Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLana Gunn letter 11.22.10 Lana Gunn S Catalina Pt. Rd. Chico, CA 95928 November 22, 2010 S4Rg Board of Supervisors 844 TO County -.,�Q Sk O oville, CA 95965unty Center rive 0Ro\A-1.E,4p,,Lt*'=op RE: Proposed Rezone Dear Board: I own, approximately, 1640 acres of land in the Pentz area of Butte County. Attached are several Assessor's Plats highlighting the parcels that I own. These lands have been in our family for approximately 65 years. They have historically been used as ranch land. While we still use these lands for seasonal grazing,we have found that they are no longer viable to support sustained cattle ranching. Today's economics, present recession excepted, do not allow for sustainable ranching. Grazing fees do not cover the property taxes, and even with a Williamson Act tax break, it just doesn't work. Our soils are shallow and clay like. They are suitable for short-term seasonal grazing only. They are not suitable for cultivation or other agricultural farming endeavors. The recent changes to the General Plan 2030 have designated my lands as Agriculture 20 acre to 320 acre minimums. We believe that this is an appropriate designation. However, the County Draft Zoning Map, dated July 2, 2010, has proposed zoning for several of my parcels that is unrealistic and totally unacceptable. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 041-120-126& 127,are proposed for 320-acre parcel minimum,while my 160-acre parcel (041-120-122) immediately adjacent is proposed for Ag 20-acre parcel minimums. My parcels 041-720-001, 002, & 003 are proposed for 160-acre parcel sizes while being almost totally surrounded by lands proposed for Ag 20-acre parcels. It is my opinion that I have been singled out simply because my parcels are presently larger than some of the adjacent parcels. The design planner most likely thought it would look good to have some "large parcels." That would be great if those large parcels could support themselves, but they don't. If zoned to the larger minimum,they become lands preserved to fulfill the philosophical need for"public open space,"totally at the expense of the owner. Page 2 of 2 November 22, 2014 Butte County Board of Supervisors We urge the Planners and the Board to reconsider the proposed zoning Of APN:041-720-001,002, &003;041-120-122, 126,&127, Open space is great as long as someone else has to foot the bill. Your attention to the matter will be greatly appreciated. Yours truly, Lna Gunn enclosures cc: Tim Snellings . ru ru Z6 R; - ra � . |§/ [ §4w )7 S | fq \ 10 . rt ! §� h /�� n \ ~ ~ } } t � � nmm Q ƒ co ��+` A S . , - � gym/ Fri e � @ ® e 6 2 2 2 $ ± }\\§ 0 co K222 � ` (§/� e ° r w�my » C) \� Ln ' I & ? ' I /& ON \ § � . t # - . . ' / CLARK 8040 r N W 5,, O N act, g O N � b W 00 x o m y 1* NOJ USE plylyq L!N .- N N u0% v�u "' N o• # 0�W N !�! towrlco Yy N GEA q VO O n O `•" `^ N cAi pail( „4 a fUWtl � � era' ,oiuri � 0 u M Z � so W WW N O UI m W FU mm? ru 0u W EA A y l., t!E-PFiy/z � II F—I OROVf FSS9LlA YAt1EY1 �Aaa } �� C �o CN CLSY01 I� ir to m y o 2 trutt _.O 'Fg PO �rl \fib N ui u' o O a o ± W '° ,^ A D • o L1 N n G 17 rim ° 8 avtre n+N CREATED BY Ps CRFArm ON 7-27-200im w 4, REVISED 8Y 0 REVlSO ON 4-02-2005 �P FFFECMC 2005-04 Rou Com IAs Butte Caen AtsMWS OfrXe V N i a ar R�qO w rU n 1 UTcn F} 13 "t w n rY a N 1^,52. 66 ffi o o z O i1. V � NJ F919.57 N iet� N � ' d n 1 FF 1p a 4^e �Uo qo O O V M Li EJ W N !U'U N lit o poi 1, n y7 gin g4} �Yk • Ay N y iH o