HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail from Pamela Boeger - Butte Creek Canyon Overlay Zone Menchaca, Clarissa
From;: Breedon, Dan
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 2-28 PM
To: Menchaca, Clarissa
Subject: Butte Creek Canyon overlay zone
Attachments: P Boeger Itr re BCC overlay 4-20-18.pdf
Clarissa, please provide the attached letter to the Board of Supervisors and all other appropriate
parties. Thanks,
Dan: Breedon, AICD
Principal Planner-530.552.3682
April 20, 2018
Dan Breedon Sent„via email only to dbreedon@buttecounty.net
Butte County - Planning Division
Department of Development Services
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Re: Butte Creek Canyon Overlay Zone and AP# 017-190-090
Dear Dan:
Thank you for meeting with me and Bill Hubbard regarding the impacts of the proposed
Butte Creek Canyon Overlay Zone on my property adjoining the Lookout Point viewing
area.
I am requesting that my property be excluded from the proposed zone for the following
reasons.
1. The purpose of the proposed zone is "...to facilitate the protection and preservation of
the scenic resource and the historical and ecological foundation of Butte Creek Canyon...".
The physical nature of my property is such that any development of the site will not impact
Butte Creek Canyon as set forth in the purpose. From a scenic resource standpoint, the
Skyway road is below the grade of the property and the canyon cannot be seen from the
road. In addition, due to extreme slope of most of the property, the only feasible building
site is at the upper elevation of the property adjoining the Skyway. A residence at that
location cannot possibly impact the stated purposes of the proposed zone.
2. The location of the only feasible building site on my property is already subject to
restrictions of one overlay zone, namely the Scenic Highway Overlay Zone. Imposition of
an additional zone, and in particular the Ridgeline designation and its restrictions imposed,
create confusing and potentially conflicting requirements for development which unduly
burden the property with regulations that are not justified by the proposed zone purposes.
3. My property and one other parcel to the west have been singled out from all other
property along the Skyway from the already developed parcels at the lower west end of the
proposed zone (which are not impacted since they are already developed) to the Paradise
city limits. This represents inconsistent and discriminatory application of regulations,
especially when considering the changes from the previous overlay zone and ridgeline map
presented at the November 9, 2017 Planning Commission meeting.
4. The added burdens of a second overlay zone will create the tipping point. It will result in
a substantial unnecessary reduction in the value of my property that is a taking for public
purposes without just compensation.
incerely,
Pamela Boeger