Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCole emailMoghannam, Kathleen From: Kirk, Maureen Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:33 AM To: Moghannam, Kathleen Cc: 'patrick@arcademe.com' Subject: FW: Universal Life Church Robert Seals Forest Ranch Attachments: Pat to Scott Rutherford 072309.docx; 0901 supes site 072312.pdf Kathleen, Would you please pass this on to the other supervisors? Thanks, Maureen Kirk Butte County Supervisor District 3 796 Memorial Way, Chico, California 95926 530.891-2800 530.891-2877 FAX From: Patrick Cole [mailto:patrick@arcademe.com] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 5:20 PM To: Kirk, Maureen Cc: Robert Seals ;Daniel P. Dalton; Michael Fvans Subject: Universal Life Church Robert Seals Forest Ranch Dear Supervisor Kirk, 1 will be out of the country on July 31 when you and the board will hear the Use Permit arguments appealing the Planning Commission's denial. I wish to give you a little background on the project progress as it pertains to the building permits. I am enclosing a letter I wrote to Scott Rutherford on June 22, 2009. This letter explains that Mr. Seals was misinformed about building without permits and that he was willing then to do all that was necessary to rectify the situation. He understands that the preparation of construction drawings and engineering in arrears is costly but must be done. Since the code requires each unattached building to be permitted separately, it was agreed between the Building Department, my office and Mr. Seals that we would prepare the engineering and submit each building for permits in sequence according to Garl Nelson's recommendation. We started with the Rectory which was still under construction at the time. We submitted for permits on that structure in December 2009 and requested the recommendation on which structure should follow next. It was then we were told that Planning and Building had not been to the site to make their determinations and the effort to get Carl Nelson and Stacey Jalliffe to the site began. We met at the site on October 22, 2010. Meantime we received a Plan Review letter from Building stipulating the mitigations that must be made to obtain a permit for the first structure. One of which was to obtain a use permit for the overall use of the land. We addressed all other items and resubmitted. Subsequently Carl called to tell me Building had signed off on the permit but it could not be issued until the use permit was approved and that we would not start another application until this was resolved. We have been waiting over 2 years far the hearing. The use permit was denied last month so Mr. Seals has directed me to proceed with retro permits for 3 other buildings under his name as a private individual. We are proceeding with as-built drawings for the Cabin #1, the Recreation Building and a kitchen install in the Barn (which was used as a Templet' in an effort to get the proper permits. I have included a site plan to clarify. I hope this helps you understand that Mr. Seals intention of rectifying his problem has only been slowed by the standard bureaucratic "red tape". I would like to add as a citizen, that I commend Mr. Seals on the programs held there, especially the children's. He has sculpted a peace garden in the wilderness. He made a mistake on the building permits but is willing to set that right. ~~ i 1 i~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~,~s CADE:1?iE ARCHITECTS Patrick Cole 1037 Park Avenue Chico, GA 9592$ Phone: (530) 343-5709 Patrick@arcademe,com July 22, 2009 Scott Rutherford Manager, Building Division Butte County Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Re: APN 063-300-049 Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Robert Seals is the co-owner of the referenced parcel along with the Universal Life Church. He has engaged my firm to assist in obtaining the requisite building permits as requested by you in your recent courtesy letter to him. I have not received a copy of that letter, however in our last conversation with Nancy Springer in your office I was told that the only buildings of record you have for the parcel are the house and the shop which were permitted about 15 years ago. I have subsequently been told that the big timber, steel and masonry building was permitted as an agricultural use. I am assuming that we must submit a design and engineering documents package for each building not previously permitted nor exempted by section 105 of the code. To determine the scope of our work and to prepare the requisite site plan, we have just completed a site survey showing the extent of building and the locations at a reasonable scale of accuracy. There appears to be seven additional buildings which have been constructed since the original 2 were permitted. My client was under the impression that his religious status exempted him from the permit process. He has since been advised and is willing to cooperate as necessary to bring all required buildings into compliance. The general use of his property is a spiritual center with an emphasis on preventative healthcare and natural healing. He is a licensed minister in the State of California. Important features of his ministry are, the natural setting of his property, an abiding respect and responsibility to the environment as our habitat and, honesty and directness in our relationships with others and ourselves. Several of the structures are marginally Iarge enough under section 105 as to require permitting. In addition, they are adapted from pre-engineered carport structures. In the interest of time, we intend to submit the manufacturer's engineering data and drawings as documents far these 4 small buildings which use that structural system, recognizing that plan check may require further clarification. Please advise me about the viability of this approach. The remaining three buildings will be documented as for standard permit application with a possible exception for the T24 energy documentation. Mr. Seals has installed two wind generators and 2 arrays of photovoltaic panels serving the entire parcel with clean free energy. His energy production exceeds his demands. Are the buildings served by these sources exempt from T24? I could find no information about such property line energy efficiency standards in the T24 code...please advise. Keep in mind that compliance to an unreasonable requirement sets a precedence which would discourage energy responsibility of Mr. Seals' Type. We are now in the process of preparing the drafting and engineering for the individual buildings. We will await your advice on the matters herein and hopefully submit soon to begin the permitting process. Respectfully, ARCADEME Patrick Cole AIA Principal Architect cc: Robert Seals