Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-150.~._ „~ ~~ ~ 1. .a~ _ _ ~ _ - ,. •' CdkJNT1r'' ~fJF.~,1j3UTT~~ STATE 41~ C~-1LIFC'~RNIA r ~~ t '. :z ~ "~'~R ~_,.~~,u ~~ ~`~; Resolution No. o~~-iso r*t~'~~ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TENTATIVE CANCELLATION OF EXISTING LAND USE CONSERVATION CONTRACT INSTRUMENT NO. 1999-0052839 WHEREAS, the subject property 52.72-acre property proposed for cancellation (APN: 047- 260-199) is owned by George Nicolaus the ("Applicant") and is located at the western terminus of Kittyhawk Drive, approximately 2,100 feet west of Garner Lane and east of and adjacent to SR-99 in the north Chico area of Butte County, and is currently subject to the provisions of a Williamson Act Contract between the Butte County and Evelyn C. Liptrap, recorded December 22, 1999 as Instrument #1999-0052839 of the Official Records of Butte County (the "Contract"); and WHEREAS, a Notice of Non-Renewal of the Contract was filed with Butte County by the Applicant on September 7, 2003; and WHEREAS, on January 30, 2004, the Applicant submitted to the Butte County Department of Development Services a Petition for Cancellation of a Williamson Act contract citing the proposed alternative use on the cancellation property as single-family residential development; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's Petition for the Tentative Cancellation of a Contract ("Petition") was determined to be complete and a copy of the Petition and a general description of the land subject to cancellation were mailed to the California Department of Conservation on September 19, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Applicant is being required to satisfy all conditions, contingencies, and processes per Government Code Sections 51283, 51283.4 and 51283.5 and all other conditions specified in EXHIBIT A here attached; follows: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Butte County as 1. The Board approves the Petition of George Nicolaus for cancellation of the Contract, based on the findings and determinations set forth in the attached EXHIBIT B Findings in Support of Immediate Cancellation of Williamson Act Contract, which are hereby adopted by the Board and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. In connection with the Board's decision to approve tentative cancellation of the Contract, the Board has independently reviewed and analyzed and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration, referenced hereto as EXHIBIT C and deemed it as the appropriate document for purposes of compliance with CEQA, and certified that the document has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 3. The Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors is authorized to execute all agreements and documents necessary to effect the purpose and intent of this Resolution. 4. The Director of the Department of Development Services is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination in the manner prescribed by law. 5. Within 30 days of the tentative cancellation of the contract, the Clerk of the Board shall publish a notice of the Board's decision, including the date, time, and place of the public hearing, a general explanation of the decision, the findings made pursuant to Section 51282 of the State Government Code. 6. Within 30 days of the tentative cancellation of the contract, the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors shall transmit a copy of the published notice of the decision, as described above, to the Director of Conservation. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte, State of California, this 11th day of September, 2007 by the following vote. AYES: Supervisors Connelly, Kirk, Josiassen, Yamaguchi, and Chair Dolan NOES: None ABSENT: None NOT VOTING: None ` ~~ JANE DOLAN, CHAIR Butt~,County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: STARLYN BROWN Interim Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk of the Board' °f Supervisors r ,, f f ~;% ~ , 2 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF CANCELLATION The owner shall satisfy all conditions, contingencies, and processes per Government Code Sections 51283, 51283.4 and 51283.5 and any other conditions required upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. The specified conditions and contingencies to be satisfied are: 1. Payment in full of the amount of the fee computed under the provisions of Section 51283. The Board notes that the valuation used in the calculation of this fee is subject to the requirements and conditions of Section 51203 and 51283.5. 2. Owner will provide a statement of acknowledgement that unless the fee is paid, or a certificate of cancellation of contract is issued within one year from the date of the recording of the certificate of tentative cancellation, the fee shall be recomputed as of the date of notice described in Section 51203 or the date the landowner requests a recomputation. 3. The landowner must obtain all permits necessary to commence the proposed alternative use. 4. In compliance with the Williamson Act contract, the owner will maintain the agricultural operations on the parcel until such time as conditions 1 through 3 above are satisfied. EXHIBIT B Findings in Support of Immediate Cancellation of Williamson Act FINDINGS OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In connection with the Board's decision to approve tentative cancellation of the Contract, the Board has independently reviewed and analyzed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (EXHIBIT C here attached) and has deemed it as the appropriate document for purposes of compliance with CEQA, and certified that the document has been completed in compliance with CEQA. GENERAL FINDING The alternative use proposed for the cancellation property in this petition is single-family residential development (Kittyhawk Park Tentative Subdivision Map application #04-11). FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE WILLIAMSON ACT Based on substantial evidence in the administrative record, the Butte County Board of Supervisors finds that the cancellation of the Land Conservation Agreement executed between Butte County and Evelyn C. Liptrap, recorded December 22, 1999, which Agreement is recorded as Instrument #1999- 0052839 of the Official Records of Butte County, from which Applicant has petitioned to remove all 52.72 acres of APN 047-260-199, is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act, Government Code section 51282, subdivision (b) in that: The statutory findings pursuant to government code section 51282 (b) as recommended by staff supporting the Cancellation are detailed below. Section 51282 (b) Find that the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act as follows: Finding (1) That the cancellation is for land on which a notice of nonrenewal has been served. a) The original request for cancellation was delivered to Butte County on September 7, 2003, and was subsequently acknowledged by a recorded Notice of Non- renewal in accordance with the Government Code. Finding (2) That cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use. a) Lands adjacent to this parcel are located within the North Chico Specific Plan, which designates lands surrounding to the north, south, and east for residential development. The 49-acre parcel immediately south of the cancellation parcel is already the subject of a tentative parcel amp application to Butte County (TSM 04- 07 "Guernsey'). b) State Route (SR)-99 also demarcates the Chico Area Greenline at this location, which allows for urban type development only east of SR-99 and agricultural uses to the west. The pattern for development of this area identified by the North Chico Specific Plan and the General Plan's Greenline policy reduce the likelihood that cancellation of Phis property is likely to result in the removal of adjacent land from agricultural use. c) The letter of comment from the California Department of Conservation (DOC) of April 26, 2004 states that the proposed cancellation appears to be consistent with the purpose of the Williamson Act (51282, findings 1 through 4). d) The proposed Kitty Hawk tentative subdivision map application (cancellation parcel) proposes a 135'-wide open space/storm drainage detention basin combined with a 65' building exclusion area, which together with the 100'-wide SR-99 right-of--way combine to create a 300'-wide buffer between the proposed residential uses and agricultural uses to the west. This buffer helps ensure that cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use. e) Based on the preceding findings and information in the record it is determined that this cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use. 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 cancellation parcel is located within the North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP) and was zoned SR-1 (Suburban Residential, one acre lot minimum) in 1995. The site is located 1/3 mile north of the City of Chico's Sphere of Influence. The NCSP is the Butte County's guide for growth and development in this area, within the overall context of the Butte County General Plan. Cancellation of the Williamson Act contract on this site will allow the property to be used for the residential purpose designated in the NCSP. b) The applicant has filed an application with the Department of Development Services fora subdivision map (Kittyhawk Park Tentative Subdivision Map). Although this Map application is currently deemed "incomplete" and is still under review, the proposed 48 one-acre parcels are consistent with the provisions of the North Chico Specific Plan's SR-1 (Suburban Residential, 1-acre minimum parcel size) zoning and the Agricultural Residential General Plan designation. c) Based on the preceding findings and information in the record it is determined that this cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city or county general plan. Finding (4) That cancellation will not result in discontiguous patterns of urban development. Based on the following findings and information in the record it is determined that this cancellation will not result in discontiguous patterns of urban development. a) Cancellation of this property would be consistent with the definition of "contiguity" as discussed by the California Court of Appeal's opinion in Honey Springs Homeowners Assn. v. Board of Supervisors (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 1122, in the context of a proposed LCA contract cancellation, in that: Actual contiguity to existing urban development, either at the time of cancellation or soon thereafter, must be the standard, because any appreciable delay between construction of the alternative use and achievement of contiguity resu/fs in the very evil the contiguity requirement was intended to abolish, i. e., premature and disorderly patterns of suburban development. We believe the contiguity requirement may be satisfied by showing the owners of intervening parcels have the current ability and intent to develop their land within a reasonable time. Id. at 157 Cal.App.3d 1145. b) Based on the California Court of Appeal's opinion in Honey Springs Homeowners Assn. v. Board of Supervisors (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 1122, is able to approve this cancellation of this property in that: • The board or council is not required to find that the alternative use will be immediately contiguous to like development. In rendering its finding, the board or council acts in its own discretion to evaluate the proposed alternative use according to existing and projected conditions within its local jurisdiction. Id. at 157 Cal.App.3d 1138. c) The cancellation property meets the Court's standard for "urban" development in that: Whether the particular property ... is to be considered "rural" or "city'; depends largely upon its surroundings and the character of the property in the neighborhood. If the buildings and improvements in the neighborhood are few and scattered; they partake of the character of the country, rather than of the city or town, and are occupied by persons engaged in rural pursuits-- the locality should be considered rural. On the other hand, if the houses and improvements partake of the character of the city or town, and are mainly occupied by persons engaged in city pursuits, the locality should be considered as city and not rural. A locality which is laid out in small lots, of the usual size for city or town lots and partly built upon with city improvements, such as paved streets and gas or water pipes, should be considered in the class of city property. Id. at 157 Cal.App.3d 1140-41. d) The proposed development on the cancellation property is consistent with the Court's interpretation of the relevant factors used to determine whether a development or area is rural or urban in character include density, surrounding development, proximity to or potential of becoming an incorporated area, existing public facilities, water availability in the region, steepness of natural slope, minimum parcel sizes, availability of public transit, ability to cluster housing to preserve open space, height of buildings, on-site sewage capacity, landscaping, lighting, space between structures, proximity of employment centers, preservation of open space easements Id. at 157 Cal.App.3d 1141-42. The closest bus stop to the Liptrap parcel is approximately 3/4 mi. away. e) The proposed alternative use (development of one-acre minimum parcel size residential lots), proposes residential development to the maximum density allowed under the County's General Plan and zoning ordinance, as well as the North Chico Specific Plan (NCSP), adopted by the County of Butte in 1995. f) The northern boundary of the incorporated area of City of Chico is approximately 7250 feet south of the Liptrap parcel. The northern boundary of the City of Chico Sphere of influence is approximately 1750 feet south of the Liptrap parcel. The 6 western boundary of the Chico Municipal Airport Redevelopment Area is approximately 8150 feet east of the Liptrap parcel. g) The development of this parcel is consistent with a contiguous pattern of urban development as set forth under the North Chico Specific Plan. The property is zoned for residential uses and is contiguous to existing and planned residential development. The cancellation parcel is located immediately to the west of the fully- developed Autumn Park Subdivision Phases 3, and is adjacent to the proposed Guernsey tentative subdivision map application immediately to the south. h) The Liptrap parcel is within the "North Chico Planning Area'; also referred to as the "Area of Cooperation" subject to a joint planning Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed by the County of Butte and the City of Chico in November 2003, which explicitly recognizes that "a substantial amount of new residential, industrial, commercial, office and school development can reasonably be expected to occur within the North Chico Specific Plan Area, as a result of the implementation of the Plan and the rezoning. " i) The County concurs with the letter of comment from the California Department of Conservation (DOC) of April 26, 2004 in that it agrees with DOC that, "The express purpose and intent at (the time the North Chico Specific Plan was adopted) was that this property would cease to be considered as viable agricultural property and would convert to residential housing. The Department notes that the County adopted the NCSP in 1995 and the County and the Landowner entered into a Land Conservation Agreement in December, 1999. Since the (Kittyhawk) property was clearly within a planning area identified for development, the initiation of the Land Conservation Agreement in 1999 was contrary to the expressed intent of the Williamson Act to preserve agricultural land." j) The proposed Guernsey Subdivision (TSM 04-07), located immediately south of the cancellation parcel, is a flex lot proposal on a +/-49-acre parcel for development of 50 residential lots of approximately 1/2 acre each, and 22 acres of Open Space on the northwestern portion adjacent to Autumn Park Drive and Highway 99 (SR-99). The Guernsey TSM 04-07 application has been deemed "complete". A Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been completed for this project. However, the project has not been advanced to public hearing because the applicant disagrees with some proposed mitigation measures and has elected not to sign the IS/MND, preventing that document from being noticed and circulated for public review and subsequent public hearing. k) SR-99 to the wesf demarcates the western limit of the Plan boundary as well as the Butte County General Plan's Chico Area Greenline. The Chico Area Greenline specifies that urban uses are appropriate in the project area, and that agricultural uses are appropriate west of SR-99. The proposal would be in keeping with existing and planned urban growth patterns required by the North Chico Specific Plan and Greenline policy. Finding (5) That there is no proximate non-contracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contracted land be put, or, that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. (GC §51282(b)). (Staff is recommending that there is adequate supporting factual information for the second portion of finding of GC §51282(b)(5) to be made: a) Much of the property in the vicinity of this project is either contemplated for future development or is proposed for urban development pursuant to the North Chico Specific Plan. The cancellation parcel is zoned for residential uses and is contiguous to existing and planned development to the east (Autumn Park Subdivision) and south (proposed Guernsey Subdivision). SR-99 to the west demarcates the Plan boundary as well as the Butte County General Plan's Chico Area Greenline. The Chico Area Greenline specifies that urban uses are appropriate in the project area, and that agricultural uses are appropriate west of SR-99. The proposed alternative use for the cancellation parcel would be in keeping with urban growth patterns required by the North Chico Specific Plan and Greenline policy. b) The letter of comment from the California Department of Conservation (DOC) of April 26, 2004 states that, "... it does appear that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. " c) The area within which the cancellation parcel is located consists of a 310-acre residential in-fill `pocket" of currently undeveloped land as follows: APN Owner Acres Status 047-430-003 Hauselt 94 No adjacent roads/access. Se crated b Keefer Slou h. 047-440-012 Lev 67 No adjacent roads/access. 047-260-199 Nicolaus 47 CANC 04-02, TSM 04-11 047-260-198 Guernse 49 TSM 04-07 047-270-033 Carr 8 Bounded on north b TSM 04-07. 047-440-036 Fox 19 Minor in-fill, separated from lands to the south by Keefer Slough. Constrained access. 047-440-037 Schuster 26 Minor in-fill, separated from lands to the south b Keefer Slou h. TOTAL 310 The seven parcels listed above (within the North Chico Specific Plan) comprise a 310-acre undeveloped pocket which share a common boundary with properties already developed. Development of any of these seven parcels would appear to represent some degree of "contiguous pattern of urban development". However, only the Nicolaus (Liptrap) APN 047-260-199 (cancellation parcel) and the Guernsey (047-260-198) properties are located adjacent to a County arterial roadway right-of--way. d) In 1999, the County accepted a sixty foot easement for the purpose of extending Kittyhawk Drive on the south side of the cancellation parcel. Development of that roadway is consistent with the Circulation Element of the NCSP which designates such an arterial road in this general location as a key component in are-wide circulation. The long range build-out plan for this arterial roadway is detailed in the Traffic Impact Analysis for Kittyhawk Park and Guernsey Subdivisions (February 8, 2005). Construction of this arterial is also detailed in the North Chico Specific Plan Circulation Element. e) Development of this arterial roadway will help ensure that contiguous patterns of urban development in the North Chico Specific Plan Area are adequately served by roadways and a circulation pattern that provide optimum access, provision of emergency services, and efficient traffic circulation. f) The proponent of the Guernsey subdivision and owner of the (noncontracted) parcel immediately to the south of the Liptrap parcel, Mr. Guernsey, has refused to fully fund the construction of Kittyhawk Drive. However, Mr. Nicolaus, the proponent of the Liptrap cancellation, intends to participate in funding the construction of Kittyhawk Drive. g) As the Guernsey property has been the subject of a residential development entitlement application under separate ownership since October 31, 2003 (prior to the submittal of the cancellation application), this land is not available for development. h) The Autumn Park subdivision (immediately east of the cancellation parcel) has two east-west oriented streets which `dead-end' into the cancellation parcel. These are identified as Anjou Court and Magness Court. These two streets are shown on their final map as continuing in a westerly direction and connecting directly to future developments on the parcel. The configuration of these two streets indicates the county's intention that these streets eventually connect to and extend to the west to create circulation connectivity and contiguous pattern of urban development. Immediate cancellation of the "Liptrap" LCA contract will allow fora more contiguous pattern of urban development than other proximate non-contracted parcels in the area which do not have similar opportunities for connectivity of circulation. i) Although there are two roadways dead-ending at the east edge of the Guernsey property (Rancho Road and Stable Lane), the Public Works Department reports that these are privately owned roadways. Improvement of these two roads to County standards and extension of these roadways through the Guernsey Subdivision would require permission of all 51 property owners along the two roads. j) The cancellation petitioner reported to the county on December 7, 2006 that he is in escrow on the 68 acre "Levy" property located immediately to the north of the subject property. In March 2005 the petitioner undertook aPre-Development Review consultation with the County to begin assessing the feasibility of future suburban-residential development. However, to date the county has not received any development entitlement applications for this property. k) The Levy property cannot be developed to ifs zoned suburban-residential potential until a second point of access can be provided. The proposed cancellation and subsequent development of the Kittyhawk subdivision would provide the Levy property with additional points of access to satisfy Butte County subdivision development standards. While there is the potential for access to the Levy property 9 at Bosc Drive, Butte County Subdivision Code Section 20-133 requires a second point of ingress/egress to a residential subdivision where cul-de-sac streets serve more than 20 lots (Section 20- 133). These access points are most likely to take place through the Autumn Park subdivision and the Kittyhawk property. This limitation exists because there is insufficient width fora 60' right-of--way to cross the property fo the east of the Levy property, to connect with Garner Lane. Securing a Highway 99 access for the Levy property would require approval by CALTRANS and Butte County. I) The presence of Bosc Drive as it connects to the Levy property clearly indicates that immediate cancellation of the "Liptrap" LCA contract and the proposed subdivision development would allow for a more contiguous pattern of urban development (onto the Levy property) than development of proximate non- contracted land because the restrictions of the Williamson Act on the Kittyhawk parcel prevent the construction of additional roads required for ingress and egress to the Levy parcel. m) Based on the preceding findings and information in the record it is determined that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. io EXHIBIT C Mitigated Negative Declaration The cancellation of a Williamson Act contract is considered a project that requires review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND here attached, SCH 2005042079), prepared for the "Liptrap" Tentative Immediate Cancellation application CANC04-01, assesses the immediate cancellation of the Williamson Act contract for environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA. The IS-MND was circulated for agency and public review and comment from July 15 through August 15, 2007. The IS-MND and cancellation hearing are solely for the Williamson Act Cancellation application. The CEQA review process requires that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the cancellation must also reference and describe any applications in the immediate area which are currently before the county and the reasonably anticipated impacts of those projects. In the case of this cancellation the related projects are the Kittyhawk Park TSM 04-11 and the Guernsey TSM 04-07 (immediately south of the Liptrap property). The Kittyhawk Park TSM 04-11 application is currently considered incomplete and is not yet ready for processing before the Planning Commission. Processing of the Guernsey TSM 04-07 application is on hold because the applicant has declined to sign acceptance of some mitigation measures recommended in the environmental review for that project, which require fully constructing Kittyhawk drive and the signalized intersection at Highway 99.