HomeMy WebLinkAboutM042181April 21, 1981
OF CALIFORNIA )
SS.
OF BUTTE )
81- The Board of Supervisors met at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to adjournment,
3 ', Present: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley.
', Clif Mickelson, administrative officer; Dan Blackstock, county counsel; and
Clark A. Nelson, county clerk-recorder, by Nancy Wilson, deputy clerk,
edge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
', Invocation by Supervisor Lemke
'647 ONTINUE TO APRIL 28 1981 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
', Approval of the minutes of April 14, 1981 were continued to
pril 28, 1981.
648
Supervisor Lemke stated he would like to discuss the Lake County
elution and to discuss Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD). He would
to discuss s letter from the Department of Labor regarding Title ITD
VI.
Supervisor Wheeler stated she would like to discuss the written
of the proposed "Green Line".
649
Chairman Moseley stated there was a call from Mike Bush requesting
Closed Session scheduled for 9:00 a.ma be taken off the agenda,
650 1~DOPT RESOLUTION 81-77 - MODIFYING THE COMPOSITION OF CETA ADVLSORY COUNCIL
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni an
znanimously carried, Resolution 81-77 modifying the resolution establishing
aembership on CETAC to include the chairman of the Private Industry Council
(PIC) on CETAC was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign,
651 ~PPROVE SENDING MONEY SACK TO PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL - COI3SIDERATION OF
RANT FUNDS TO BE CONSIDERED AFTER STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSYNESS AND ECONOMIC
Supervisor Saraceni stated they had tried to place the grant money
nto the county economic development, He felt bad the money could not be
sed through BEDCO or anyone who qualified and met the requirements. Job;^-
pportunities and payroll is desperately needed in Butte County, Every
ffort should be made to use all of the people who are involved to try to
ring industry and payroll to Butte County. He stated he felt the-funds
hould go back to PIC and go back to the drawiig~ board and put these funds
o work to change the economy of this county,
Supervisor Lemke questioned when the state Department of Business,
Economic Development seminar was scheduled to be in Butte County,
it.
Clif Mickelson, administrative officer, stated they were working
Supervisor Lemke stated he was hopeful they could hold the seminar
y the September 30, 1981 deadline for the funding and they could possibly
et some kind of direction whether it is from BEDCO or a new one, He does not
ave any hangups regarding sending it back up the pipes. He agreed with
upervisor Saraceni to send back to PTC for grant modification after the
tate Department.of Business and Economic Development seminar. He stated
alifornia Park Pavilion had offered the park freed
Page ' 252,
April 21, 1981
81'=
April 21L 1981
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Lemke and
unanimously carried, to send the CETA Title VII grant money back to the
Private Industry Council (PIC) for modification and reconsideration of
the grant was approved,
Jim Rackerby, personnel director, stated there was a May 1
deadline for their proposal. They will be receiving information from
the government stating they will have to accept the grant, It was his
understanding the CETA Council would be invited to the seminar.
Supervisor Saraceni stated we desperately need the economic money,
The people have been meeting through the efforts of all those involved,
Every week they go forth and work on projects to bring in more economy.
He felt the people on CETA training should be given an opportunity to
obtain a job. As a whole they have one goal~.in Butte County and that is
to change some of this and help and pull together to show they are ready
to accept some industry. It will make the difference in the economy. It
is a must that PIC get together and try to do those things,
James Lynch, chairman, Private Industry Council, stated they had
to look at all of the CETA programs. PIC authorized a study in February
1980 and every private employer was called looking for jobs, There was
not enough public opportunity for people who needed it, Only 30 percent
of the people trained find permanent jobs, He felt PIC was only a welfare
program. With some restraints it can be changed. They chose to send the
$4'2 million to $6 million back rather than use the ~noney~~i as a welfare program.
After training there are no jabs to go to, Only 30 percent get jobs and the
rest are out on the streets, He sees merit in the On: the Job Training and
people have been put to work, The program is 70 percent inefficient. Mr.
Lynch stated Lt, Governor Curb during his visit indicated tourism is the
biggest industry in California, it is larger than agriculture. They usually
relate industry to manufacturing, Maybe they should look in other directions.
The Board has a big problem and it is not easily solved, PIC has sincerely
tried to analyze the problem, it is not going to be easily analyzed,
Supervisor Lemke stated he had received a letter from the tT.S.
Department of Labor regarding phasedown of public service employment jobsa
Supervisor Lemke read the letter into the record. He felt there were a
number o£ good suggestions.
Mr. Rackerby stated his office had received a copy and he had
reported to the Board his plans which .accomplish everything in the letter.
He had mixed feelings regarding the suggested job fairs. Mr, Rackerby stated
the jobs listed in both the Chico and Oroville newspapers were for skilled
labor at the entry level. Very few of the CETA participants have these skills.
The survey completed by PIC indicated there are not a number of jobs for
unskilled in this area. I£ industry deter•.m:nes what kind of training is
required it can be accomplished through Title ITD, They do have individual
references. It is difficult to work with these people in an area of high
unemployment. PIC got hung up in the mechanics. He feels Butte County has
a very effective CETA program.
Roy Raney, member, Private Industry Council, stated there were a
number of reasons for the council voting down the proposal of BEDCO, One
was the time frame. There were coacerns regarding cost effectiveness. At
their last meeting they instructed staff to come up with educational data
for them to go over. Such as what other PIC agencies in other counties are
handling this problem, They recognized the desperate need, but to spend it
in a direction like this would not be for a CETA qualified person.
Supervisor Saraceni stated the funds that would have gone to BEDCO
would hire staff that would qua~~y%'to bring industry and get loans which
Page 253.
April 21, 1981
.F ,~
81-
'b
652
April 21, 1981
are available-for this. Without the qualified staff, there is no way funding
can be brought in for agriculture, industry, cannery or any type of industry and
cannot be funded with a lower interest rate in today's market without that
staff. To get those-jobs they have to back those people to get the funding
for those jobs.
Supervisor Lemke stated the money cannot be spent until they
modify the plan-for direction back to the federal governmento He is hopeful
the seminar will come up with the answers. They will not get anywhere unless
they get directly involved.
MOTION TO LEAVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION COMMITTEE AS IS
Discussion on the Employees' Association request for an additional
employee member be appointed to the Deferred Compansation Committee was held
at this time.
There was a motion by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni to leave the Butte County Employee's Association representation
on the Deferred Compensation Cammittee as is.
Chairman Moseley stated Bob Potter, representative from BCEA
was in the hospital and Rad Weyand was present to represent the group.
Rod Weyand stated he would like to explain their position as to why
they are asking for three representativesa He had copies of the packet
Mr. Potter put together if they had not been distributed. Mr. Weyand set
out there are two units, management and a general unit. They are two
entities. There are separate representatives for the law enforcement unit,
When they negotiated in good faith with the county to establish: the Deferred
Compensation pragr~;ma=rt was with representatives of these units and represent-
atives of the county. This was agreed on, There must be a standing committee.
The committee will establish rules and procedures. He felt the money belongs
to the employees, it is coming from their pay checks. They axe asking for
equal representation on this committeeo There should be three representatives.
There are three groups involvedo They work together with management. He
felt the previous Board minutes were confusingo
Supervisor Lemke stated he did not want another committee. He is
not concerned about the administration of the program. He was concerned
that three more employees were going to take county time to go to more
committee meetings. They have a group of people who can administer-the
program. It is an on going thing. They have so many committees now with
employees taking time off from county jobs that with the fiscal constraints
he does not feel they can afford three more employees.
Supervisor Dolan stated there are five on the committee. They are
requesting one-more, The request is for the original group that :.studied
it and worked with the proposal.
Jim Rackerby, personnel director, stated they are requesting a
representative from each group. If they set a policy the committee would
continue to growar,eThere could be the problem of management and labor.
The committee must meet on confidential matters. There are legal tests the
county must meet, The smaller committee could work more effectively.
Supervisor Dolan stated she did not think the request was to
not, proliferate but to put the same committee as was originally formed.
There will be confidential decisions and it can be handled through trust.
Mr, Weyand noted he was using his vacation time to be present before
the Board, As Mr. Rackerby had suggested there be one representative from
labor, then there should be one representative from management. Regardless
Page 254.
April 21, 1981
April 21, 1981
8I-
b''
of the number on the committee, they must render the rules and regulations.
If they are concerned with savings, then cut from management.
James Hansen, Oroville, Mr. Hansen stated he did not think the
employees were paying, The taxpayers were paying their salarieso They
are r~epresented~.by;-,~: people they elect to the officeo It appears from what
he is hearing the controls are coming from people and representatives are
hiding.
Vote on motion:
', YES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
Motion carried.
653 PPROVE/DENY PENALTY ABATEMENT RE VESTS - CHANGE OE OWNERSHIP REPORT
', On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Lemke and
', unanimously carried, the following action was taken regarding penalty
abatement requests, change of ownership report:
to Approved penalty abatement request for Gehlco Tractor Co.,
', Inc.,AP 040-43-0-OI1-0
2. Approved penalty abatement request for George C. Toy,
025-25-0-061-0
', 3. Approved penalty abatement request for Merritt Preston, AP
36-74-0-022-0
4. Approved penalty abatement request for Isabelle Curd, AP_
44-44-0-067-0
S. Approved penalty abatement request for Kenneth A. & Joyce E,
sh, AP 036-29-1-052-0
6. Approved penalty abatement request for Charles C. & Denise
orth, AP 045-21-3-008-0
7. Approved penalty abatement request for Jack & Lorraine
cClendon, AP 036-10-3-023-0
', 8. Denied penalty abatement request for Arnold A, Bromme, AP 022-
S-0-019-0
654 UTHORIZE SENDING LETTER REGARDING OROVILLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROJECT N0, 1
There was a motion by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
o authorize sending the letter regarding Oroville Redevelopment Agency Project
o. 1 to the City of Oroville.
Supervisor Ao1an question if a committee could be set up to discuss
he issue prior to a meeting before the full Board.
Motion amended:
a committee of Supervisor Saraceni and Chairman Moseley beset up
o meet with the City of Oroville to lay the ground work prior to a full -
oard meeting was authorized,
_. - ~ - Page 255.
April 21, 1981
81-
a
April 21, 1981
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ = W = - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
Motion carried,
655
656
APPROVE ACCEPTANCE OF SNOWMOBILES AND AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF VEHICLE FOR
JUVENTI:E_~i OFFICER
Discussion of request for acceptance of two snowmobiles and purchase
of additional automobile was held at this time.
harry Gillick, sheriff, stated the request was for an unmarked car
for the juvenile _rc>:r~~;-_ officero They go to homes and schools and it is
best to use an unmarked car.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, set out the background from the
discussion held last week. The question came up if the Board could accept
the snowmobiles with clear title and then at a later time pay off the note
the individuals `in his department signed,
Mr. Gillick stated the juvenile6ffic~er uses the car most of the
day. The cost would be $5,355 fram fixed assetso
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, the purchase of an automobile for the juvenile officer from
a savings within their budget was approved.
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni and Wheeler NOES: Chairman
Moseley
Bill DeMotto, captain, Search and Rescue, stated the unit has
voted to pay for the snowmobiles. fihey would like for the Board to accept
them. They have paid for them out of their budget for radios. They used
$5,000 and at budget time they hope the Board will consider this and
approve a request for radioso In order for them to be covered by insurance
they chose to pay for them and have the county accept them. During previous
discussions they were told to solicit fundscrTlae two trailers being built
to carry the snowmobiles have had various businesses donate welding, iron,
electrical wiring and other items from the Durham and Chico area.
Supervisor Saraceni stated he has been working to help them with
their funding, but it is not completed, He will regort back at a later time.
Supervisor Wheeler stated she wanted to inform Sheriff Gillick
that Captain Grey has been to Forest Ranch and Cohasset discussing his
new patrol system and the residents are pleased,
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
unanimously carried, the two snowmobiles were acre~pted by the Board.
Chairman Moseley stated she had received a telephone call from
Eleanor Samuelson of Richvale regarding a xobbery while they were out of town.
They would like their resident deputy back.
SUFERVI50R LEMKE ABSENT AT THIS TIME
APPROVE BUDGET TIik1NSFERS
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, set out the background
on the budget transfer as it relates to HCD,
SUPERVISOR LEMKE PRESENT AT THIS TTME
Page 256.
April 21, 1981
', April 21, 1981
81- On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
~' carried, the following budget transfers were approved:
B-199 - Housin and Communit Develo ment. (1) Closes out the
', HCD administration budget in the Administrative Office; (2) creates the HCD
administration budget (180) for contract administration in the Public Works
Department; and (3) establishes appropriations for staff time in the Public
orks Department involved in contract administration,.
AYES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
657 PUBLIC°>HEARING DATES SET - HCD
', Public hearing dates of May 5, 1981; May 19, 1981; and May 26, 1481
at L1:00 a.m. for consideration of citizen participation in the Housing and
Community Development plan were set.
Pat McCafferty, Connerly and Associates, stated the hearings would
be before the Board. Final action will be held May 2bth; Staff will hold
eetings on May 6 and May 20 to give feed back of information received,
RECESS: 10:10 a.m.
RECONVENE: 10:25 a.m.
658 T]BLIC HEARING: STANLEY M. BOGGS PETITION FOR VARIANCE TO SECTIONS 19-10 AND/
OR 19-12 OF BUTTE COUNTY CODE FOR PLACEMENT OF A MOBILE HOME, CHICO AREA -
EDWARD AND DONNA MCMARTIN PETITION FOR VARIANCE TO SECTIONS 19-10 AND/OR 19-12
OF BUTTE COUNTY CODE FOR PLACEMENT OF A MOBILE HOME BANGOR AREA
The public hearings on the following were held as advertised:
', to Stanley M. Boggs petition for variance to Sections 19-10 and/or
14-12 of the Butte County Gode for placement of a mobile home on AP 39-12-03,
Route 2, Box 850, River Road, Chico area; zoning "A-i0"; and
2, Edward and Donna McMartin petition for variance to Sections 19-10
and/or 19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home on
P 28-27-099, off of LaPorte Road, Bangor area; zoning "A-5".
', Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, set out the background
on the two petitionso They are children wishing to care for-their mothers.
', he petitions are in order.
', Hearing open to the public: Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni. and
nanimously carried, the following petitions for variance to Sections 19-10
nd/or 19-12 of the Butte. County Code for placement of a mobile home-were
pprovedofor a period of one year:
1. Stanely M. Boggs, AP 39-12-03, Route 2, Box 850, River Road,
hico area, zoning "A-10" and
2. Edward and Donna McMartin, AP 28-27-099, off of LaPorte Road,
angor area, zoning "A-5",
659 DOPT RESOLUTION 81-78: PUBLIC HEARING: ROSSER R. 5E07'~' ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC
ILITIES AND RECREATIONAL EASEMENTS .PARADISE PINES UNIT 5 LOT 120
The public hearing on Rosser R. Scott abandonment of public utilities
nd recreational easements, Paradise Pines Unit 5, Lot 120 was held as
dvertised.
Page 257a
April 21, 1981
April 21, 1981
81- Bettye Blair, planning director, stated the abandonment was in order.
v'
', Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
', On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
unanimously carried, Resolution 81-78 on the Rosser R. Scott abandonment of
public utilities and recreational easements, Paradise Pines Unit 5, Lot 120
', was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
660 ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-79 OROVILLE':.,ROAD NAME CHANGES AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-80
PARADISE ROAD NAME CHANGES: PUBLIC HEARING: RENAMING OF COUNTY ROADS -
OROVILLE AND itPARADISE AREAS
The public hearing on renaming of county roads in the Oroville and
Paradise areas was held at this time,
', Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Gaylan Wright, 81 Rivervew>> Terrace, Orovi•11e. Mr. Wright
stated the residents would like to leave the name at Riverview Terrace and
drop the word drive.
Clay Castleberry, public works director, suggested the official
name be changes as requested by the committee. The other road is in Kelly
Ridge, he did not think there would be a problemo
On motion of Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
', and unanimously carried, Resolution 81-79 renaming county roads in the
Oroville area as follows:
Existing Name Termini Name Change
1, Riverside Drive Table Mountain Blvd. Riverview Terrace
to Riverview Terrace ..
I Drive
', 2. Riverview Terrace Drive Riverside Drive to Riverview Terrace
'Fable-Mountain Blvd.
was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
Mr. Castleberry stated the Town of Paradise and the county concurs
with the changes in Paradise.
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
unanimously carried, Resolution 81-80 renaming county roads in-the Paradise
area as follows:
Existing Name Termini Name Change
1, Van Fossen Ravine Road Wagstaff Road to End Van Fossen Road
was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
661 PUBLIC HEARING: R. GRANT CLINE APPEAL OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
DENIED REZONE FROM "AR-MH-3" (AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME - 3 ACRE
PARCELS) TO "PA-C" (PLANNED AREA CLUSTER) TO ALLOW A NINE UNIT RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET WEST OF SKYWAY AT WOOF
WARD AVENUE IDENTIFIED AS AP 64-67-12 NORTH OF PARADISE
The public hearing on R. Grant Gline appeal of proposed negative
', declaration regarding environmental impact and denied rezone from "AR-MH-3"
Page 258, `
', April 21, I981
81-
a.
April 21, 1981 _ _ _
(agricultural residential mobile home - 3 acre parcels) to "PA-C" (planned
area cluster) to allow a nine unit residential development on property located
approximately 600 feet west of Skyway at Woodward Avenue, identified as
AP 64-67-12, north of Paradise was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, planning director, stated the Board had received
copies of Planning Commission recommendations, copies of correspondence
which came after the Planning Commission meeting and staff findingso
Earl Nelson, environmental review director, set out the background
on the environmental determination. A conditional negative declaration had
been recommended. Applicant has agreed to all mitigation measures.. Their
recommendation was only part of the measures, he submitted a memo outlining
the additions.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Mike McEnespy, McCain and Associates, Mr. McEnespy set out
the staff findings, County staff had comments from the Sheriff, Environ-
mental Health, Public Works and Fish and Game Commission and there were no
objections.. During public hearings concerns were voiced regarding density.
Yt is consisten.k with existing zones. The other objection was in regard
to water supply. Del Oro has assured him their is enough water. in the
current and in the reserve supply. The lots meet the requirements of CEQA.
They feel this zone will provide more protection for the existing zone.
Planning Commission stated they denied th'e project because they had denied
a similar one, Concerns were voiced regarding traffic. There will be more
traffic on-the Skyway. 7t will be below Coutelenr Road. Their concern was
with the traffic betweenPEaradise and Magalia, it is going to get worse with
or without this project.
Supervisor Lemke stated he had received a letter which indicated
all DeI Oro property owners were cautioned there is a water shortage and
to conserve.
2. Bill Cutler, Del Oro Association. Mr. Cutler stated the
subject property is within the Del Oro Association boundaries. They are
deeply concerned if this proposed subdivision is granted the effects of
traffic and the water. Mr, Cutler stated Archie MacDonald was unable to
attend and had submitted a letter.
3. Ho C. Ashley, Magalia. Mr. Ashley was representing the Upper
Ridge Coordinating Council. This project is similar to the one on Nimshew
Road. They felt any zoning into smaller parcels will add to the problems
of traffic and water. The area is remote, there would be~pr.oblems if there
was a catastrophe. Any addition of smaller lots would aecelerate~' thsc
The residents in 1977 did receive a letter regarding water shortage and
rationingo No one is sure how much water is in the area. They could buy
** some-from PG&E, The Planning Commission recommended that the 100 parcels
on 88 acres zoning noCrb~e:~allowed.
4, Grant Cline, applicant. Mr. Cline stated he was friends with
Mr. Culter, he sold him his property. His property is not within the boundry
of Sierra Del Oro or Paradise Pines. He has lived there approximately ten
years. Mr. MacDonald is a neighbor. He has used his land for access and to
walk his dog, He offered to construct a left hand pocket on the Skyway but
was told by county officials it was not necessary. He feels if the project
is not agproved it is like confiscation without compensation. McCain drew "
a map indicating each rock and tree. There will be no mobile homes. He
feels he has a right to use his land as long as he does not hurt anyone else.
Page 259.
April 21, T981
81-
3'
April 21, 1981
- _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ - T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment there will not be a significant effect in this case
because of the mitigation measures described and determined by Environmental
Reuiew 'earlier has been added to the project and a negative declaration is
recommended with the following mitigation measures:
1, Construct a standard 5-18 public road approach at the intersection of
Skyway and the access entrance.
2, Implement the following erosion control measures during construction:
a. Stabilize a1I soil surfaces exposed by construction and grading,
b. Stablize roads with surfacing of gravel.or pavement, or through
other measures as prescribed by the P.W.D.
c. Stabilize storm water runoff channels with the installation of
culverts, riprap, rock lining, energy dissipating structures, or
other measures as recommended by the P.W,D,
d. Earthwork is to be conducted during the dry season only, No disturbed
surfaces are to be left unprotected during the winter rainy season.
3, Roadway locations are to conform to the terrain, following contours as
much as possible and avoiding steep embankment cuts. Road grades are
not to exceed 15 percent,
4. Properly sized and installed culverts shall be placed in any drainage
caurses crossed by roads or driveways.
5. Building sites shall be located on areas of less than 20 percent slope,
unless soil stabilization-techniques as approved by the A,P.W. are
incorporated into the design.
6. Removal of natural vegetation for purposes other than necessary site
improvements as required by the D,P.W„ Environmental Health Department,
or the Butte County Fire Department, shall be prohibited,
7, Perimeter fencing which would create a barrier to the normal movement of
wildlife shall not be constructed on the project site.
8. Any excavation on the project site shall be performed in accordance with
the Butte County grading ordinance.
9. Drainage improvements shall in no way impair the stability or erode the
soil of cut banks on the site.
AYES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
There was a motion by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor
Dolan, the Planning Commission decision to deny the R, Grant Cline rezone
from "AR-MH-3" (agricultural residential mobile home - 3 acre parcels) to
"PA-C" (planned area cluster) to allow a nine unit residential development on
property located approximately 600 feet west of Skyway at Woodward Avenue,
identified as AP 64-b7-12, north of Paradise, based on the density, traffic
and potential water problems of the area surrounding '.lends ~self~ to:~a
considerable number of small lot splits; : t&e ~.patetttialhFis,, there! _ "
for establishing a preaedentc on a number of large, even larger parcels in
the area that are currently under "AR-MK-3", be upheld; that the rezone be
Page 260,
April 21; 1981
..i
81-
April 21, 1981
J ~ e~eairmsn Moseley^stated Mr, Cline had indicated Public Works did not
feel a turn pocket was necessaryo
Supervisor Lemke stated he understood this but he was anticipating
the growth in the Upper Ridge. There are changes and the traffic is signif-
icant in the areao It is heavy at the present time. He was looking into
the future and establishing a precedent in the area, They are working now
with the future in the Paradise Pines area. They-were taking traffic counts
until the hose was stoleno There are plans for handling future problems.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley.
Motion carried.
662
PUBLIC HEARING: P05ADA WAY INVESTORS PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO PLACE A "HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" DESIGNATION
ON PROPERTY CURRENTLY DESTGNATED "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL",.PROPERTY
LOCATID ON THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF JOSHUA TREE ROAD AND POSADA WAY,
IDENTIFIED AS AP 44-61-3, 9, 10 AND 11, CONTAINTNG 3.6 ACRES, MORE OR LESS,
CHICO - MOTION OF INTENT --..___ ......_..._..,._.._ _~_....._._.....__ -__._.
The public hearing on Posada Way Investors proposed negative
declaration regarding environmental impact and General Plan amendment to
place a "high density residential" designation on property currently designated
"medium density residential", property located on the northwesterly corner
of Joshua Tree Road and Posada Way, identified as AP 44-6i-3, 9, 10 and 11,
containing 3,6 acres, more or less, Chico was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background an the
project, She asked that the Board defer-final action on the request until
action on the Gridley-Biggs General Plan Amendment had been handled. The
Planning Commission recommends approval.
Earl Nelson, environmental review director, stated in the initial
study they noted much of the surrounding area is already developed-. There
would be somewhat of a change, for that reason they recommend a negative
declaration. There would be `.additional traffic.
Supervisor Wheeler noted from staff findings dated March 18th
there is the possibility the project could be rental unit without any
requirements.
Ms. Blair stated it is in existing "R3" zone. Instead of having
to file a subdivision map .for a condominium, there has to be ,. conformance
with the General Plan. They also attempt to achieve at the subdivision
level a specific none. At this time the density would be beyond the reach
of the General Plan, the impacts are there,
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
to Pete Giampaoli, applicant, placed maps of the proposed project
on the board. Traffic was the biggest consideration. Mr. Giamaoli set out
the background on his project. On February 15, 1978 they purchased a four lot
'parcel in an existing 11 lot subdivision. Of the four lots they anticipated
'placing apartments until the interest rates went high, They designed a
96 unit one bedroom apartment complex, their next proposal was an.=BQ two
bedroom unit. They looked at the economics of the property and it was not -
something they felt they could proceed further-with. They felt an alternative
was for lower-density. Their first plan was for a 55 :;'unit and changed it
to a 45 unit condominium. In any subdivision you file there must be compliance
with the General Plan which shoias~fr%ve to eight unite per acre.
Page 261.
April 21, 1981
April 21, 1981
SI-
b
Mr. Giampaoli set out the density and number of units per acre.
There would be a buffer between the single family residents. They have
filed a subdivision map with the county. They will institue a PA-C zoning
request. Mr, Giampaoli set out the maps for the other two proposed projects.
The septic has been approved by the county, Traffic is one of the major
problems. The EIR pointed out no significant impacts but staff feels there
is some potential problem with traffic. They agree there will be some traffic
on E1 Paso, They feel residents will use Eaton either to the northeast of
the project or one to the north with traffic going south will use Lassen
Avenue to Esplanade, To reach the mall it is easier to use Lassen Avenue
to Cohasset. He set out the density requirements from the Land Use Element,
He felt this project will not stop the traffic problem or make it specifically
worse.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
663
Ms, Blair stated staff has prepared a motion-which would handle
both this project and the Gridley-Biggs General Plan Amendment,
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
unanimously carried, a motion of intent to approve the Posada Way Investors
General Plan Amendment to place a "high density residential" designation on
property currently designated "medium density residential", property located
on the northwesterly corner of Joshua Tree Road and Posada Way, identified
as AP 44-61-3, 9, 10 and 11, containing 3,6 acres, more or-less, Chico was
authorized.
Final action to be handled later in the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING:- BUTTE COUNTY PLANNTNG COMMISSION AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 24 OF
TEiE BUTTE COUNTY CODE TO STANDARDIZE SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR LIVESTOCK IN THE
nA-R", nAR"MH°, "AR-MH-3", "AS-R", nFR-2", "FR-5", "FR-10", "FR-20"? "FR-40",
nFR-160", "S-R", nSR-1/2r,~ „SR-1", nSR-3", "TM-1„~ „TM-2", "TM°2xzn, ,rTM-~",
"TM-5", "TM-10", "TM-20", "TM-~+O" AND "TM-160" ZONES, COUNTYWIDE
The public hearing on Butte County Planning Commission amendment
to Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code to standardize space requirements
far livestock in the "A-R", "A R-5", "AR-MH", "AR-MH-3", "AS-R", "FR-2",
"FR-5", "FR-10", "FR-20", nFR-40", "FR-160", "S-R", "SR-l/2 ", "SR-1", "SR-3",
"TM-1", "TM-2", "TM-22n, nTM-3", "TM-5", "TM-10", "TM-20", "TM-40" and
"TM-160" zones, countywide was held as continued;
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background on this
project. The Board had referred the matter back to the Planning Commission
to consider regulating the square~£oatage of livestock. After discussion and
a split vote they chose to remain with the original proposal.
Hearing open to the public, Appearing:
1, Richard De Vore, Paradise. Mr. De Vore stated they have been
.active in trying to modify or limft some of the densities referring~ao
'animalso They feel the problem is maintenance. They would like to see
:stronger abilities for the Health Department, Sheriff and Humane Society.
;It is not the number of animals, but the proper maintenance.
2, Evelyn Reeder, Thermalito, Mrs. Reeder questioned the number
of animals allowed within her zone.
Ms. Blair set out the requirements within the nAR-MH" zone.
3. Steve Roach, Oroville. Mr. Roach works with 4-H and FFA members.
He does not feel the zoning of the property or the animals is the answer. It
is the owners responsibility tolmai~ntain their animalsa When they were first
Page .262 ,
April 21, 1981
AQril 21,a 1981
g~- before the Board they presented a petition but there has been no mention of it.
b', They proposed a committee of livestock people to work on the changes,
4, Wayne Anthony, Paradise. Mr, Anthony stated he owns a 2'~ acre
parcel and raises animals. This measure would hurt the small land owner
who has small lots. It will hurt those who raise animals for food and
', profit. He voiced his concern about roaming dogs killing other peoples
animals. He has not heard of -restr-ictirig;dmgs.
5. Bill McBride, Paradise. Mr. McBride raises goats and if the
proposal is adopted he could not raise all of these animals. He felt the
problem was maintenance.
6. Troy Wooton, Chico. Mr. Wooton stated he felt the proposal
would be more restrictive. He suggested the Humane Society handle the
problems. It is up to the land owner to handle proper maintenance.
7. Dorothy Best, Cohasset. Mrso Best stated she has spoke before
and felt the 4-H kids needed areas to have their animal projects.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board,
Supervisor Lemke stated he is-:hei~ri~ng~~}~e,ngle.-~dre'ct)y involved
with livestock and it sound like it is a problem of manure. He would like
the Board to consider leaving the code as it is written and not try to
impose further restrictions.
Supervisor Saraceni stated he felt there was more of a nuisance
problem. He feels the children should be allowed their 4-H projects.
There was a motion by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni that the amendment to Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code to
standardize space requirements for livestock in the "A-R", "AR-5", "AR-MH",
"AR-MH-3", °AS-R", "FR-2", "FR-5", "FR-10", "FR-20", "FR-40,', "FR-160",
"S-R", °SR-1/2", °SR-1", "SR-3", "TM-1", "TM-2",."TM-2'~", "TM-3", "TM-5",
"TM-10", "TM-20", "TM-40" and "TM-160" zones, countywide be denied.
Ms. Blair stated at the last meeting the Board reference was to
consider your removing the regulations.
Supervisor Lemke stated he was not ready to address that at this
point. He felt the subject of all of the hearings was looking into whether
or not to have the animals or individuals regulated. It should be considered
at another-meeting.
Supervisor Wheeler stated there are some areas where more restriction,
are~needed.a: Violations are taking place and they will continue,
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
Motion carried.
APPEARANCE: JAMES HANSEN
3ames Hansen questioned if the pressure regarding the livestock
restrictions had been from a different group which direction the Board
would have gone., Government is continuing to manufacture laws to centralize
things. He felt if you treat people like animals they will act like them.
665 APPEARANCE: ELLIS CHAMBERLIN
Ellis Chamberlain, O~oulle Downtown Business Association, spoke
regarding broken street light globes and concrete standards at the old
', Page 263.
', April 21, 1981
81-
$'
April 21, 198_1 _
owntownYcourt house square. The damage was done by the 1975 earthquake.
e is awaiting their. support and reply. Mr. Chamberlain presented a letter
rom the Association, The responsibility continues to be passed on from
coup to group.
Chairman Moseley stated they would get a group together including
ity of Oroville, County Supervisors, Schools and other individuals to work
n the problem.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated his office would
pork on-the problem and report back.
666 PPEARANCE: HENRY MCCALL
Henry McCall, Oroville Councilman, spoke requesting support of
SB 1161 an amendment to the public utilities code relating to Public Utilities
*** Commission. Copies are to be forwarded to the Board members.
Mr. McCall commended Supervisor Wheeler on her drug paraphernalia
ordinance which was considered at City Council.
667 APPEARANCE: ROBERT LEMKE
Supervisor Robert Lemke invited everyone to attend the opening of
the Gold Nugget Museum .c.r and to all Gold Nugget festivities to be
held in Paradise later this week. He stated Mr. Castleberry had joined the
E1 Clampus groupo
12:26 p,m.
ENE: 1:30 p.m.
SORS DOLAN AND WHEELER ABSENT AT THIS TIME
668 APPROVE INCREASED BUDGET - riEN~rAL tt~a~'rtt ~~xv ~~r~s
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, an increase in revenue for the Mental Health Services budget
of $19,700 to be appropriated for professional and specialized services:;was
approved; contract amendment with Do-It, Inco with increasing maximum
reimbursement by $2,500 was approved and the Chairman authorized to sign,
669 (APPROVE PUBLIC WORKS TTEMS
There was a motion by Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor
Saraceni, to approve the following Public Works items:
1. The first reading of the ordinance establishing a 25 mph speed
limit on Conners Avenue between the Esplanade and East Avenue, Chico was
waived; and
2. Approved request of Neal Road Landfill to allow olive. waste
is to be disposed of at the Neal Road dump site with no cost impact,
SOR WHEELER PRESENT AT THIS fiIME
Vote on motion:
YES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
BSENT: Supervisor Dolan
Motion carried,
670 DISCUSSION: REPORT TO TH
Discussion was held on a report to the Board on Ramsey Gregory
subdivision application at this time.
Page 2fi4.
April 21, 1981
81-
~'
67
April 21, 1981
Gary Smith stated Mr. Gregory was present at the previous meeting
as a representative for him. He wished to address an issue that exists
throughout the countyo
SUPERVISOR DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIME
Mr. Smith stated he was never advised there was going to be a delay
in his project, He set out the background on his application; He responded
to comments from a memo to the Board dated April 16, 1981 .from the Planning
Director. The process of a developer building and private owners is lengthy,
expensive and inadequateo His proposed project is on Oak Way. The General
Plan calls for medium density residentiab. There seems to be .a hold up
because of the "SR" zoning. He purchased the Land Use Element book and his
interpretation and staffs is not the same, He feels it is in compliance,
He feels the General Plan disagrees with some densities. The California
Administrative Code and all sources should be considered with the General
Plan. There is a lot of land that has zones on it that are not consistent
with the General Plan. He felt the Board should take a definite stand and
to clarify it to applicattoo Applicants should be informed early in the
process. Information has to be pulled out of county staff.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, stated the engineer was acting
as his agento The county cannot be responsible for a lack of communication
between the two.
Bettye Blair, planning director, stated in her memo she set out
to clarify the application process. Ms. Blair stated there is a problem
whereby the engineer receives the information but does not pass it along
to the applicant.
Supervisor Dolan stated the Chico urban area is large and the
changes cannot be accomplished overnight. There is local design and
community .input into the process of changing it.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-81: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO LAND USE PLAN FOR BIGGS-
GRIDLEY AREA AND POSADA WAY INVESTORS CHICO
The closed hearing on Butte County Planning Commission draft
environmental impact report and General Plan amendment to the Land Use
Plan of the Biggs-Gridley area was held as continued.
Charlie Woods, planner, set out the background on the proposed
resolution. There should be a motion regarding the environmental findings
before the formal adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and
unanimously carried, finding for certification of the environmental impact
report for the Gridley-Biggs General Plan amendment to the Land Use Element;
further finding that summations of the comments and recommendations from
the public have been attached to the draft environmental impact report,
that written responses to significant environmental points raised by the
comments have been prepared and attached to the draft environmental impact
report and that a list of the persons, organizations and public agencies
who commented has been attached to the draft environmental impact report;
move to adopt the responses to comments prepared by the Environmental Review
Director as the responses of this Board and further move to certify the
final environmental impact report as having been completed in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Environmental Review
Guidelines and the Butte County Enviornmental Review Guidelines be approved,
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and unanimously carried, finding that the proposed Posada Way Investors
project could not have a signifzcaiat effect on the environment, a negative
Page 265.
April 21, 1981
81-
a
April 21, 1981
declaration is recommended, J
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler and
unanimously carried, having reviewed and considered the final environmental
impact report on the 'Gridley=Bgg•sGeneral Plan Amendment the following
€ind ings were • approved :. ~ ,. • , ,` -
la Development which is anticipated to occur within the project area in
compliance with growth policies and density limitations may have a
significant effect on the environment in the areas of surface drainage
accommodation, potential loss of riparian woodland, traffic noise
exposure, agricultural/residential interface conflicts, potential loss
of agricultural land, traffic increases and congestion, energy consumption,
and potential loss of archaeological sitesa Many, but not a11, of the
above-listed impacts can be mitigated on a project-by-project basis,
or in connection with community improvement projects which may be
undertaken in the future with public or private funding, The likelihood
of such mitigation is too speculative for evaluation at this time.
2, With the exception of the "No project" alternative, the alternatives
listed on page 41 of the environmental impact report have been incorp-
orated into the current proposal where such incorporation has been
found to be consistent with community desires and General Plan goals
and policies. The "No project" alternative can be divided into two
categories, the first being no building or development within the
project area whatsoever, and the second being simply to retain existing
land use categories. The first of these is being rejected because it
is not politically feasible or realistic or consistent with the desires
of the community. Zoning tools to implement this alternative are not
likely to be adopted, Leaving the land use categories as they are is
being rejected because the proposed categories more accurately reflect
community goals and the policies of the General Plan.
3o Although there may be significant adverse environmental effects resulting
from development which would be allowed pursuant to approval of this
project, there are overriding considerations-which justify project
approval, These overriding considerations include:.
a. The Butte County General Plan-calls for periodic review and
update of land use classifications throughout the countyo This
project is a part of this ongoing process.
b. The land use designations being adopted represent an improvement
over present land use designations in that they were firmulated
with the help of citizen input to more effectively implement
the goals and objectives of the Butte County General Plan,
c, The land use categories being adopted are potentially less environ-
mentally damaging at full buildout than the categories which
previously were in effect for the area, while still providing room
for community expansion,
d, The land use patterns under consideration provide areas for rural
homesites on large parcels which will offer area residents the
opportunity to offset food and energy resource demand by becoming
partially self-sufficient through producing on the premises a
portion of their food and energy needs.
e. The land use categories being adopted represent a cooperative effort
reflecting the growth policies of Butte County and the communities
Page 266a
April 21, 1981
_,
81-
~'
672
673
6741
675
April 21_,_1981 _ _ _ _ __
of Gridley and Biggs whose^spheres of influence will develop under
County jurisdiction until such time that contiguous area axe annexed.
having made the above findings for the Gridley-Biggs General Plan Amendment;
and further having found no significant effect with regard to the Posada Way
Investors General P1an.Amendment, Resolutian 81-81 amending the General Plan
was adopted and the Chairman authorized torsign,
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 24 OF TEiE BU7°PE COUNTY CODE CONSOLIDATING THE "FR", "SR"
AND "TM" ZONES TAKEN OFF TfiE AGENDA
Bettye Blair, planning director, requested the the amendment to
Chapter 24 of the Butte County Code consolidating the "FR", "SR", and "TM"
zones be taken off the agenda.
DTSCUSSION: REGARDING "GREEN LINE"
Supervisor Wheeler stated she was very interested in the "Green
Line" which draws the line between urban and rural land, Without very
specific language being drawn up she could see a problem, She questioned
if the changes on the map and the written language could be discussed at
the same time. She would like to see input from the agr~.culture community.
They are interested in active participation. She is concerned about all
of Butte County.
Supervisor Dolan stated at the-last Planning Commission it was
brought up regarding having information.duplicated and forwarded to various
agencies which are interested.
Supervisor Wheeler felt when an individual came in .: -~ -with an
application there was a distinct line and the proper language.
Supervisor Saraceni stated he felt there was considerable input
and information on all of the decisions that happened with the "Green Line".
Bettye Blair, planning director, stated the Planning Commission
has made a motion of intent on the location of the "Green Line", but the
matter is not closed, They have not really generated talk through the
process of language. Nothing is closed,
DISCUSSION: APPOINTMENTS TO THE BUTTE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
ADVISORY COUNCIL (CETAC) - CONTINUE TO APRIL 28, 1981
Clif Mickelson, administrative officer, stated the city govern-
ment representative has been eliminated from CETAC. The dity government
representative is the chairman of Private Industry Council.
Continued to April 28, 1981 appointment to the Butte County Employ-
ment and Training Advisory Council (CETAC) the veteran representative.
OONTINUE APPOINTMENTS TO APRIL 28 1981
The following appointments were continued to April 28, 1981:
1, Youth Planning Council
2. Agricultural Advisory Commission - District 5
b76
I
APPOINTMENTS TO MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD
On motion of Supexnrisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Lemke and
carried, the following appointments to Mental Health Advisory Board were
approved:
Michael Stockwell - Professional
Jerry Kenkel - Professional
Audrey Brynda - Parent/Consumer
Elizabeth Wolf - Parent/Consumer
Page 267.
April 21, 1981
s-
~,
April 21, 1981 _ _ _ _
'ES: Supervisors Dolan, Lemke, Saraceni and Chairman Moseley
3STATNING: Supervisor Wheeler .
677. APPOINTMENTS CONTINUED TO APRIL 28 1981
The following appointments were continued to April 28, 1981:
1. Butte County Housing Authority - District 2
2, Butte County Justice System Advisory Group
678 APPOINTMENT TO THE ALC;UHUL a~vts~xs nvr~icu
On motiom of Supervisor Lemke;,seeondedcby-Supervis,sr Saraceni
and unanimously carried, the following appointment to the Alcohol Advisory
Board was approved:
Melvin Sargent
679
Butte County Mosquito Abatement District, Dr. Hazeltine writes requesting
the Board support AB 1662. See motion .following communications.
Mr, and Mrs. Thomas S. Brownlee, Oroville. Mr. and Mrs. Brownlee write in
support of continuing the present Animal Control Services. Infor-
mation; no action taken.
David W. Lands, Citizens Advisory Committee. Mr. Lantis, on behalf of the
Citizens Advisory Committee to study the proposed green line,
provides information and requests support for the project. Referred
to Planning DeparCment.
Alkop Farms, Chico, Robert E, A11en, on behalf of Alkop Parms, writes in
opposition to the proposed green linen Referred to Planning Depart=
meat.
William H. Nolan, San Marino. Mr. Nolan writes appealing a draft environ-
mental impact report and Planning Commission denial of rezone
from "FR-10" (foothill recreational - 10 acre parcels) to "F'R-5"
(foothill recreational - 5 acre parcels) property located on both
sides of the Craig Recreation Access Road, approximately 500 feet
north of Lumpkin Road, identified as AP 7i-i5-O1, approximately
15 miles northeast of Oroville. Set for public hearing May 12,
1981 at 10:15 a.m.
Robert R. Day, Tahoma. Mro Day writes appealing proposed negative declaration
and Planning Commission's denial of variance to minimum lot size
requirements to allow the creation of two parcels on property zoned
"TM-2" (timber mountain - two acre parcels)'located on both sides
of Maple Lane approximately 350 feet east of Cohasset Road, agprox-
imately 12 miles north of Vilas Road, identified as AP 56-12-91,
Cohasset area. Set for public hearing May 12, 1981 at 10:30 a.m.
Henderson and Esser, attorneys at law. The attorneys write requesting a
hearing on action taken by the Assessor regarding tax exemptions
owned by the Eaith Center, a California nonprofit church corporation.
Referred to the Assessor.
Upper Ridge Coordinating Council. The Council writes in opposition to a
proposed rezone, AP 64-67-12 proposed by R. Grant Cline and McCain
and Associates. Handled earlier in the meeting. -
Linda L, Vaccaro, Chico, Ms. Vaccaro writes in opposition to a proposed
rezone in the area of Estates Drive at Highway 99. To be considered
at the time of the hearing.
Page 268,
April 21, 1981
81-
3'
April 21, 1981
Sierra Del Oro Property Owners Association, Magalia. Bill Culter, chairman,
writes providing information that his organization is in opposition
to a proposed rezone submitted by McCain and Associates on behalf
of R, Grant Cline. Handled earlier in the meeting.
California Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., Sacramentoo Robert G.
Guernsey, executive director, requests support of SB Sl4 repealing
the requirements to pay prevailing wages in the State of California.
To be considered April 28, 1981.
County of Tehama. The Tehama Board of Supervisors requests support by
resolution of the Sacramento River parkway. Supervisor Dolan to
bring matter back on May 5, 1981.
Neil Hazelton, Sr., Oroville. Mr. Hazelton submits a claim for damages
totalling $30 million for injuries alleged to have occurred on
January 4, 1981, Referred to County Counsel.
A, John Merlo, attorney at law. The attorney submits a claim on behalf of
Donald H. Hines in the amount of $100,000 for an alleged false
arrest. Referred to County Counsel.
680
681
68~
Ronald J. Evans, Chico. Mr. Evans writes appealing a proposed negative
declaration and Planning Commission's denial of rezone from "A-20"
(agricultural - 20 acre parcels) to "A-5" (agricultural - 5 acre
parcels), property located on-the west side of Esplanade, approx-
imately 1,700 feet north of Garner Lane, identified as AP 44-02-52,
north of Chico, Set for public hearing May 12, 1981 at 10:45 a.m,
Robert E, & 3udith I. Shepherd, Chico. Mr. and Mxs. Shepherd request a
waiver of improvement for building permit to change property
located at 181 East 9th Avenue, Chico, AP 45-061-17, from residential
use to commercial use. Set for public hearing May 12, 1981 at
11:15 a.m,
MOTION IN SUPPORT OF AB 1662
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Dolan and
unanimously carried, a motion in support of AB 1662 was approved.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-82 - SUPPORT OF LAVE COUNTY RESOLUTION -PLANNING MANDATES
.On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni
and carried, Resolution 81-$2 in support of Lake County resolution opposing
excessive planning mandates from the State of California and urging the
reintroduction of legislation similar to AB 220b-was adopted .and the Chairman
authorized to sign,
AYES: Supervisors Lemke, Saraceni, Wheeler and Chairman Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR MOTHERS AGAINST DRUNK DRIVERS MADD
On motion of Supervisor Lemke, seconded by Supervisor Saraceni and
unanimously carried, a letter of support to be forwarded to Mothers Against
Drunk Drivers (MADD) was approved.
ADJOURNMENT
There being nothing further before the Board, the meeting was
adjourned at 2:40 p.m. to reconvene on T sday, April 28, 1981 at 9:00 a,m,
ATTEST: CLARK A, NELSON, COUNTY CLE
RECORDER a d ex-officio Clerk
of a d of Supervisors Chairman, Board of S pervisors
By -
Page 269.
April 21, 1981