improvement or i~2 frastructure is warranted. 7. Durham Dayton Nelson Plan Policy 4. Goal IV This policy encourages development that fosters a compact rather than a scattered development pattern in order to discourage urban sprawl, reduce the cost of public services and preserve open space within the Planning Area. The proposal is consistent with this policy, since it proposes to cluster residential parcels around built subdivision improvements and existing public roads. Anderson General Plan Amendment A. This project is not considered to be urban development. Q. That the following conditions to be made part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement do in fact mitigate the identified impacts to less than significant: The building shall be substantially similar to that depicted on the conceptual exterior elevation submitted with the project. The final design and color of the building shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. (Mitigation Measure) 2. A parking layout and landscaping plan showing the location and types of vegetation to be installed, and the method of in-igation, shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The arrangement of parking stalls shall be made to minimize the number of spaces along Highway 99 and maximize parking spaces behind the building as much as possible. The parking spaces on the west side of the site shall be at least 100 feet from the west property line in order to protect adjacent agricultural uses. The area to be changed to Commercial General Plan land use designation and to be rezoned to C-1 shal] be moved 55 feet further to the west to accommodate the required separation. Trees and other landscaping shall be installed in the landscaped area adjacent to SR 99 and B Street frontages as shown on the site plan. The landscaping shall be installed pz-ior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or may be bonded for an amount to be determined by the Director of Development services or his or her designee. (Mitigation Measure) 3. All outside lights on the site shall be fully shielded and directed to prevent glare and excess light on SR 99, B Street, and surrounding parcels. (Mitigation Measure) 4. The commercial uses allowed on the site shall be agriculturally-related and shall be constructed as shown on the site plan, received by the Planning Division on March 23, 2001. A delicatessen may be established within the proposed 3,000 square foot building. The sale of wine shall be permitted, subject to obtaining the necessary State permits. (Mitigation Measure) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall apply far and receive approval of a Lot Line Adjustment to increase the size of APN 022- 170-060 to encompass the 8-acre (approximate) project site. Land divisions shall not be allowed on the resulting 8-acre parcel. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Measures shall be taken to contra) fugitive dust emissions during development of the site. Standard Mitigation Measures to prevent or reduce fugitive dust emissions can be obtained from the Butte County Air Quality Management District, (Mitigation Measure) 7. The existing trees within the SR 99 right-of-way shall be protected during site development. Each tree to be preserved shall be surrounded by a circular zone (minimum 40-foot radius) identified by an orange construction fence during construction activities. No vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or other development activities shall occur within the fenced area. (Mitigation Measure) 8. Prior to the issuance of building permits a plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works, Caltrans, and Reclamation District $33. The drainage plans for the Department of Public Works shall specify how drainage waters shall be detained on site andJor conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak flow runoff to said channel or facility. Plans submitted to Caltrans and Reclamation District 833 shall be in conformance with their requirements. A copy of the approved drainage plans shat] be submitted to the Planning Division and the Building Division prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit a traffic study focusing on the location of the site access road shall be submitted the Public Works Department for review and approval. The study shall determine the best location of the driveway and an}~ access improvements necessary to ensure safe turning movements in and out of the site. The study shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer. (Mitigation Measure) 10. Monument-type advertising signs shall be limited to one (1) per street frontage, not exceeding thirty-five (35) square feet per sign. No advertising signs for off-site businesses shall be allowed. Submit plans to the Department of Development Services for Review and approval. 11. All outdoor trash storage and collection facilities shall be enclosed by a solid masonry wall or view-obscuring fence at least one (1) foot higher than the trash container. 12. Any new commercial development of this parcel may require a pressurized water system with Fire Department approved fire hydrant. C. The project will not cause a significant impact to agricultural resow-ees in Butte County because only approximately two acres of an existing orchard will be removed to accommodate the project. The remaining six acres of the site will consist of a producing orchard. The conditions of approval for the project limit the commercial use of the site to the sale of agricultural products and a delicatessen. No land divisions will be allowed on the 8-acre project site. D. The location of the project site at a major road intersection is appropriate for a commercial use. E. 'hhe project will not cause any significant impacts to vehicle circulation in the area because most vehicle trips attributable to the project will be "pass by" trips from vehicles on SR 99. F. The project site has a history of being utilized for commercial uses, including a restaurant, a gas station, and a fruit stand. C. Future development of the property is required to meet Butte County Environmental Health Department requirements for sewage disposal, drinking water, and flood handling. H. The proposed C-I zoning is consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designation of Commercial. This General Plan Amendment is in the public interest because it allows a commercial use that will promote agricultural products grown in Butte County. J. The design of the proposed commercial structure is harmonious with the agricultural character of the project area. K. The project is consistent with Policy 2.1 of the Butte County General Plan Agt7cultural Element, which states that agriculture shall not be made unviable by the economic impacts of urban development. The orchard on the adjoining parcel will not be made unviable due to the project due to the type of commercial use that will be permitted an the site. L. The project is consistent with Policy 2.3 of the Butte County General Plan Agricultural Element, which requires development to provide land use transitions, setbacks and buffers between urban development and agricultural interface to reduce interference and conflict. A 100-foot buffer is required between the parking area on the west side of the project site and the orchard to the west of the site. The picnic area on the north side of the site provides a large buffer area. No buffers are needed on the east and south sides of the site, which consists of SR 99 and B Street. M. The project is consistent with Goal 6.1 of the Agricultural Element, which states that agricultural production should be facilitated by considering a limited range of ancillary or support servicesluses. N. The project is consistent with Goal 6.2 of the Agricultural Element, which states that opportunities to promote and market agricultural products grown or processed in Butte County should be created and facilitated. O. The project is consistent with Program 6.2 of the Agricultural Element, which states that limited visitor-serving commercial uses, such as wineries and specialty produce markets should be allowed in agricultural areas to ensure continued agricultural use and compatibility with surrounding uses. P. The project is consistent with Program 6.4 of the Agricultural Element, which states that agriculture-dependent industries and uses must meet specific criteria. The project meets the criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, Bh IT RESOLVED as follows: The General Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential as showy on the attached Exhibit A-1 is hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The General Plan Amendment to Commercial as shown on the attached Exhibit B- I is hereby incorporated by reference. 3. The General Plan Amendments are hereby adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte as amendments to the Butte County General Plan Land Use Element, said Amendments to be the land use policy for the County of Butte in the affected area for all findings pursuant to law; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, with regards to the Colby project, that the Butte County Board of Supervisors hereby approves: Revised text, figures, and tables to reflect the effects of the Colby General Plan Amendment on the whole Durham-Dayton-Nelson Plan, including but not limited to: a. Amend Sheet 2 of 2 of Alternate Map Number 6 "A" Co reflect the new land use designations. BE I'T FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to GovernmenC Code Section G5359 that the General Plan be endorsed to show that the above amendments have been approved by this Board. BE I~[' FUR"hHER RESOLVED, that if any of the two General Plan Amendments made by this Resolution, namely the Lee Colby or Anderson Amendments, is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions of this Resolution relating to that Amendment shall be deemed severable, and the invalidity thereof shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of Supervisors on this llrh day of September , 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Beeler, Dolan, Houx, Yamaguchi. and Chair Josiassen NOES: None ABSENT: None NOT DOTING: None •~ -CUR JOSIASSEN, CHAIRMAN Butte County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: John S. Blackloek, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board ~ ,-~~ B~ ~ •i '~'-c. ' ~' --- -- f K:1PItOJE('TS\GPA\('OLI3Y.GPA\,loini Resoultion ('olby-Andcrson.doc MAP ANgfi1DING Exhibit. A-1 DiJRHAM A12~A LAl\TD USE PLAN tee; GPAJREZ 00-06 Resolution Butte Coanty Board of Sapervisors Date N GENERAL PLAN A1~~NDMEN'I' FROM AGRICULTURAL RESII~EN'TTAI, T© LOW DENSITY RESIDh'NTIAIL MAP AMENDING Ezhibit• g-2 BIGGS AREA LAND USE PLAN tee; GPArxz O]-03 Resolution Butte County Board of Sapervisors Date N GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM ORC~iAR~D & FIELD CROPS TO COMIY~RCIAL