HomeMy WebLinkAboutE-mail from Dot Morris - Title 25 Agenda item 2.9.09 ,N1P Page 1 of 1
Moghannam, Kathleen
From: Dorothy Morris [morrisdm@pacbell.net] SUPEROSORS
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 9:43 AM FEB 0 9 2009
To: Mo hannam, Kathleen
Subject: Letter for Tomorrow's Board Meeting -Title 25 Agenda Item aROVILf F' CALIFORNIA
Attachments: T25 Letter to Board of Supervisors Feb 10 Meeting Final_Connelly.doc; T25 Letter to Board of
Supervisors Feb 10 Meeting Final_Dolan.doc; T25 Letter to Board of Supervisors Feb 10
Meeting Final_Kirk.doc; T25 Letter to Board of Supervisors Feb 10 Meeting
Final Lambert.doc; T25 Letter to Board of Supervisors Feb 10 Meeting Final_Yamaguchi.doc;
T25 Kyle King Letter Permit Period.pdf
Hi Kathleen,
I talked with one of your co-workers this morning and she said that it would be ok for me to email you the attached
letters that have been sent to each of the Supervisors this morning for discussion in tomorrow's Board of
Supervisors' Meeting. If you could print these out for the Supervisors I would appreciate it. There is a letter for
each Supervisor-no need to give all of them all the letters-but each should have a copy of the T25 Kyle King
letter.
If I need to hand deliver hard copies to you l can do that as well...but I need to know that as it is a bit of a drive
from Concow. I also plan on having a powerpoint presentation of the points mentioned in the letter, Will it be
possible to use the overhead projector for this presentation? Do l need to come early to provide the CD for
loading to the laptop used in the meeting or should I bring my own?
I will also give you a call in a bit to confirm you received this and to see if I need to change plans.
Thanks,
Dot Morris
PO Box 4069
Yankee Hill, CA 95965
530-533-2771
AGENDA 1Ni=C3Rj0Al"1aK1
.F i 2009
AGENDA INFORMAMN
FEBFEB 0 9 2009
C40
+ t d
2/9/2009
Limited Density Owner-Built Rural Dwellings --Concow Community Citizens' Group
February 10, 2009
The Butte County Board of SupervisorgGENDA INFORMATION BOARD OFSUPERvrso.s
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965 FEB 1A 2009 FEB Q 9 2009
Dear Supervisor Connelly, CROVILLF, CALIF(
We appreciate the opportunity to work with The Butte County Board of Supervisors, Development
Services and Cal-Fire to craft an ordinance for Limited Density Owner-Built Rural Dwellings ("Title 25").
Adoption of this simplified building code will encourage compliance in an area of the County where a
number of property owners have historically chosen to build without permits. We, along with you, want
to see legally constructed, affordable, structurally sound and fire wise housing in Concow. Adherence
to Exterior Fire Codes, combined with maintenance of defensible space, will be crucial in avoiding
another conflagration like the fires experienced last summer. It is our belief that the appropriate, well-
considered implementation of this ordinance is absolutely critical to the legally permitted, successful
rebuilding of our Community.
In the Staff Report provided by Tim Snellings, Development Services Director, there are various options
to be discussed, with direction to be determined by the Board of Supervisors. The Concow Community
Citizens Group ("the Committee") supports much of the ordinance as proposed by Development
Services; however, there are a few points of negotiation remaining. Using the Summary of Key Issues
format as presented in the Report, we have identified recommendations for your consideration.
Summary of Key Issues
Key Point#9 - The Committee endorses the findings listed but stipulates that, should the Board agree
to our request to consider the entire ConcowNankee Hill Community as outlined in Key point#6, the
findings may need to be broadened to accommodate areas of the Concow Community beyond the
immediate fire area. See Key Point#6.
Key Point#2—The Committee supports Development Services' recommendation for the availability of
the ordinance for seasonally or permanently owner occupied dwellings. Real life seasonal use includes
situations where children attend school in a neighboring town, family members hold jobs out of the
area, or families invest in building a retirement home while still living and working out of the area. To
accommodate this recommendation, the wording at the end of the last sentence could be modified to
read: "... located in rural areas and solely occupied by the owner and/or the owner's family." We also
recommend inclusion or clarification that second dwellings and appurtenant structures located on
owner occupied property, where the primary residence was built under the Butte County Building Code,
be allowed under the proposed ordinance.
Key Point#3 —Agreed—The clarification that a general contractor can be hired is appreciated.
Key Points #4, 9 and 13 must agree as to time period required for owner occupancy
The citizens committee recommends one of the following, in order of preference.
• 3 years after issuance of the building permit
• 1 year after issuance of Certificate of Occupancy (= 2-6 yrs. total time w/building time added in)
• 3 years after the Certificate of Occupancy but only with a hardship provision to cover situations
forcing sale of a property due to death, divorce, loss of a job, disability, foreclosure, etc.
Due to life situations such as those listed above, it is our belief that the County would be placed in a
contentious position with its citizens if the most restrictive time limit is imposed.
Key Point#5—Agreed—We endorse minimum 1 acre parcels.
Key Point#6—The Committee and many members of the Concow/Yankee Hill Community, as shown
by signatures gathered throughout the Community, strongly endorse the choice of Option a. "Golden
Feather School District Boundary North of the West Branch Bridge on HWY 70." The reasoning:
• This entire area has been affected by fires over the past 12 years and many people have yet to
rebuild. The parcel sizes, rural nature and, in many cases, unavailability of access to PG&E
power are conducive to building under the guidelines of the proposed ordinance.
• The area is clearly defined and available on GIS maps, and therefore readily enforceable.
Additionally, the area is geographically isolated on all sides by steep river canyons and
uninhabited forest, which has resulted in a strong community identity.
• The provisions included in the draft document to protect the integrity of structures built under
this code will serve the community well, improve fire safety, and allow for bringing currently non-
permitted structures into compliance in a more affordable manner.
• In recognition of the fact that this ordinance is being proposed for a trial period of 3 years, the
inclusion of the entire Concow/Yankee Hill Community provides a better opportunity for
assessing its viability.
• Children from the entire area attend Concow School, and the Community comes together for
various activities utilizing facilities on both sides of the highway, including Crain Park, the Lake
Concow Campground, the Volunteer Fire Stations, the Yankee Hill Grange, the SDA Church,
and the historic Mesilla Valley Schoolhouse. Additionally, the Yankee Hili Pines Hardware Store
serves as a resource and an information center for the whole Community.
Key Point#11-See Key Point#17
Key Point#13 — Recording: The Committee agrees with the wording for the deed restriction. Item
number 2 under that clause (stating occupancy is limited to the owner and the owner's family), should
be amended to match the owner occupancy time period decided upon in Key Points 94 and#9.
Key Point#14--Agreed—The Committee strongly endorses the use of this code to bring existing or
partially constructed dwellings built without permits into compliance.
Key Point#15—The Committee feels very strongly that the permit period should follow the guidelines
of Title 25, Section 8, which provides for a 3 year.permit period without requiring renewals every year.
One of the premises of the owner-builder concept is the fact that it usually takes several years to build a
home if one is doing the work oneself—even if part of the work is contracted for. The amount of time
needed is also affected by the availability of cash when the home is built on a "pay as you go" basis.
Key Point#16--The Committee agrees to this substantial modification of the provisions of Title 25 as it
will benefit the structural soundness of the dwellings and allow Development Services the ability to
provide appropriate guidance in a timely manner. This provision strengthens and supports the
representation of dwellings constructed under this ordinance as being structurally sound, of sustainable
quality and a benefit to the Community.
Key Points#11 and #17— Development Services interprets General Requirements (a) as meaning
that construction must be in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Title 24 Building Code. This
is in direct conflict with the paragraphs that follow in the draft ordinance which are quoted directly from
the state regulation and say: "Except as otherwise required by this article, dwellings and appurtenant
structures constructed pursuant to this part need not conform with the construction requirements prescribed by
the latest applicable editions of the Uniform Building Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes, the National Electrical
Code, or other applicable technical codes; however, it is not the intent of this section to disregard nationally
accepted technical and scientific principles relating to design, materials, methods of construction, and structural
requirements for the erection and construction of dwelling and appurtenant structures as are contained in the
uniform technical codes. Such codes shall be a basis for approval."
General Requirements (a) in the state regulation Title 25 refer to "Subchapter 2-12" of the California
Code of Regulations. This doesn't match the titling of any current codes as written. General
Requirements (a) in the previous 2002 version of Title 25 was written as a reference to The
Administrative Code, Title 24, Part 1 and not the Building Code Title 24, Part 2.
Compliance with basic Building, Electrical, Mechanical and Plumbing Codes are included as
requirements in the draft ordinance. Therefore we request that the confusing clause (a) be removed as
it has been by every other county adopting an ordinance under the provisions of Title 25, Section 8
Limited Density Owner Built Rural Dwellings. If the Board chooses to delete it, then the phrase in
Petitions For Interpretation (Key Point#11)that has been added by Development Services basing
interpretations on "the current adopted California Building Codes" should also be modified for the sake
of consistent application.
We concur with the proposed inclusion of Chapter 7A of the Code of Regulations, covering exterior
materials and construction requirements for wildfire exposure, which is found under Fire Safety
Regulations on page 14 of the draft ordinance.
Key Point#18 -We are in support of significantly reducing generator noise by means of an enclosure.
Key Point# 19— Agreed. Chief Brachais has indicated a willingness to work with residents who were
burnt out on ingress/egress requirements such as grades, road and driveway widths (making
recommendations and not necessarily requiring major road work, etc.), but emphasized the importance
of compliance with defensible space requirements and appropriate street and address signage.
Key Point#21 -The 5 points clarifying Construction Requirements are well defined.
Key Point# 22—Sanitation Requirements seem to conflict with language of Title 25, Section 8, as
written, as well as the ordinances of other counties, which state that the Environmental Health Official
has the final determination in toilet, washing and bathing facilities. The proposed ordinance says that
the Board of Supervisors must approve alternative sanitary facilities— is this because a policy change
of that nature cannot be directly approved by the Director of Environmental Health? The proposed
ordinance also states that "no dwelling shall utilize a bathtub or a shower and a lavatory or alternate
bathing and washing facility unless it has been approved by the Building Official" (instead of the
Director of Environmental Health). Shouldn't this be the prerogative of the Director of Environmental
Health? Or, perhaps it is a reference to a separate, outdoor bathroom or shower and is not a reference
to alternative sanitary facilities that have been previously approved. We would appreciate a clarification
of this provision, and want to ascertain whether a stand alone bathroom would be allowed under this
ordinance, in particular if the owner builder prefers no bathroom be located within the main dwelling.
Additional Points: Under Plans (pg. 11), we ask that the phrase "simplified diagram" is retained.
Under Fees (pg. 13) we recommend inclusion of a reference to the existing waiver of fees for previously
permitted structures destroyed in the Camp Fire for uninsured individuals building a new home of the
same size, and noting the applicable expiration date for that fee waiver.
Thank you for your consideration of the Concow Community Citizens' Group's request to create an
opportunity for the construction of affordable, owner occupied housing by adopting this ordinance.
Kyle King 4282 Paiute Drive, Yankee Hill, CA 95965 530-533-0446
AGENDA INFORMATION &C'Ar�n o�s��
February 6, 2009 ERv1soRs
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: FEB. 1 .0 2009 0R PER 0 9 2009
p��
RE: RECONSTRUCTION PERMITS &TIME LIMITS FOR DISASTER VICTI ALE, CALIF,RNlq
As a victim of The Poe Fire on 9/6/01 which destroyed my home, trees, a lifetime of personal
possessions.... and as both, an owner-builder and dealer of home building packages, I would
like to first express my gratitude to the Butte County Board of Supervisors who had the wisdom,
foresight and understanding to not only waive my building permit fees, but to allow me enough
time, thru permit extensions to put my life back together. Without this understanding and these
extended time frames, I would not have been able to rebuild my home.
Building a home is a major project in normal conditions, with delays, material shortages and
unexpected events. In my case, my civil engineer, Michael Mooney, died after having my floor
plans for 6 months and it took another few months to find another available engineer to review
and stamp my floor plans. 1 year later, i had approved floor plans. After the Butte County
Building/Planning Dept. approved my plans, I experienced one of the wettest rainy seasons on
record. Part of my road washed out and needed repair before I could work on my house. These
events alone delayed my ability to even work on my house for no less than four months. I lived
in a tiny 22' foot travel trailer for almost 6 yrs, while going thru the debris and tree cleanup,
financing, the permit process all before I could even break ground.
One might ask - - - What's taking these owner-builder so tong? Just after The Poe Fire on
9/06/01 the twin towers in New York were hit by planes on 9/11/01. 1 was already in a state of
shock, loss and grief- one day working at my job, the next day living in motel in Paradise and I
certainly didn't need any more bad news. Never the less, on my way back to my property to see
if I still had home left from the Poe Fire - I was sent back due to the Highway 70 Arson Fire and
only 15 days later did I find out that my house was leveled to the ground by the fire. later that
year my mother died on the day we got 4 feet of snow here in Yankee Hill and I was unable to
attend her funeral. The next year, both of my dogs died, I had to terminate no fewer than 4
contractors for either stealing money and materials from me and/or for doing drugs on my job
site- then find others who might be willing to work in this area, as most preferred working closer
to town. The micro burst winds of 110 mph ripped sheets of 5/8"th inch CDX plywood in half,
tossing them 500 feet, pulling up 2 x 12 rafters on off one corner of the roof of new home, which
also had to be rebuilt. It was one set back after another. Meanwhile, I had loggers who were
removing my trees, leaving their mess behind, destroying fence and other personal property and
it was just me here to cut down the dead scorched trees (well over 100,000 trees) into burn piles
as they were very much a hazard as they could kill or injure anyone if they fell on someone from
high the winds. The dead/burnt tree phase took me a little over two years to clean up and I had
to buy a tractor for that - an unexpected expense, but necessary. Chasing of looters who were
trying to steal my well pump and other equipment here was also sad, and watching my
insurance money go to pay off my note instead of being able to use the money to rebuild was
even more depressing. There was an epidemic of locusts of some kind that ate half of the new
pine tree seedlings I planted. The locusts invited an infestation of diamond back rattle snakes to
eat them and I killed 26 rattlesnakes with my shovel or shotgun within 3 months one year as
they would crawl next the house while we were working on it. Fuel prices went up and trucking
companies would not deliver my building packages because they could not afford to operate
their big rigs. This delayed my construction by 4 months. My material arrived and I got the walls
Kyle King 4282 Paiute Drive, Yankee Hill, CA 95965 530-533-0446
up and the floors down, but before 1 could get the roof on the rains came like never before. I
spent another 4 months pushing water out of the house thru the opening in the dining room
doors.
For any disaster victim there is not only the unexpected and daunting task of building a new
home, but there Is the grief and emotional distress of having to FIRST remove the debris while
somehow trying to work a job, keep the credit rating up so as to qualify for a construction loan,
keep the bills paid, the contractorsAaborerslsuppliers all paid, and then try to build within a time
so as to satisfy building codes/requirements. Did I mention that I was I also working full time? I
had six other clients I was assisting with their own home construction projects.
Before any time limits are set on when a person "should" have all of the plans/construction
phases satisfied, I would encourage any official to FIRST volunteer their labor for 1 day, perhaps
on one of their paid days off, get some gloves and overalls and go work with some of the fire
victims (like Michael Mooney did before he died - he came up replanted pine trees here with
me) cleaning up the land, debris trees, and spend time with them overseeing just how long and
how difficult a task it can be aside from the emotional grief that a victim has to push aside while
undertaking the mighty task of get a home thru the final permit stages and back onto the county
tax roles.
am now living in my new home since 2007 and am paying my property taxes once again and I
can tell you without a doubt, that if it were not for the generosity and wisdom of the Board of
Supervisors who allowed me the 3 years or so to rebuild, I know I would not have been able to
complete my home building project.
In summary, I would encourage the Board once again to exercise their good judgement when it
comes to time frames on building codes, especially for those who suffer such a loss- a suffering
which lasts about 7 years. As a fire victim, 1 call tell you that anyone who has not gone thru such
an experience, simply cannot relate to it, however, I am hopeful that enough people can relate
to my experience which is similar to most other disaster victims. It would put an unfair burden on
disaster victims to tell that they have to"hurry it up and get their homes built' - simply to meet an
earlier time-frame of no real value. Is it more important to force a short time limit on
reconstruction or is it more important to create good will and satisfied property tax payers?
Once again, I thank this Board of Supervisors and the Building, Planning, Health/Sanitation
Depts. and other depts. for the time and extensions they granted me and the other Poe Fire
victims here and for their understanding of the magnitude and the difficulty involved for a.
disaster victim to fully recover.
SincerelyYours,
U*_
Kyle King
Yankee Hill